Demonstration of Advanced Boiler Instrumentation Technologies

Technical Report

Demonstration of Advanced Boiler Instrumentation Technologies

1008144

Final Report, March 2005

EPRI Project Manager R. Shankar

Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA 800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES

THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT. ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)

ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to EPRI Orders and Conferences, 1355 Willow Way, Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2 or internally x5379, (925) 609-9169, (925) 609-1310 (fax). Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Copyright 2005 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

CITATIONS
This report was prepared by Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) I&C Center 714 Swan Pond Road Harriman, TN 37748-8327 Principal Investigators D. Dearmon G. Starnes This report describes research sponsored by EPRI. The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner: Demonstration of Advanced Boiler Instrumentation Technologies. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1008144.

iii

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

New and increasing limits on emissions (in particular, NOx) and new emphasis on heat rate have underscored the need to measure flue gas constituents more accurately and in more locations. Utilities are making large capital investments in boiler improvements and emission control devices. These investments can be enhanced through the use of innovative, on-line instrumentation closer to the furnace combustion zone. Traditionally, sensors for flue gas constituents, such as NOx and CO, are implemented as part of a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS), some of which might be installed far downstream of the combustion process. This creates a significant time delay in the measurements and hinders accurate feedback based on individual unit performance. This project is a catalog of innovative demonstrations of new and emerging coal combustion measurement technologies. It is the result of several projects focused on a similar goal of improved coal combustion measurements for flue gas constituents. This report contains the theory behind the technologies and the status and results of demonstrations. Results and Findings Traditional sensor suppliers have produced a new generation of CO/O2 analyzers based on familiar technology that can be placed in higher temperature regions of the furnace. This provides both a faster and a more accurate picture of the actual combustion process. In addition, a new class of sensors based on tunable diode lasers (TDLs) shows great promise in providing a non-intrusive and more representative (path average rather than single point) look at multiple elements of the flue gas makeup. Other technologies reviewed include optical furnace exit gas temperature (FEGT) measurement, flue gas moisture measurement, and new approaches to measure stack flow. Challenges and Objectives The objectives of the projects summarized herein are to demonstrate innovative technology to determine when and where to use these measurement devices. The challenges to applying these technologies include high temperatures and dirty, chemically reactive environments for in situ measurements, as well as high ambient temperature conditions for sensitive optics and electronics. These issues have been largely addressed. Applications, Value, and Use The next challenge is to incorporate the information from these systems into feed forward control for emission control equipment and/or boiler controls including optimization systems. The ability to measure combustion products near the process (at multiple points or along a path) provides the opportunity to more precisely control the process itself. This has the potential to reduce both emissions and heat rate. Also, tube wastage due to reducing atmosphere might be reduced. v

EPRI Perspective Better measurement of the combustion conditions is increasingly important. Emission control devices perform more consistently if supplied with more controlled inlet conditions. Fuel costs are increasing, and improved efficiencies can be affected through the improved measurements these instruments provide. The TDL technologies hold great promise in a variety of measurements previously unavailable, including gas constituents at the plane of furnace exit. This may provide new opportunities for improving temperature and, therefore, energy distribution in the boiler, as well as minimizing NOx production and heat rate.

Approach
The common thread in the demonstrations described was the partnership among the vendors, the demonstration site hosts, and EPRI. In all but one case, the vendors provided the instrument for evaluation with the caveat that if it passed pre-agreed test and operational criteria, the site would purchase the instrument at the conclusion of the test period. Another common thread was that although multiple projects were presented, they were all performed through the EPRI I&C Center. Because these applications pushed the technologies, the instrument suppliers received excellent feedback on the areas where improvements were needed for a reliable system. The testing included post-installation calibration tests, long-term reliability runs, and final calibration checks. The resources for these projects were largely from tailored collaborative efforts. Keywords CO/O2 measurement Tunable diode laser (TDL) Flue gas composition Furnace exit gas temperature (FEGT) Moisture measurement Stack flow

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was possible through the contributions and support of many individuals and vendors from the utility industry. EPRI wishes to acknowledge the support of the following: Bob Burbage Tom Butler Darrell Howard (retired) Jim Cowart Larry Chandler William Sisk Chris Masengill Ben Zimmerman Bill Pritchard Craig Self Joe Johnson Duane Hill Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority Cumberland Fossil Plant Cumberland Fossil Plant John Sevier Fossil Plant Kingston Fossil Plant (now at John Sevier) Johnsonville Fossil Plant Dairyland Power Cooperative

Manufacturers representatives also played a key role in this effort. In particular, EPRI would like to acknowledge the contributions of: Jim McNoldy Dennis Hungerman Ann McGowan Jack Holland Tim Kamczyc Len Suback Brien Knight Kim Sung Ametek Ametek Servomex Servomex Rosemount Rosemount Marathon Optical Scientific, Inc.

EPRI also wishes to thank Mike Coffey, Ronnie Ryan, Paul Wolff, and Judy Post at the EPRI I&C Center for their assistance in the preparation of this report.

vii

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1-1 References for Section 1.......................................................................................................1-3 2 CO/OXYGEN SENSORS........................................................................................................2-1 Oxygen ..................................................................................................................................2-1 Oxygen Measurement ......................................................................................................2-2 Oxygen Zirconium Oxide ...............................................................................................2-3 Failure Mechanisms .........................................................................................................2-6 Electrode Failure..........................................................................................................2-6 Mechanical Failure.......................................................................................................2-6 Hot-Side O2 Measurement................................................................................................2-7 Summary of Resulting Benefits ........................................................................................2-9 Applications by Plant Site ...............................................................................................2-10 TVA Johnsonville Fossil Plant....................................................................................2-10 Marathon High-Temperature Oxyfire .........................................................................2-10 Operation ..............................................................................................................2-11 Installation Issues..................................................................................................2-13 Results ..................................................................................................................2-14 Yokogawa ZR22G High-Temperature Oxygen ..........................................................2-15 Carbon Monoxide Catalytic Combustibles and Infrared ...................................................2-16 Issues and Interferences ................................................................................................2-17 Applications by Plant Site ...............................................................................................2-18 TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant....................................................................................2-18 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 .....................................................................2-19 Installation .............................................................................................................2-20 Issues Historical .................................................................................................2-22 Performance Test Results.....................................................................................2-26 Summary...............................................................................................................2-28

ix

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant .........................................................................................2-30 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 ...............................................................................2-31 Installation .............................................................................................................2-31 Issues Historical .................................................................................................2-34 Performance Test Results.....................................................................................2-36 Combustion Control with CO.................................................................................2-42 Summary...............................................................................................................2-43 TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant ....................................................................................2-43 Background................................................................................................................2-44 Evaluation Specifications ...........................................................................................2-45 Performance Test ......................................................................................................2-45 Rosemount OCX 4400 and OCX 8800 COe/O2 ........................................................2-47 Historical Issues OCX 4400 ...............................................................................2-48 Rosemount OCX 8800 CO2/O2 .............................................................................2-49 Issues OCX 8800 ...............................................................................................2-50 Performance Test Results.....................................................................................2-52 Summary...............................................................................................................2-56 Ametek WDG-IVC COe/O2 ........................................................................................2-57 Issues Installation...............................................................................................2-59 Performance Test Results.....................................................................................2-60 Summary...............................................................................................................2-63 Servomex Xendos 2700 .................................................................................................2-63 Performance Test Results.....................................................................................2-65 Summary...............................................................................................................2-69 References for Section 2.....................................................................................................2-70 3 TUNABLE DIODE LASER .....................................................................................................3-1 Discussion of Technology .....................................................................................................3-1 Tunable Diode Laser Measurement Applications..................................................................3-2 TVA NH3 Demonstration at Kingston ....................................................................................3-3 Norsk Electro Optikk LaserGas ........................................................................................3-3 Unisearch Associates LasIR............................................................................................3-4 Boreal Laser Inc.s GasFinder FC ....................................................................................3-4 Past EPRI Research .............................................................................................................3-4 EPA Environmental Technology Verification Report .............................................................3-5

Future Research Possibilities................................................................................................3-5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................3-6 Available Tunable Diode Laser Systems...............................................................................3-6 Boreal Laser GasFinder MC.............................................................................................3-6 Boreal Laser GasFinder FC..............................................................................................3-7 Norsk Elektro Optikk AS Neo Monitors LaserGas II ......................................................3-8 Opsis LD500...................................................................................................................3-10 Siemens LDS 6...............................................................................................................3-10 Unisearch LASIR ............................................................................................................3-11 ZoloBOSS.......................................................................................................................3-11 MetroLaser LTS-100 Laser Temperature Sensor...........................................................3-13 References for Section 3.....................................................................................................3-14 4 FURNACE EXIT GAS TEMPERATURE ................................................................................4-1 Non-Contact FEGT Technologies .........................................................................................4-1 Optical Pyrometer.............................................................................................................4-1 Infrared CO2 Waveband Pyrometer..................................................................................4-3 Ash Particle Emission Spectroscopy ................................................................................4-3 Acoustic Pyrometry...........................................................................................................4-4 TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant Evaluation .............................................................................4-5 TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant Selection and Installation ......................................................4-5 High Velocity Thermocouple Verification Tests.....................................................................4-8 Automatic Port Rodding System .........................................................................................4-10 Summary .............................................................................................................................4-11 Dairyland Power Cooperatives John P. Madgett Station....................................................4-12 Objective.........................................................................................................................4-12 Testing............................................................................................................................4-14 Results............................................................................................................................4-15 References for Section 4.....................................................................................................4-20 5 STACK FLOW MEASUREMENT ...........................................................................................5-1 Optical Flow Sensors ............................................................................................................5-1 Plant Demonstration..............................................................................................................5-2 Performance..........................................................................................................................5-4 Infrared ..................................................................................................................................5-7

xi

Epsilon Technologies ............................................................................................................5-8 6 MOISTURE .............................................................................................................................6-1 Kingston Cimtec Moisture Meter Installation .........................................................................6-1 A TVA CUF UNIT 2 PROFILE DATA ....................................................................................... A-1 CUF Unit 2 HVT Traverses 11-19-03 ................................................................................... A-1 Unit 2 Analzyer B Traverse 7th Floor ................................................................................... A-2 B CO/O2 TEST PLANS............................................................................................................. B-1 Test Plan for Evaluation of Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 Analyzer at TVA Kingston Fossil Plant............................................................................................................ B-1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... B-1 Background .......................................................................................................................... B-2 Analyzer Operating Principle ........................................................................................... B-2 Test Background ............................................................................................................. B-3 Test Procedures ................................................................................................................... B-3 Interferences.................................................................................................................... B-3 Pre-Test Procedures ....................................................................................................... B-3 Drift .................................................................................................................................. B-4 Repeatability/Linearity ..................................................................................................... B-4 Relative Accuracy............................................................................................................ B-5 Analyzer Location ....................................................................................................... B-5 HVT at Furnace Nose ................................................................................................. B-6 References ........................................................................................................................... B-6 C TVA CUMBERLAND FOSSIL PLANT AMETEK THERMOX WDG-HPIIC TEST DATA AND RESULTS ............................................................................................................. C-1 D TVA KINGSTON FOSSIL PLANT SERVOMEX XENDOS 2700 TEST DATA AND RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. D-1 E TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT ROSEMOUNT OCX 4400 SERVICE REPORT ........ E-1 Report on RMR 24706 TVA Unit Serial Number R01005008 .............................................. E-1 Initial Inspection of Unit ................................................................................................... E-1 Paramater Settings as Received from TVA ................................................................ E-2 Line Voltage: 115 Vac ..................................................................................................... E-2

xii

Settings Changed So the Sensors Can Be Evaluated................................................ E-3 Vacuum Test and Initial Calibration Results.................................................................... E-3 F TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT ROSEMOUNT OCX 8800 TEST DATA AND RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................F-1 G TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT AMETEK THERMOX WDG-IVC TEST DATA AND RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ G-1 H TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT SERVOMEX XENDOS 2700 TEST DATA AND RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. H-1 I DAIRYLAND JOHN P. MADGETT STATION FEGT TEST DATA AND RESULTS................I-1

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Typical Oxygen Probe Configuration........................................................................2-4 Figure 2-2 Zirconium Oxide Sensor Operation ..........................................................................2-5 Figure 2-3 Characteristic Coal-Fired Boiler Conditions..............................................................2-8 Figure 2-4 Relationship of CO to O2 in the Combustion Process...............................................2-9 Figure 2-5 Johnsonville Fossil Plant ........................................................................................2-10 Figure 2-6 Marathon High-Temperature Oxyfire O2 Probe ......................................................2-10 Figure 2-7 Location of High-Temperature O2 Probes in Johnsonville Unit 9 ...........................2-11 Figure 2-8 Cross Section and Process Diagram of Oxyfire Probe...........................................2-12 Figure 2-9 Schematic Diagram of Marathon High-Temperature O2 Probe Installation ............2-12 Figure 2-10 Plan View of Marathon High-Temperature O2 Probes Installation........................2-14 Figure 2-11 Boiler External (Left) and Internal (Right) Showing Probe Failure........................2-14 Figure 2-12 Yokogawa ZR22G High-Temperature Oxygen Probe ..........................................2-15 Figure 2-13 Yokogawa High-Temperature Oxygen Extractive System ...................................2-16 Figure 2-14 Cumberland Fossil Plant ......................................................................................2-18 Figure 2-15 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 ................................................................2-19 Figure 2-16 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC Convective Flow Diagram....................................2-20 Figure 2-17 Installation Details of Ametek Units ......................................................................2-21 Figure 2-18 Installation Location of CO Monitors in Cumberlands Unit 1 Furnace .................2-22 Figure 2-19 Data Indicating Sluggish Response of Ametek WDG-HPIIC ................................2-23 Figure 2-20 CUF Unit 2 Depth Profile at Steady State ............................................................2-24 Figure 2-21 Ametek WDG-HPIIC Oxygen Measurement Compared with Plant Oxygen.........2-25 Figure 2-22 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 Analyzer 2A Data from TVA CUF Unit 2................................................................................................................................2-30 Figure 2-23 Kingston Fossil Plant ............................................................................................2-30 Figure 2-24 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 ..........................................................................2-31 Figure 2-25 Servomex Xendos 2700 Temperature Profile Indicating Above-Limit Operating Temperature....................................................................................................2-32 Figure 2-26 Addition of Low Heat Conductive Spacer to Servomex Xendos 2700..................2-33 Figure 2-27 Initial 2001 Readings from Servomex Xendos 2700 ............................................2-33 Figure 2-28 Positive Drift Data for Servomex Xendos 2700 ....................................................2-34 Figure 2-29 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe Process Offset ......................................................2-35 Figure 2-30 Servomex COe Linearity Data August 2002.........................................................2-36

xv

Figure 2-31 Servomex Xendos 2700 Performance Test CO Comparison ...............................2-39 Figure 2-32 Servomex Xendos 2700 Performance Test O2 Comparison ................................2-40 Figure 2-33 Servomex Xendos 2700 Overall Test Results ......................................................2-41 Figure 2-34 Servomex Xendos 2700 Performance Comparison with Unit CEMS ...................2-41 Figure 2-35 Overall Combustion from Performance Test Data................................................2-42 Figure 2-36 John Sevier Fossil Plant .......................................................................................2-44 Figure 2-37 TVA JSF Installation Schematic ...........................................................................2-45 Figure 2-38 TVA JSF Performance Test Combustion Process Change ..................................2-46 Figure 2-39 Rosemount OCX 4400 COe/O2 Installation..........................................................2-47 Figure 2-40 Rosemount OCX 4400 Flow Schematic ...............................................................2-48 Figure 2-41 Rosemount OCX 4400 Internal Filter Arrangement..............................................2-49 Figure 2-42 Rosemount OCX 8800 Installation at JSF ............................................................2-50 Figure 2-43 Rosemount OXC 8800 Configuration ...................................................................2-50 Figure 2-44 Rosemount OCX 8800 Blowback Drift .................................................................2-51 Figure 2-45 Rosemount OCX 8800 Performance Test O2 Comparison ..................................2-54 Figure 2-46 Rosemount OCX 8800 Performance Test CO Comparison .................................2-55 Figure 2-47 Ametek WDG-IVC CO2/O2 Installation at John Sevier..........................................2-57 Figure 2-48 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Close Coupled Extractive Analyzer .........................2-58 Figure 2-49 Thermox WDG-IVC Internal View.........................................................................2-58 Figure 2-50 Thermox Self and Externally Heated Hot-Wire Catalytic Detector .......................2-59 Figure 2-51 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Installation at JSF with Bracing ...............................2-60 Figure 2-52 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC O2 Performance Test Comparison ..........................2-61 Figure 2-53 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC CO Performance Test Comparison .........................2-62 Figure 2-54 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 Installation at JSF ............................................2-63 Figure 2-55 Servomex Xendos 2700 O2 Performance Test Comparison ................................2-67 Figure 2-56 Servomex Xendos 2700 CO Performance Test Comparison ...............................2-68 Figure 3-1 General Configuration of Conventional Tunable Diode Laser Technology...............3-1 Figure 3-2 Boreal GasFinder MC...............................................................................................3-7 Figure 3-3 Boreal GasFinder FC................................................................................................3-8 Figure 3-4 Neo Monitors LaserGas II System............................................................................3-9 Figure 3-5 LD500 Send and Receive Unit ...............................................................................3-10 Figure 3-6 LD500 Processing Unit...........................................................................................3-10 Figure 3-7 Zolotech ZoloBOSS System at TVA Gallatin..........................................................3-12 Figure 3-8 ZoloBOSS Mapping Example.................................................................................3-13 Figure 3-9 MetroLaser LTS-100...............................................................................................3-13 Figure 4-1 FEGT Installation Location .......................................................................................4-6 Figure 4-2 Furnace Wing Wall Configuration.............................................................................4-7 Figure 4-3 Diamond Power GasTemp Controls.........................................................................4-8

xvi

Figure 4-4 Diamond Power GasTemp Monitor ..........................................................................4-8 Figure 4-5 FEGT Average Comparison 1040 MW Low Load ....................................................4-9 Figure 4-6 FEGT Average Comparison 1300 MW Base Load...................................................4-9 Figure 4-7 FEGT Versus Unit Load .........................................................................................4-10 Figure 4-8 Automatic Port Rodding System.............................................................................4-11 Figure 4-9 Automatic Port Rodding System.............................................................................4-11 Figure 4-10 Dairyland Power Cooperatives John P. Madgett Station.....................................4-12 Figure 4-11 Dairyland JPM Backpass Temperature Stratification ...........................................4-13 Figure 4-12 JPM Gas Temperature 9th Elevation ...................................................................4-16 Figure 4-13 Variance of Elevation Traverse Data....................................................................4-16 Figure 4-14 JPM Gas Traverse, Elevation Comparison ..........................................................4-17 Figure 4-15 Existing Thermocouple Comparison with HVT Test Data.....................................4-18 Figure 4-16 JNT 20 Second Peak Depth Profile......................................................................4-19 Figure 4-17 Difference from Elevation Average.......................................................................4-20 Figure 5-1 Schematic of Scintillation Flow Measurement ..........................................................5-2 Figure 5-2 OSI Stack Flow Monitor Control Unit .....................................................................5-3 Figure 5-3 OSI Stack Flow Monitor Transmitter......................................................................5-3 Figure 5-4 OSI Pressure and Temperature Transmitters ..........................................................5-3 Figure 5-5 OSI Control Unit Mounting........................................................................................5-4 Figure 5-6 Schematic of OSI Stack and Control Unit.................................................................5-4 Figure 5-7 Comparison of OSI Versus Current CEMS Flow (Kurz) and Unit Load....................5-5 Figure 5-8 Comparison of OSI Versus CEMS (Kurz) During Load Drop ...................................5-6 Figure 5-9 Comparison of OSI Unit with Load and Stack CEMS Showing Correct Response ...........................................................................................................................5-7 Figure 5-10 Diagram of Infrared Stack Flow Monitor .................................................................5-8 Figure 5-11 Waveform Cross-Correlation ..................................................................................5-8 Figure 5-12 Epsilon Technologies LLC IR4 Hi-Temp Flow Meter..............................................5-9 Figure 6-1 Screen Capture of the TTU Heat Rate Calculator Installed on Kingston Unit 9 .......6-2 Figure 6-2 Cimtec Model 120 Moisture Meter Installed on Kingston Unit 9 ...............................6-2 Figure 6-3 PMW Calculated Moisture Flow Compared with Cimtec Moisture Meter .................6-3

xvii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 CUF Ametek WDG-HPIIC Zero Verification Data ....................................................2-24 Table 2-2 Rising O2 Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A.......................................2-26 Table 2-3 Falling O2 Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A ......................................2-27 Table 2-4 Rising Combustibles Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A .....................2-27 Table 2-5 Falling Combustibles Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A.....................2-28 Table 2-6 Maintenance Guide for Ametek WDG-HPIIC at TVA CUF ......................................2-29 Table 2-7 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 Test Results Comparison to Specifications ...................................................................................................................2-29 Table 2-8 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising O2 Results...............................................2-37 Table 2-9 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling O2 Results ..............................................2-37 Table 2-10 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising CO Results ...........................................2-38 Table 2-11 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling CO Results ...........................................2-38 Table 2-12 TVA KIF Servomex 2700 Test Results Comparison to Specifications...................2-43 Table 2-13 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Rising O2 Results ..............................................2-52 Table 2-14 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Falling O2 Results..............................................2-52 Table 2-15 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Rising CO Results .............................................2-53 Table 2-16 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Falling CO Results ............................................2-53 Table 2-17 Rosemount OCX 8800 Correlation to Test Measurements ...................................2-55 Table 2-18 Rosemount OCX 8800 Test Results ......................................................................2-56 Table 2-19 Estimated Maintenance Guide for Rosemount OCX 8800 ....................................2-56 Table 2-20 Rosemount OCX 8800 Installation and Maintenance Notes..................................2-57 Table 2-21 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Correlation to Test Measurements ...........................2-62 Table 2-22 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Installation and Maintenance Notes .........................2-63 Table 2-23 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising O2 Results ............................................2-65 Table 2-24 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling O2 Results ...........................................2-65 Table 2-25 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising CO Results...........................................2-66 Table 2-26 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling CO Results ..........................................2-66 Table 2-27 Servomex Xendos 2700 Correlation to Test Measurements .................................2-69 Table 2-28 Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Results ...................................................................2-69 Table 2-29 Estimated Maintenance Guide for Servomex Xendos 2700 ..................................2-70 Table 2-30 Servomex Xendos 2700 Installation and Maintenance Notes ...............................2-70

xix

Table 3-1 Tunable Diode Laser Companies ..............................................................................3-3 Table B-1 Test Matrix for Dynamic Tests................................................................................. B-5

xx

INTRODUCTION

New and increasing limits on emissions, in particular nitrogen oxide (NOx), and emphasis on heat rate have underscored the need to measure flue gas constituents more accurately and in more locations. Utilities are making capital investments installing low-NOx burners, over-fired air, and other boiler modifications and chemical plant additions, including selective catalytic reduction (SCR) and selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR), to control and reduce NOx emissions. Effective emissions control can be enhanced through the use of innovative instrumentation closer to the furnace combustion zone and obtained on a near real-time basis. Current sensors are usually implemented as part of a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS), and some of those sensors are installed in a shared stack far downstream of the combustion process. This creates a significant time delay in the measurements and hinders accurate feedback based on individual unit performance. Thus, if the unit operators have near real-time boiler emission data, they can maintain the boiler more efficiently and possibly prevent it from slagging. When SCRs are installed by reducing and stabilizing the amount of NOx produced by the boiler, the amount of ammonia needed in the SCR will be reduced. Increasing limits on NOx, changing fuel quality, and retrofitting low NOx burners and downstream NOx removal equipment have indicated the need for better combustion process monitoring. Improved technology now permits O2, CO, and other process parameters to be monitored much closer to the combustion zone, allowing for better process control. The objective of this project is to identify and evaluate improved and new furnace process instrumentation. Benefits of improved furnace instrumentation could include: Reduced air heater operation and maintenance Reduced SCR NH3 costs Increased SCR catalyst longevity NOx reduction Reduced derates due to opacity Reduced loss on ignition (LOI) Improved heat rate Decreased equivalent forced outage rate (EFOR) due to boiler tube degradation and waterwall slagging

1-1

Introduction

This project has been developed to review the flue gas analyzers available on the market that can withstand the harsh environment as close to the boiler as possible, pick the most promising analyzers, install them in the process, and evaluate them for an extended time period. The final reason for the project is to verify that the analyzers meet the manufacturers performance specifications and can operate with minimal maintenance. The next step will be to provide assistance with the most applicable analyzer for the needs of the plant. A feature of this project is that most of the instrumentation has been supplied on a trial basis so that if it does not meet requisite performance requirements, it will be removed with no cost to the utility member. As a benefit, this project has spurred companies to redevelop their instrumentation for fossil applications, which in essence has prevented plants from purchasing instrumentation that was not quite ready for their needs. Many of these instruments have been used in gas furnace applications but were not fully developed for the harsh conditions found in coal-fired plants. The vendors involved are working to revamp their systems for the high temperature/high particulate/sulfur dioxide (SO2) laden fossil applications. Extensive research for noninvasive high-temperature O2 and CO measurements led the project to tunable diode laser (TDL) technology. Preliminary data have been collected for the possibility of future installations in fossil units. The research plan had two primary thrusts. The first was to perform a survey of commercial CO monitoring systems available, which was completed in 2000 and submitted to EPRI as CO Monitoring Instrumentation and Applications: Technology Assessment [1]. The completed survey included cost of purchase, licensing options, features, and, to the extent available, market penetration. The market list, again to the extent available, provided the names of utility users and contacts. The second thrust was a survey that resulted in Instrumentation for CO Monitoring [2], published in 2001 and created to give utility members more detail on how to choose a monitor for an application by discussing installation and monitoring locations, as well as updating the status of the technologies. The report also discussed the plans to demonstrate the most promising instrumentation determined from the market survey at different utility sites. This report is being produced to detail the results of implemented test plans to determine the instrumentation that performs best for each application. This detailed performance report on market available analyzers will enable the utilities to see test data on each of the units before making their purchasing decisions, thus preventing purchasing units that will not operate in a specific application. The original project was revised to include other types of boiler instrumentation. In addition to CO monitors, furnace exit gas temperature (FEGT) and hot-side O2 monitors and stack flow analyzers have been added to the assessment. The second section, TDL technology, includes a short study and evaluation of optical flow monitors and current demonstrations being performed.

1-2

Introduction

References for Section 1

1. CO Monitoring Instrumentation and Applications: Technology Assessment. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000. 1000343. 2. Instrumentation for CO Monitoring. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001. 1003979.

1-3

CO/OXYGEN SENSORS

Oxygen
The U.S. energy policy emphasizes the maximum use of all its domestic energy resources in a clean, efficient, and cost-effective manner. Every facet of the U.S. economy depends on reliable, low-cost energy. The enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 and the restructuring of the U.S. electricity markets represent significant forces that are having a major impact on the electric power industry. In response to the new emission requirements and the threat of competition resulting from deregulation, electric power generators are applying new technologies to improve plant operations while reducing emissions. Neural network optimization is another widely used tool. Neural networks require relevant data in order to model important variables for control. In order to control or reduce NOx and improve heat rate, it is important to measure CO on a near real-time basis. In many cases, CO is measured in a shared stack or far downstream of the combustion process so that feedback to control the process is poor. In addition, current sensors are designed for CEMs, making them expensive to install and maintain, which precludes putting in multiple sensors to address duct stratification, reliability, and so on. New innovations have made it possible to monitor the combustion process on a continuous basis for boiler efficiency viability. The past difficulties due to the harsh environments encountered in fossil-fired boilers have been addressed in the re-engineering of these continuous monitors. Path and point analyzers are available with new features for fossil applications. Within the point analyzers, past issues included difficulties due to particulate matter, longevity, and sensitivity of detectors. These units are now field serviceable and offer a wide range of probe material to overcome the high temperatures surrounding the combustion zone. Path analyzers of the past have encountered difficulties with signal strength, flue gas temperature limitations, and misalignment of optical systems due to vibrations. Much work has been completed in recent years to develop higher performance sources and detectors for these analyzers. Because many of these analyzers are new to the market, further research efforts could be focused on the actual applications of these units. Comparisons of the operational issues and long-term maintenance issues would be helpful in deciding which analyzer best fits an application. This would entail the cooperation of many utilities because some analyzers are already installed in plants from different utilities. The outcome of this research could benefit all utilities.

2-1

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Key measurements required for effective emissions control include CO, NOx, and O2 concentrations and FEGT. These parameters can be applied in the following ways: Combustion monitoring (use CO measurement to set excess O2) Burner balancing (with an array of sample points across duct) Reducing atmosphere indicator (show incomplete combustion)

The results could be: NOx reduction from lower excess O2 Improved heat rate Increased availability due to reduced slagging Reduced derating because of opacity limits

Oxygen Measurement Perfect or stoichiometric combustion is the complete oxidation of all the combustibles in the fuel with exactly 100% of the oxygen contained in the air. Oxygen measurement is important in order to know the correct air flow required for complete combustion. Direct measurement of O2 is a relatively new quantity and has only been incorporated into combustion controls since the late 1970s. Prior to that, the instrumentation was not available in a form reliable enough for power plant control, and air flow was used for control. Direct measurement was accomplished by calibrating a flow element in the air stream with Orsat analysis of the flue gas stream. From this analysis, a curve could be constructed of excess O2 to air flow differential pressure. The operator then knew from the air flow indicator how much excess O2 was in the combustion process. The reliable and accurate O2 sensor has made direct measurement of excess oxygen the standard for boiler control. It is, however, open to interpretation. For example, with multiple O2 instruments on one boiler, some control philosophies use the average of all sensors for the control point. Others use the lowest sensor, commonly known as low select, for control. The latter mode is the most conservative because if one of the sensors in the average fails high (a common failure mode), the control system can drive the combustion process to a potentially dangerously low level of oxygen in the furnace. This can lead to a furnace explosion. Another conservative control approach is to use air flow as a primary control and O2 measurement as a trim control. The methods for monitoring oxygen include [1]: Orsat: Oxygen absorption into a liquid results in a change in volume. Chemical, only. Noncontinuous extractive. Chemical Cell: Used in portable analyzers. Inexpensive electrolytic cell is consumed by the measurement. Semi-continuous extractive.

2-2

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Paramagnetic: Oxygen is affected by magnetic fields, which is suitable for continuous use in combustion service but requires a clean, dry, extracted sample. Conditioned multi-point extractive. Zirconium Oxide (ZrO2): Solid fuel cell technology based upon the migration of O2 ions through a ceramic media. ZrO2 technology is used in the majority of all combustion applications. In situ, extractive, or multi-point control. Tunable Diode Laser (TDL): A diode laser scans a small spectrum of wavelengths, reducing problems with background noise. Claim performance in harsh applications. Higher cost.

Oxygen Zirconium Oxide The ZrO2 sensor has become the predominant technology for measuring oxygen in combustion flue gases. This sensor was a technology transfer created from the Apollo space program. ZrO2 is now the primary tool for setting the fuel/air ratios of most combustion processes. There are multiple manufacturers for these types of sensors, and they are: Ametek Thermox ABB Bailey COSA Zircomat Datatest Land Combustion Marathon Sensors PCI Panametrics Rosemount Servomex SICK Optic Electronic Yokogawa http://www.thermox.com http://www.abb.com http://www.cosa-instrument.com http://www.datatest-inc.com http://www.landinst.com http://www.marathonsensors.com http://www.panametrics.com http://www.emersonprocess.com http://www.servomex.com http://www.sickoptic.com http://www.ypa.com

These sensors are usually mounted at the exit of the economizer outlet at approximately 316 399C (600750F). These in situ instruments house no electronics at the sensor itself but have a control unit that can be installed away from the furnace in a lower temperature environment. Even these control units have temperature limitations that must be followed; otherwise, the longevity will be compromised. The instrument includes a probe that can be up to 3 m (9 ft) in length without additional support with the sensor at the tip or end of the probe. The wiring from the sensor to the probe outer housing is insulated for high temperatures. The sensor itself is platinum-plated zirconium oxide or ceramic. The sensor has an internal heater that maintains a constant temperature approximately 750C (1382F). The location of the sensor installation is limited to an area where the flue gas temperature is below the sensor temperature. Various manufacturers differ in their sensor technology, specifically in the design and application of the platinum to the zirconium oxide. Rosemount uses a zirconia ceramic disk with the platinum 2-3

CO/Oxygen Sensors

applied either through flame spray or vapor deposition (vacuum, then sprayed on by laser). Yokogawa uses a thimble-like zirconia ceramic with the platinum applied by a special bonding process. Each vendor also has a slightly different configuration of the probe end. A general view is depicted in Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1 Typical Oxygen Probe Configuration

The principle of the zirconia oxygen analyzer is as follows: A disk of zirconium oxide powder is mixed with a small amount of yttria. It is pressed and fired. In the firing process, the yttria is lost, which creates vacancies. At high temperatures the zirconia element, as a solid electrolyte, is a conductor of oxygen ions. Platinum electrode material is attached to the interior and exterior of the zirconia. The combination of the elevated temperatures and the platinum electrode material causes the available oxygen molecules to ionize and pass from one side to the other. The oxygen ions pass from the side of higher partial pressure (reference air 20.95% oxygen) to lower partial pressure (process gas stream). In other words, oxygen molecules gain electrons to form oxygen ions with higher partial pressure of oxygen concentrations. These ions travel through the zirconia element to the other electrode, creating an electromotive force between the two platinum electrodes, as shown in Figure 2-2.

2-4

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-2 Zirconium Oxide Sensor Operation

The Nerst equation can be applied to calculate the force by measuring the electromotive force E generated between the two electrodes. Nerst Equation: EMF = KT log10 (P1/P2) + C Where, P2 is the partial pressure of oxygen on the flue gas side P1 is the partial pressure of oxygen on the reference side T is the absolute temperature K is a constant C is the cell constant The output is inverse and logarithmic. The signal increases at the low O2 levels commonly experienced in combustion processes; thus, accuracy actually improves at lower O2 levels. These sensors operate well at elevated temperatures, permitting the in situ design for a fast response to combustion changes. The sensors are robust and cell life can easily exceed 35 years. Sulfur is the major cause of shortened cell life [2].

2-5

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Failure Mechanisms As a result of discussions with various vendors and utility sites, a summary of failure mechanisms more common with zirconium oxide oxygen instruments was compiled and is summarized as follows: Electrode Failure [3] Sulfur Erosion of Platinum (not usually a problem with light oil and gas) Normal sulfur reaction: 2SO2 + O2 = 2SO3 Low O2 causes CO production: thus: 2SO2 + 2CO = 2CO2 + 2S(gas) S(gas) + Pt = Platinum sulfide Sulfur causes the platinum to sublimate (burn like a candle). This causes less signal for a given O2%: less signal = less mV = high O2% = fail high. Lower mV means higher O2% due to reference of 20.9% O2; larger difference between reference and sample means lower O2% and larger mV; larger mV means higher accuracy on smaller O2 values. High-Temperature Platinum Degrade At higher temperatures, over a period of time, the separate grains of platinum will begin to run together, called grain growth. The larger grains of platinum mean lower sensitivity. The range of the unit will drop. At the lower range, O2% will not reach the high mV, and the unit will read higher than what is in the process. It does not have the range to detect the lower O2%, so it will fail high. Mechanical Failure Heater Failure The heater element will break. The temperature of the electrode will not reach the minimum necessary for measurement, and an alarm will show on the control display. The 420 mA signal will be changed to a specific value that the digital control system (DCS) will pick up as failure. Diffusion Element Failure In normal operation the diffusion element acts as a chamber for calibration. Calibration gas floods the chamber, and the diffuser keeps the sample gas stream from sweeping the calibration gas away too quickly. The calibration gases used are low O2 and high O2. Air should not be used as the high O2 because the process will never reach that point. Something lower than 20.9% would give higher accuracy.

2-6

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Pluggage To detect a plugged filter, check the return-to-process time during calibration. Normal time is 12 seconds for process indication and 15 seconds for full return. Pluggage will just stop the unit from detecting changes in the process stream, no failure high or low. A plugged filter can lead the person running the calibration to increase the flow of calibration gas during calibration. If the diffuser is plugged and flow of calibration gas is increased, the pressure inside the chamber will increase. This increase in pressure during calibration sets the O2 higher than it should be because the unit is really measuring the difference in partial pressures. This causes a higher range of mV for the calibration. Once the unit is back online, the mV reading will represent a lower O2% due to the calibration: fail low.

Crack in the Zirconia Oxide Ceramic Sensor If there is a crack in the ceramic sensor, calibration will be fine because the calibration gas causes higher pressure in the chamber, keeping reference gas from leaking. Once the unit is returned to the process, the negative pressure in the duct causes 20.9% O2 reference gas to leak into the process side: fail high.

Hot-Side O2 Measurement Measurement of excess oxygen in the boilers radiant section provides information on the products and conditions of combustion closest to their source. Most oxygen sensors used for combustion control are installed in the area between the economizer and air preheater. CEM sensors are placed in the stack of the boiler. Conventional zirconium oxide sensor technology is limited to temperatures lower than the internal heater temperature of approximately 750C (1380F). Thus, due to this limitation the sensors are normally located farther down the gas stream away from the combustion zone. The sensors, installed in lower temperature environments, provide valuable information but can read erroneously due to air in-leakage throughout the boiler (see Figure 2-3). This can include air infiltration between the radiant zone and the back-pass sensor location through the penthouse penetrations, casing leakage and possible expansion joint leakage. This can result in lower oxygen levels in the furnace combustion zone, which can lead to incomplete combustion. In order to ensure adequate oxygen for combustion, most operators will run with higher than necessary levels of O2, increasing the production of NOx. The benefits of measuring oxygen closer to the combustion zone can include: NOx reduction Heat rate improvement Reduced slagging Greater availability Opacity improvements 2-7

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-3 demonstrates characteristic coal-fired boiler conditions.

Figure 2-3 Characteristic Coal-Fired Boiler Conditions

Excess oxygen measurements taken above the burners provide timely information for the optimal control of boiler combustion and give information about the condition of the equipment supplying the fuel and air. Use of multiple probes, especially in wall-fired furnaces, can identify problem areas in the furnace from the stratification of the gases and can link problem areas back to specific burners. Operational issues, such as broken or out-of-position dampers and mill settings, can tune burners and/or mills, causing high CO or LOI. Correcting these issues using O2 measurements as a guide will allow excess oxygen to be lowered, thus reducing the formation of NOx (see Figure 2-4). Providing the operators with this information allows them to operate the units more efficiently, eliminates CO pockets, and helps in achieving lowest cost megawatts.

2-8

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-4 Relationship of CO to O2 in the Combustion Process

Summary of Resulting Benefits The benefits that result are: Better tuned combustion zone (balanced boiler) Optimized fuel/air ratio and combustion efficiency Minimized NOx emissions Standardized emissions concentration data Reduced overall maintenance costs associated with slag formation and carbon degradation to the waterwalls

The limitations with any instrument used in the combustion zone include slag accumulation and high temperatures. Temperatures in the combustion zone in the range of 10931371C (2000 2500F) require high heat-withstanding materials. Most metals will melt at these temperatures, leaving only ceramic or newly developed high-temperature alloy metals as possibilities. Slag accumulation can increase the difficulty of survival of the probe. The ash from the coal will become molten and sticky at temperatures above the ash fusion temperature, which for most coals is in the temperature range of the combustion zone. Utility boilers are designed to collect this molten material at the bottom of the boiler for later disposal with the ash sluice system. For an instrument protruding into the furnace in the combustion zone, this slag can accumulate, adding weight to the end of the probe, which can be detrimental to the instruments longevity.

2-9

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Ceramics can withstand the high temperature but are susceptible to breakage. The slag accumulation in the furnace can also create deposits that, after becoming heavy enough, will fall and break the probe itself. Applications by Plant Site TVA Johnsonville Fossil Plant TVAs Johnsonville Fossil Plant (JOF) is located on the east bank of the Tennessee River near Waverly, Tennessee (see Figure 2-5). Johnsonville has ten coal-fired generating units. Construction of the plant began in 1949, and the first unit came online in 1952. The winter net dependable generating capacity is 1254 MW. The plant consumes about 9600 tons of coal a day.

Figure 2-5 Johnsonville Fossil Plant

Marathon High-Temperature Oxyfire Figure 2-6 illustrates a Marathon High-Temperature Oxyfire O2 Probe.

Figure 2-6 Marathon High-Temperature Oxyfire O2 Probe

2-10

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Operation

The Oxyfire works by precisely measuring the net concentration of oxygen in a process; that is, the amount of oxygen that remains after combustion is completed. At its core is the platinumcoated zirconia cell. Also included is a required B type (R and S types optional) thermocouple, which provides the sensor temperature needed for the O2 calculation. Marathon Oxyfire oxygen instruments were installed at TVAs Johnsonville Fossil plant on Unit 9 above each of the four columns of burners for the purpose of burner diagnostics. This in situ oxygen sensor is designed to measure oxygen concentrations directly in the high-heat zones of high-temperature furnaces, boilers, and incinerators. They are intrinsically safe, requiring no electrical input power and generating only a low millivolt output. The four Oxyfire probes were installed in the boiler front wall, above each of the burner banks (shown in Figure 2-7). This configuration will allow operators to monitor the oxygen levels for each bank of burners and balance the boiler.

Figure 2-7 Location of High-Temperature O2 Probes in Johnsonville Unit 9

The Oxyfire instruments use a continuous piece of platinum-plated zirconium oxide with an outer sheath for protection. Unlike conventional probes that house heaters to maintain a constant temperature for the measurement, the Oxyfire probes, as shown in Figure 2-8, include a thermocouple that can monitor the changes in combustion temperature. This temperature level is 2-11

CO/Oxygen Sensors

applied to the Nerst equation to calculate O2% in the furnace. The larger amount of sensor material is necessary because of the faster degradation of the sensor at high temperatures.

Figure 2-8 Cross Section and Process Diagram of Oxyfire Probe

The installation is as simple as the installation of conventional probes, with the probes at the furnace and the control unit away from the high-temperature area (see Figure 2-9). A Yokogawa DX 112 recorder was used to input the signal to the control room. This recorder was connected to the plant historian to access and log the data for the evaluation.

Figure 2-9 Schematic Diagram of Marathon High-Temperature O2 Probe Installation

2-12

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Installation Issues

Marathon provided 31.75-mm (1.25-in.) outer diameter (OD) probes for the application. It was discovered that the outer nipples installed on the four installation ports were 31.75-mm (1.25-in.) conduit nipples, not the 31.75-mm (1.25-in.) NPT pipe nipples specified, so the inside diameters of the ports were too small for the probe to fit through. All the ports were cut and replaced to the correct specification. On further inspection, several other inconsistencies were found. The two innermost ports on the boiler access doors had the 31.75-mm (1.25-in.) conduit protruding into the boiler. Because the boiler is online, those could not be replaced. Also, at the southernmost port on the access door, an insulated steam line ran behind the port. Insulation had to be removed to allow the probe and probe head to pass into the port. Because further work on the probes would be necessary during the evaluation period, a removable panel was used in order to remove the probe when necessary. The southernmost port had refractory that was removed. Upon removal, the inner pipe through the insulation had a 40.13-mm (1.58-in.) inner diameter (ID) that the probe would fit through. The water wall tubes had also been spread apart far enough. The northernmost port had the same inner pipe through the insulation and the spread of the boiler tubes was 35.05 mm (1.38 in.). The inner pipe was mounted off center, with the boiler tubes overlapping the inner tube. The 31.75-mm (1.25-in.) probe could not pass by the boiler tubes into the furnace. When the new nipple was welded into place, it was re-centered on the left side of the inner pipe and the right edge of the boiler tube. Marathon had checked with their suppliers and found an even stronger material in a 25.4-mm (1-in.) diameter. They have proposed to use this new more rugged material on all the probes to help correct the current situation. In summary, issues with the ports that had to be resolved included: Nipples on all ports removed and replaced Nipple on most northern port re-centered using a 25.4-mm (1-in.) OD pipe at plant to ensure correct alignment Removable insulation panel fabricated

Due to the port issues, the probe sheaths had an OD limitation of 25.4 mm (1 in.). The sensor probe itself remained the original thickness, thus the sheaths were thinner, making them less rigid. Due to these issues, Marathon provided a reduced-length probe MSI Oxyfire hightemperature in situ oxygen sensor with a 1.1-m (3.5-ft) KANTHAL APM protection sheath and a Type B thermocouple for the two outer ports. An MSI Oxyfire high-temperature in situ oxygen sensor with a 1.2-m (3.9-ft) A KANTHAL APM protection sheath and a Type B thermocouple were provided for the two inner ports (see Figure 2-10).

2-13

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-10 Plan View of Marathon High-Temperature O2 Probes Installation

Results

Because of the high temperatures and slag accumulation, the first set of support tubes was made of high-temperature ceramic/metal alloy bent (see Figure 2-11).

Figure 2-11 Boiler External (Left) and Internal (Right) Showing Probe Failure

A second set of support tubes fabricated of stainless steel also had the same failure. Boiler operators who removed the probes reported that slag was still on the ends of the probes, and they had also bent. Marathon has recommended increasing the port size to allow for their standard ceramic support tube. With the slag accumulation and possibility of a slag clinker breaking the ceramic support tube, the plant has decided not to invest in making the ports larger. The ports are located in the waterwalls and would require substantial scaffolding and bending of tubes, which is a large undertaking.

2-14

CO/Oxygen Sensors

In summary, due to high temperatures and slag, the application seemed too harsh for the Oxyfire probes to maintain longevity and deliver measurements of combustion oxygen to the operator. Generally speaking, the instrument did not fit the application. The Oxyfire probes were easy to install and theoretically seemed able, although no data was collected, to deliver the measurement of oxygen from the flue gas stream. A better application would be a location past the slag line in the furnace but still in the convection pass, or, if possible, somewhere in the high-temperature slagging area but with the probes installed vertically to minimize slag accumulation. Yokogawa ZR22G High-Temperature Oxygen Figure 2-12 shows the Yokogawa ZR22G high-temperature oxygen probe.

Figure 2-12 Yokogawa ZR22G High-Temperature Oxygen Probe

Yokogawas ZR22P high-temperature adapter, shown in Figure 2-13, is a simple device that uses the heat transfer characteristics of a pipe stand off to cool the process gas temperature to less than 704C (1300F) where the oxygen measurement is made using a common in situ detector. A steel or ceramic transport tube extends into the process. Its length is determined by the process flow dynamics, installation constraints, and customer requirements. A hot gas sample passes through the transport tube and stand off and past the oxygen detector. The gas sample is never allowed to cool below dew point, so considerations for condensate are not required. The gas sample is returned to the process.

2-15

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-13 Yokogawa High-Temperature Oxygen Extractive System

The Yokogawa high-temperature oxygen extractive system is planned for installation at the JOF plant using one of the ports installed for the previous high-temperature application. The instrument will be located above one of the four columns of burners for the purpose of burner diagnostics. This configuration will allow operators to monitor the oxygen levels for each bank of burners and balance the boiler. When the project is completed the data from this evaluation will be published in a report.

Carbon Monoxide Catalytic Combustibles and Infrared

In any combustion process, the theoretical amount of air that reacts first with all the combustibles in the fuel would also yield the higher efficiency. In practice, some additional air is needed due to stratification of fuel and other physical limitations. Fundamental combustion theory suggests that to maximize combustion efficiency, it is desirable to balance the process by simultaneously optimizing the oxygen and the CO produced by the process while remaining within the emissions limits. Measuring oxygen alone is insufficient for combustion efficiency purposes because of ever-changing boiler conditions that affect the amount of carbon monoxide in the flue gas. Combustion efficiency can then be maximized when the correct amount of excess air is supplied to the sum of energy losses from both unburned fuel and flue gas heat loss is minimized. The addition of continuous CO monitoring will enable close control of the process at peak efficiency and, at the same time, reduce harmful emissions. Unburned fuel is also unburned carbon, which is a combustible and is affected by oxygen levels. It is not addressed in this report; only gaseous combustibles are addressed. Unburned carbon is directly related to CO because as the CO increases, the unburned carbon will also increase.

2-16

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Reliable measurement closer to the combustion CO, together with oxygen, allows the user to determine and maintain the optimal O2 set point, resulting in maximized fuel efficiency and minimized NOx emissions. Typical NOx reductions of 20% can be obtained simply by practicing good combustion or low excess air firing. The combination of oxygen and ppm combustibles also allows monitoring of burner performance and reduces problems due to air leakage. This study has the overall objective of identifying and assessing continuous carbon monoxide monitoring techniques for commercial power plants. The different issues encountered when deciding upon one of these units are addressed, including placement, operational, and maintenance issues, which need to be understood for each specific application. Each monitor is discussed within these topics, along with comparison tables. This report will not indicate a specific monitor to use, but it is designed to inform and educate interested parties on current trends in CO analyzers to aid in the decision making process. The difficulties associated with extractive systems led to the idea of measuring the flue gasses as they exist in the stack or duct, without conditioning. The two different methods of in situ monitoring can be classified as point and path. These methods require no conditioning of the sample gas to clear it of particulate matter. They are also built to withstand the harsh environments encountered close to the combustion process, unlike stack conditions. Path and point analyzers offer different advantages and limitations. Point in situ CO analyzers require a probe to be inserted into the process gas. The newest point analyzers consist of a catalytic combustibles detector to which the probe delivers the process gas. This does not give an actual CO reading but a total combustibles reading, which is predominately CO once the particulate matter is removed (referred to as carbon monoxide equivalent [COe]). These combustibles detectors can work in high-temperature areas where most CO path analyzers cannot. Infrared path CO monitors have been available on the market for several years. They provide a direct measurement of CO, not just combustibles, over line path in the duct. This enables an average line measurement across the duct, which may help offset differences due to gas stratification. Issues and Interferences In EPRIs CO Monitoring Instrumentation and Applications: Technology Assessment [4], Section 2 briefly touches on the issues of placement and operations maintenance. A more thorough discussion on installation and monitoring location issues is included in Section 4 of EPRIs Instrumentation for CO Monitoring [5]. These issues and how various vendors have configured their units to overcome them are discussed in the following evaluation applications. One issue that has not been emphasized is the interferences within the flue gas itself. The catalytic combustibles detectors measure all the combustibles in the flue gas. Anything that is not carbon monoxide but can be combusted can cause erroneous readings. Some of these include hydrocarbons and SO2. From discussions with utility members and various test facilities and/or groups, the amount (if any) of hydrocarbons that are unburnt in a coal-fired furnace is insignificant. Unburned carbon does not interfere because each of these units includes an outer filter to keep particulate out of the measurement gas stream. 2-17

CO/Oxygen Sensors

These catalytic combustible analyzers also incorporate platinum in their catalyst sensor. As mentioned earlier in Section 2, sulfur can cause degradation of the sensor itself. For these specific instruments, the following can occur: SO2 SO3 combustion: This causes a positive reading that is not representative of CO in the gas stream. It can be large enough to warrant adding an offset to the unit. If an offset is included, it will change as the sulfur content of the coal changes. SO2 inhibition: The SO2 will attach itself to the catalyst and inactivate the catalyst. This will cause a negative drift of the unit. Platinum degradation: SO2 will also attack the platinum on the catalyst and degrade the sensor over time.

Each vendor designs a sensor with these SO2 issues in mind. One of the primary obstacles with the measurement itself is that the vendors have their own special formula for their sensor catalyst in order to prevent error due to the SO2 reactions and to make the sensor as stable and robust as possible. Applications by Plant Site TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant The TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant (CUF) plant, as shown in Figure 2-14, is located on Barkley Lake in Cumberland City, Stewart County, Tennessee. The CUF plant is a two-unit, fossil fuel station and is the largest fossil-generating asset in the TVA fleet, boasting a maximum rated gross output of 2678 MW. Plant electrical station service usage equals approximately 5.5% of gross output.

Figure 2-14 Cumberland Fossil Plant

2-18

CO/Oxygen Sensors

CUF is a key player in the Clean Air Strategy for the TVA system. Both Cumberland units are equipped with wet limestone scrubbers capable of >95% SO2 removal. In the spring of 2003, Cumberland Unit 1 commissioned the SCR system capable of >90% NOx reduction. Unit 2 SCR was commissioned in the spring of 2004, operating also at 90% NOx removal. SCR operation is currently scheduled to take place only during ozone season (May through September). A recurring problem has been slag deposition on the upper furnace sections, particularly the pendants at CUF (two 1300 MW opposed-wall fired units burning Illinois Basin coal). The boiler dimensions are 33.8 m (110.9 ft) wide by 15.5 m (50.9 ft) deep and are configured with 88 burners fed by eleven MPS 89 mills. The furnaces were originally designed with cell burners and were retrofitted with Foster Wheeler CF/CS low NOx burners in the late 1990s. A high-heat release ratio and the medium-to-high sulfur and iron content of the fuel results in the troublesome combination of high FEGTs and low ash fusion temperatures. The ash fusion temperature of coal is decreased in a reduced atmosphere, resulting in higher probability of slagging issues. The plant installed CO monitors to prevent a reduced atmosphere in the furnace. Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 CUF has had a history of problems associated with slag accumulating in the furnace. Several costly forced outages have occurred from slag falls damaging the furnace floor. In late 2000, CUF purchased six of the Ametek Thermox analyzers, shown in Figure 2-15, to monitor CO in the convection pass. The CO reading would give them an indication of incomplete combustion and a reduced atmosphere, which increases slagging potential. An array of three analyzers was installed on Units 1 and 2 on the 10th elevation in the back convection pass. CUF Units 1 and 2 are sister 1300 MW wall fired units with 11 mills that deliver to 88 burners. The furnace is considered sectioned into three parts: north, middle, and south. These units use a standard catalytic combustibles detector to calculate the amount of combustibles in the flue gas.

Figure 2-15 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2

2-19

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Combustible style sensors rely on the combustion of carbon monoxide and oxygen over an active element with a catalytic surface. The resistance difference from the active to a reference element is proportional to the combustibles concentration of the flue gas. The analyzer is directly mounted in the combustion process to provide a continuous measurement of oxygen and combustibles with a separate control unit. The oxygen measurement is made using the industry standard zirconium oxide technology. The WDG-HPIIC in Figure 2-16 uses a convective process to extract the sample, which should decrease the possibility of pluggage sometimes associated with extractive units, but it also increases response time. The HPIIC has a maximum probe length of 1.2 m (3.9 ft).

Figure 2-16 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC Convective Flow Diagram

Installation

Installation was in March 2001, with the first set of verification tests in June 2001. The initial problems with the units were not mechanical; the units were mechanically robust and were installed with no major effort. The plant decided to place them in the back of the convection pass, where water tubes had to be negotiated (see Figure 2-17).

2-20

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-17 Installation Details of Ametek Units

The plant wanted the units to be as close to the process as possible (see Figure 2-18). A discussion ensued regarding the location being a possible dead zone in the furnace, especially because the probes were only 1.2 m (3.9 ft) in length. The depth is presented in the issues section.

2-21

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-18 Installation Location of CO Monitors in Cumberlands Unit 1 Furnace

Issues Historical

After installation and up to June 2001, the plant engineer, Chris Masengil, discovered problems with the analyzers. During calibration, they were not returning to zero on consecutive days within the accuracy limits. Upon inspection, one analyzer no longer had the expected sensitivity. Ametek quoted that once the sensitivity drops below 1.5 mV/1000 ppm CO, the detector should be replaced. Ametek replaced it, at their expense, and provided new ceramic filters for the higher temperature area. The units were not only having difficulty during calibration, but they seemed to have a sluggish response time (see Figure 2-19), of which pluggage was thought to be the cause. The opacity monitor, located at the stack, indicated combustion problems. 2-22

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-19 Data Indicating Sluggish Response of Ametek WDG-HPIIC

Leakage through the RCU solenoid valves was suspected, so the valves were replaced. After these changes, the analyzers were still not repeatable with the calibration gas. Ametek suspected that the analyzer software was allowing a negative zero calibration, and daily calibrations indicated an unrepeatable COe sensor. During the span between installation and June 2001 1B, 2A, and 2B had detectors replaced, and 1C and 2C had lost sensitivity, as indicated by calibration slopes around 3E-4, and needed replacement. In early June 2001, Ametek representatives Jim McNoldy and Dennis Hungerman visited the plant site for testing and to: Install the new controller software that had the appropriate span calibration failure limit for the COe detector Replace the COe detectors that had marginally low slope (sensitivity)

During the testing, an Ametek PACE 400 portable flue gas analyzer was used to measure the Oxygen, CO, and NOx as the reference. Two weeks prior to the testing, a test port was added to Unit 2B to make it easier to hook up a portable analyzer for verification. The data from these sets of tests are included in Appendix A. The CUF units were very sensitive to slag, thus operations always tried to maintain an oxidizing atmosphere in the furnace. Because the CO units had not been proven reliable and due to the sensitivity of the CUF units, operators were hesitant to drop the O2 set point to establish the production of CO.

2-23

CO/Oxygen Sensors

During this testing, only negligible levels of CO, amounts below the Ametek analyzers accuracy specifications, were reached. The test did yield depth profile data to help resolve the issue of probe depth on the 10th elevation. The data were still inconclusive regarding whether the 1.2-m (3.9-ft) probe length at the given location was and adequate representation of the flue gas stream. As the depth increased from 0.63.6 m (211.8 ft) the O2 levels decreased, specifically between 1.82.4 m (5.97.9 ft) (see Figure 2-20).

Figure 2-20 CUF Unit 2 Depth Profile at Steady State

After the test and Ametek visit, by mid-June 2001, all CO monitors were indicating zero combustibles. Verification gas (2% O2, Bal N2) was used to determine negative drift. The results of the verification did not indicate zero or a consistent negative but a non-repeatable inaccuracy in the combustible detector (see Table 2-1). These units are quoted as having a 40 ppm accuracy.
Table 2-1 CUF Ametek WDG-HPIIC Zero Verification Data Analyzer 1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C O2 (%) 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.97 2.01 1.96 CO (ppm) 70 150 10 20 40 -110

2-24

CO/Oxygen Sensors

The analyzers continued to have difficulty with the combustibles detectors. Since installation, the oxygen readings tracked directly with the plants existing in situ oxygen analyzers at the exit of the economizer (see Figure 2-21). There were no perceived problems with the zirconium oxide oxygen sensor.

Figure 2-21 Ametek WDG-HPIIC Oxygen Measurement Compared with Plant Oxygen

The analyzers had not provided reliable CO readings for CUF due to problems with repeatability. After much trial and error on the part of Ametek, with the support of the CUF and EPRI personnel, Ametek discovered some problems with the combustibles detector for this model. In February 2003 the new detectors, as well as some other modifications, were applied to the CUF analyzers. Calibration had been hindered by the remote calibration unit (RCU) leakage through the solenoid valves. Ametek is currently reworking their RCU to correct these issues. CUF currently performs manual calibrations at each analyzer.

2-25

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Performance Test Results

Performance testing took place in November 2003, but it resulted in no usable data because of problems with the reference method of obtaining the CO and O2 measurements. The reference test data were not reliable due to air infiltration between test probes and test analyzers. The test did indicate a problem with analyzer 1A, which Ametek quickly identified as leakage around the detector from stripped threading and replaced the detector in a timely manner. Linearity and repeatability data were taken for unit 2A in February 2005. The test method for this is described in Appendix B-1. The references for the test procedure included: International Standard IEC 1207-1, Expression of Performance of Gas Analyzers Part 1: General International Standard IEC 1207-2, Expression of Performance of Gas Analyzers Part 2: Oxygen in Gas (Utilizing High-Temperature Electrochemical Sensors) US CFR 40 Part 60 Method 10, Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources

Results from these tests are shown in Tables 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, and 2-5.
Table 2-2 Rising O2 Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A O2% Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) Mean Reading WDGHPIIC ppm 1.95 1.97 1.99 1.99 8.00 20.83 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 6 Point 5 Point 4 Point 3 Point 2 Point 1 Ave Slope Intercept

2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 8.00 20.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.01

0.05 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.10 0.03

0.07 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.06

0.998 -0.017

2-26

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-3 Falling O2 Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A O2% Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) Mean Reading WDGHPIIC ppm 20.83 8.03 2.00 1.99 1.97 1.95 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4 Point 5 Point 6 Ave Slope Intercept

20.90 8.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

0.10 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.04

0.15 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.05

0.998 -0.010

Table 2-4 Rising Combustibles Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A CO Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) Mean Reading WDGHPIIC ppm 0 0 0 250 750 1000 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4 Point 5 Point 6 Ave Slope Intercept

0 0 0 250 750 1000

0.00 0.00 0.00 8.21 6.20 13.62 4.67

0 0 0 25 23 32 13.33

2.08 2.08 2.08 30.12 34.91 47.17 19.74

0.986 -2.076

2-27

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-5 Falling Combustibles Test Results for Ametek Thermox Analyzer 2A CO Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) Mean Reading WDGHPIIC ppm 986.33 732.33 233.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 6 Point 5 Point 4 Point 3 Point 2 Point 1 Ave Slope Intercept

1000 750 250 0 0 0

13.62 14.33 10.60 0.82 0.00 0.00 6.56

32 37 28 2 0 0 16.50

50.01 50.96 34.18 2.66 2.66 2.66 23.85

0.984 -2.659

The linearity error for each cylinder test gas concentration is the maximum deviation between the measured results and the best fit straight line. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. The repeatability is taken as the standard deviation of the displayed readings at each test gas concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. Intrinsic error is normally accepted to be equivalent to the frequently used term accuracy and also includes the effects of the two parameters of repeatability and linearity. The intrinsic error was established as the 95% confidence limit of the displayed reading against the test gas of each concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table.
Summary

After four years of troubleshooting and making improvements, all six analyzers at TVA CUF are functioning to the standards of the plant technicians maintaining the units. This project identified problems with the Ametek unit; the new modification results will be a benefit to all other utilities wishing to purchase CO/O2 monitors. The sensors had not received any maintenance since February 2003 (except for Unit 1A, which received maintenance in June 2004) until this recent trip in 2005. The plant technicians now trust the analyzers functionality and have created predictive maintenance routines to maintain the analyzers. Table 2-6 is the determined maintenance guide for the units based on the test data and plant technician experience. 2-28

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-6 Maintenance Guide for Ametek WDG-HPIIC at TVA CUF Ametek WDG-HPIIC Maintenance Interval System Check Quarterly Calibration Quarterly Outer Filter Check return time to process quarterly. Replacement and/or cleaning suggested yearly. O2 Sensor Unknown Lifespan All currently 4 years intermittent use still ok CO Sensor 2A in service 2 years intermittent use sensitivity still at 2.71 mV/ppm replacement below 1.5 mV/ppm

Although test data were only taken for one analyzer at CUF, the results met the published Ametek specifications for the Thermox WDG-HPIIC (see Table 2-7). Because these units had not been maintained and were purchased by the plant separately from the project, drift data had not been obtained for the units.
Table 2-7 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 Test Results Comparison to Specifications Accuracy O2 Test results Published specifications CO Test results Published specifications 0.04% 0.05% 16.50 ppm 40 ppm Repeatability 0.01% Not available 6.56 ppm Not available Linearity 0.06% Not available 23.85 ppm Not available Drift Unavailable <0.1%/month Unavailable Not available

TVA CUF Unit 1 was in an outage when the final data were collected. Unit 2 was still online, and Figure 2-22 is the data from analyzer 2A in which the test data were taken. Units 2B and 2C required calibration, but calibration gases were unavailable at the plant site, so no data are shown for those analyzers. The plant plans to have all analyzers online by the end of their outage.

2-29

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-22 Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC COe/O2 Analyzer 2A Data from TVA CUF Unit 2

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Kingston Fossil Plant (KIF), shown in Figure 2-24, is located on Watts Bar Reservoir on the Tennessee River near Kingston, Tennessee. At the time it was completed in 1955, Kingston was the largest coal-burning power plant in the world, a distinction it held for more than a decade.

Figure 2-23 Kingston Fossil Plant

To reduce SO2 emissions, all nine units use a blend of low-sulfur coal. To reduce NOx, Units 14 and Unit 9 use combustion controls and boiler optimization. Units 58 use low-NOx burners, and SCRs are in operation or under construction for all nine units. 2-30

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Kingston has nine coal-fired generating units that have a total rated capacity of 1,700 MW. Construction began in 1951 and was completed in 1955. The winter net dependable generating capacity is 1,456 MW. The plant consumes approximately 14,000 tons of coal a day, and the steam generators are Combustion Engineering (CE) pulverized coal type. Units 14 have four Raymond bowl mill type pulverizers that supply coal to four burners in each corner of the furnace. Units 59 have six similar mills, each supplying coal to three burners in each corner of the twin furnace. Units 14 are 140 MW CE tangentially fired reheat units of radiant-type, natural circulation, dry-bottom furnaces. Units 59 are 190 MW CE tangentially fired reheat units with twin dry-bottom furnaces. In 2001 a Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 analyzer was installed as a test on Unit 9. Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 The Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 monitor (see Figure 2-24) is another close-couple extractive combustibles monitor. Servomex uses the industry standard zirconium oxide technology for oxygen measurement. The process gas is extracted using an air aspirator and then passes through the COe and O2 detector.

Figure 2-24 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2

Servomex uses an innovative thick film calorimetry (Tfx) cell to make a sensitive combustibles analysis rather than a breakthrough indication. The technique relies on the combustion of carbon monoxide and oxygen over a catalytic surface. A four-quadrant track is precision-printed onto a substrate using platinum ink. Each quadrant forms one leg of a Wheatstone bridge circuit, giving the unit higher accuracy. Any carbon monoxide in the sample will burn on the catalytic surfaces, causing a heating effect. This alters the current on the circuit to produce an output that is proportional to the carbon monoxide concentration in the sample.
Installation

The unit was installed in September 2001 on KIF Unit 9 RH furnace at the economizer exit. At that location, the flue gas was approximately 343398C (650750F). The analyzer seemed to be very hot and thought to be above temperature specifications for the system. The sensors inside 2-31

CO/Oxygen Sensors

operated at elevated temperatures, but the electronics inside the unit were insulated from the heat and had a maximum allowable temperature of 65C (150F). An infrared temperature device was used to take comparison temperature measurements of the Servomex analyzer and the adjacent Yokogawa analyzer the plant used for the oxygen measurement (see Figure 2-25).

Figure 2-25 Servomex Xendos 2700 Temperature Profile Indicating Above-Limit Operating Temperature

Conductive and radiant heat from the furnace wall was determined to be the reason for the high temperatures because the ambient temperatures at the location only reached a maximum of approximately 54C (130F). A spacer fabricated from low-heat conductive material was added to the analyzer flange mounting to reduce the conductive heat from the process (see Figure 2-26).

2-32

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-26 Addition of Low Heat Conductive Spacer to Servomex Xendos 2700

The system went online in early October 2001 with the initial readings available in the control room for the operators (see Figure 2-27).

Figure 2-27 Initial 2001 Readings from Servomex Xendos 2700

2-33

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Issues Historical

Several problems were discovered at the onset of the evaluation. When verification gas was passed through the unit, a daily negative drift occurred. This drift issue was corrected by Servomex in early January 2002 by changing the electronics board, which may have been damaged due to the high temperatures during initial installation; however, it may have been a faulty board because they had seen this happen before. Servomex also changed the COe sensor for good measure because the evaluation was still in initial stages. By February 2002, the readings from the analyzer were drifting high on the process stream and on the 500 ppm CO verification gas (see Figure 2-28). Servomex discovered a software bug related to an incorrectly set noise filter that caused readings to accumulate until calibration, resulting in continuously growing high readings. This issue was corrected by changing the flow restrictor in the unit.

Figure 2-28 Positive Drift Data for Servomex Xendos 2700

The COe sensor initially used by Servomex for this application was the least accurate of the versions they had available, but it was the most resistant to damage by the huge cocktail of chemicals that can derive from coal. The sensor had not lost any sensitivity since installation, which was a very good sign, but it did not have the accuracy that the plant needed to use the analyzer for combustion control. In April 2002 Servomex replaced the current sensor with their higher sensitivity sensor. The traditional problem areas with catalytic combustibles type sensors are stability of signal and robustness of the sensor (for example, resistance to poisoning). The two sensors that Servomex had on trial were the latest generation of their type, described within 2-34

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Servomex as ng 703 and ng 702. The 703 is less sensitive as the flow of sample to the catalytic surface is restricted. This is to make it less susceptible to possible catalyst poisons that can reduce the life of the sensor. Because it sees fewer samples, it is essentially a noisier sensor than the 702 version. The experience of Servomex with this field trial is that there is no evidence of any poisoning of the sensor, and the likelihood is that the more precise 702 unit will work well. Even after all the adjustments were made, the unit still read 60 ppm when the reference unit CEMS CO did not indicate those levels (see Figure 2-29). The SO2 in the flue gas was also combusting and creating an erroneously high reading. SO2 can also degrade the catalyst on the combustibles sensor. These errors can occur with all brands of catalytic combustibles detectors. Each manufacturer develops a unit to resist the SO2 degradation of the catalyst and tries to develop a catalyst that reduces the combustion of SO2.

Figure 2-29 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe Process Offset

Servomex performed some SO2 cross interference tests on the analyzer in August 2002. The tests performed by Stuart Simmons and Kermit Dobbs of Servomex showed the cross sensitivity to SO2 approximately 35 ppm COe per 1000 ppm SO2. This explains why the process COe level was higher than expected just by the CO background level because the SO2 burn was superimposed on the baseline. At that time Servomex was working on adding an offset option to the software.

2-35

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Concurrently, a CO/air linearity test was performed in the range of 0510 ppm CO. The CO concentrations were made using the 510 ppm CO/air calibration bottle mixed with air. Even ignoring any experimental errors (for example, mixing or bottle content) the deviations between the 0 and 510 ppm calibration points were well below 10 ppm COe and within the 25 ppm specification. Results in Figure 2-30 show the sensor to be very linear with a correlation coefficient of 0.99.

Figure 2-30 Servomex COe Linearity Data August 2002

Performance Test Results

In March 2003, a performance test to evaluate the reliability of the analyzer measurement in an operating power plant facility was performed. The test and data analysis procedures are based largely on the EN 61207-1 and 2: 1994 Expression of Performance of Gas Analyzers and the US CFR Title 40 Part 60, Performance Specification 4 Specifications and Test Procedures for Carbon Monoxide Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources. Appendix B: contains the full test plan. Online analyzer performance testing requires comparing analyzer readings to measurements obtained from other instruments or measurement techniques. The TVA test crew gathered test data using a Servomex Xentra 4900 Infrared CO analyzer, along with other gas constituents. To obtain the referencing sample, a probe is inserted as close to the same location as the extraction probe of the unit. A Thermo Environmental Instruments Model 48C Infrared CO monitor,

2-36

CO/Oxygen Sensors

downstream from the analyzer and part of the plants unit CEMS system, was used as a reference. A high velocity thermocouple (HVT) was run during the test to obtain the CO profile in the furnace and to ensure safe operation of Unit 9.
Table 2-8 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising O2 Results O2 Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) 0.52 3.01 7.82 20.95 Mean Reading 2700 ppm 0.50 2.99 7.81 20.95 Standard Deviation Intrinsic Error Linearity Error

Point 0 Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Average Slope Intercept

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00

0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02

0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.03

1.001 -0.019

Table 2-9 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling O2 Results O2 Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) 20.95 7.82 3.01 0.52 Mean Reading 2700 ppm 20.96 7.83 3.00 0.51 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.001 -0.007 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Linearity Error

Point 3 Point 2 Point 1 Point 0 Average Slope Intercept

0.03 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02

2-37

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-10 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising CO* Results CO Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) 0.00 120.70 277.60 510.00 Mean Reading 2700 ppm -1.00 125.33 290.50 500.17 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 1.79 3.01 2.88 6.21 3.47 0.984 5.415 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 4.00 9.30 17.40 21.00 12.93 Linearity Error

Point 0 Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Average Slope Intercept

6.40 12.57 17.96 23.64 15.14

* All of the instruments measure COe. Table 2-11 TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling CO* Results CO Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) 510.00 277.60 120.70 0.00 Mean Reading 2700 ppm 500.17 289.67 122.67 -2.33 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 6.21 3.72 3.88 3.27 4.27 0.987 3.357 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 21.00 16.40 5.70 8.00 12.78 Linearity Error

Point 3 Point 2 Point 1 Point 0 Average Slope Intercept

23.87 16.01 7.05 4.54 12.87

* All of the instruments measure COe.

The linearity error for each cylinder test gas concentration is the maximum deviation between the measured results and the best fit straight line. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. The repeatability is taken as the standard deviation of the displayed readings at each test gas concentration.

2-38

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Intrinsic error is normally accepted to be equivalent to the frequently used term accuracy and also includes the effects of the two parameters of repeatability and linearity. The intrinsic error was established as the 95% confidence limit of the displayed reading against the test gas of each concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. Drift data were taken weekly and are shown in Appendix D. Due to the lack of sufficient data, no drift calculation was made. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. During the plant process performance testing, the O2 set point for KIF Unit 9 was dropped until CO was detected. The plant operates Unit 9 on low set point O2. This means that they use the lowest reading of the two plant O2 analyzers in the duct. The first indication of CO production was detected at about 1.8% O2. The Servomex unit did detect the CO but not to the same sensitivity as the test equipment (see Figure 2-31). At levels of 1.51.0% O2, the CO spikes ramped up and became more constant at higher levels. The Servomex analyzer ramped up, picking up the spikes, but it did not reach the higher levels that the test equipment reached.

Figure 2-31 Servomex Xendos 2700 Performance Test CO Comparison

2-39

CO/Oxygen Sensors

In Figure 2-32 the test results show that the Servomex trended directly with both the test equipment and the current plant oxygen analyzer.

Figure 2-32 Servomex Xendos 2700 Performance Test O2 Comparison

These data are important in describing how CO reacts in the flue gas. The breakthrough point is dynamic and will depend on various factors, including fuel composition, load, and atmospheric conditions. This highlights the advantages of the simultaneous analysis and how easy it is to relate the concentrations of O2 and CO as seen in the chart. With the conditions present when the tests were undertaken, the minimum level of excess air was that which equated to 1.8% excess O2. When this level was decreased further, the CO levels increased dramatically. This can be seen in Figure 2-33, which, along with Figure 2-34, shows overall results.

2-40

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-33 Servomex Xendos 2700 Overall Test Results

Figure 2-34 Servomex Xendos 2700 Performance Comparison with Unit CEMS

2-41

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Combustion Control with CO

The ability to monitor CO in the furnace has generated much interest from U.S. coal-fired utilities. The question is: Can we use this CO measurement alone or with existing O2 for combustion control? The oxygen measurement alone indicates sufficient excess O2 for combusting the carbon in the coal. However, more and more utilities are trying to reduce NOx by trimming back the O2 in the furnace because higher O2 means higher temperatures and more O2 to combine with N2 to form NOx. This O2 measurement can be misleading due to air leakage in the furnace because the measurement is taken downstream of the combustion zone. An indicator of insufficient O2 for combustion is CO because the production of CO indicates incomplete combustion due to being fuel rich/air lean. Would CO or a combination of CO and O2 be a better indicator to use for combustion control? Because the production of CO has many factors associated with it (such as mill performance and burner configuration) the result, as seen from the test results in Figure 2-35, is not a steady stream to be measured. In actuality, the CO appears as spikes as the minimum threshold of excess O2 is reached in the combustion zone. The minimum threshold for this application is 1.8% O2. Reducing the excess O2 further dramatically increased the CO production.

Figure 2-35 Overall Combustion from Performance Test Data

2-42

CO/Oxygen Sensors

The average O2 levels are about 3% and thus could be reduced by about 1% O2, which represents at least a 0.5% reduction in fuel costs. A typical fuel cost for a power station unit of similar size to the one used for the tests is $2M per month. Thus, if the analyser is used to control at this new level, the potential savings are $10,000 per month on this unit alone. Taking into account the cost of the analysers and their installation, the payback time is much less than a year.
Summary

The Servomex Xendos 2700 did indicate the breakthrough point for CO but lacked the sensitivity to indicate the level of CO in the gas stream. Both the COe and O2 tracked with process changes. Table 2-12 shows that they did maintain the published specifications of accuracy on both the O2 and the COe.
Table 2-12 TVA KIF Servomex 2700 Test Results Comparison to Specifications Accuracy O2 Test results Published specifications CO Test results Published specifications 0.00% 0.01% 12.93 ppm 75 ppm Repeatability 0.02% Not available 4.27 ppm Not available Linearity 0.06% Not available 15.14 ppm Not available

The analyzer was linear and repeatable in the measurement of O2 and CO. There was a concern about SO2 interference with the unit. The offset of approximately 60 ppm due to SO2 is within the published specification of less than 60 ppm interference due to SO2. However, the data show a negative drift over time. This issue is more fully discussed in the following report on the Servomex Xendos 2700 evaluation at TVA JSF. TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant TVAs John Sevier Fossil Plant (JSF), as seen in Figure 2-36, is located on 300 hectares (750 acres) of rolling land beside the Holston River near Rogersville, Tennessee. It is named for an early pioneer in the region who was the first governor of Tennessee. Plant construction began October 14, 1952, and the first generating unit went into operation on July 12, 1955.

2-43

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-36 John Sevier Fossil Plant

JSF houses four CE 200 MW twin furnace units that are balanced draft and tangentially fired. Each unit consists of a reheat furnace and a superheat furnace with a single General Electric generator. This is one of the many TVA coal-fired plants that attempt to sell ash by-product to reduce the necessity for storage. The storage space for ash disposal is becoming more and more limited. In order for the end users to purchase the ash, it must have a relatively low amount of unburned carbon or LOI. By adding a CO measurement to JSFs operation parameters, they hope to reduce the occurrences of high CO that can be related back to high LOI. Background In 2000, EPRI and TVA entered into a tailored collaboration (TC) agreement to perform an industry survey of different CO instrumentation available for use in coal-fired utility applications. A summary report was generated and made available to all member utilities. Since the release of that summary, a request was made to evaluate each of the top vendors on the market. Some of these units were already installed in a variety of TVA locations. Others were placed at different TVA sites to obtain valuable operational and mechanical information on each of the represented monitors. This included a Servomex Xendos 2700 CO/O2 unit at TVA Kingston Plant, Ametek WDG-HPIIC CO/O2 units at the TVA Cumberland Plant, and a Rosemount OCX 4400 CO/O2 unit at JSF. These units were installed at locations ranging from the back of the convection pass to the exit of the economizer. As a new directive, the purpose of the EPRI/TVA Boiler Instrumentation TC Project was to test each of these instruments at a common location. Because each generating unit can have different conditions, it was determined that the best evaluation would be done if each of the vendors sensors was installed at the same location in the boiler; however, there would still be slight differences due to stratification of dust loading and temperatures.

2-44

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Evaluation Specifications The monitors were installed mid-year 2004 on the TVA JSF Unit 1 superheat furnace at the exit of the economizer, where temperatures ranged from 343398C (650750F) and high particulate ash loading existed (see Figure 2-37). The evaluation was scheduled to span a total of six months beginning after the commissioning of all monitors, but due to issues with the analyzers, the test duration was longer. This report on the evaluation will not present conclusions or results in comparing vendors but will simply present the evaluation data. This report is available to all member utilities, but it will not be provided to monitor vendors. However, individual test data results will be provided to each vendor.

Figure 2-37 TVA JSF Installation Schematic

Performance Test In September 2004, a performance test to evaluate the reliability of the measurement of the analyzers in an operating power plant facility was performed. The test and data analysis procedures are based largely on the EN 61207-1 and 2: 1994 Expression of Performance of Gas Analyzers and the US CFR Title 40 Part 60, Performance Specification 4 Specifications and Test Procedures for Carbon Monoxide Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources. The same type of test plan as used in the Servomex TVA KIF performance test was applied. Appendix B contains the full test plan. Online analyzer performance testing requires comparing analyzer readings to measurements obtained from other instruments or measurement techniques. The TVA test crew gathered test data using a Servomex Xentra 4900 infrared CO analyzer, along with other gas constituents. A probe inserted in the center test port location was used to obtain the reference sample. A Yokogawa MV200 data acquisition system (DAQ) was used to log the test data from the test equipment. The DAQ logged only the minimum and maximum values during each minute, 2-45

CO/Oxygen Sensors

which was unknown until after the test was completed. The system did not give an option of current value or mean value. For comparison, the minimum, maximum, and average of the two were used. This was not the true average during the minute sampling time, but it should have given more of an approximate than just the minimum and maximum. At the beginning of the performance test, the unit was operating at 3.54% excess O2. The plant O2 and the DAQ O2 were offset by 1%. The test equipment DAQ data were used for comparison due to the lack of knowledge of the state of the plant O2. A shown in Figure 2-38, the first spike of CO was detected at 2% plant O2. When the excess air was stepped down further to 1.5% O2, the CO production was dramatically increased. The threshold by plant equipment was 2%, but on the test equipment it was slightly above 1% O2. In an effort to explain the offset, O2 data were taken in all three of the test ports. This revealed significant stratification in the duct with a difference up to 1.5% at the various locations. The NOx values were not captured but should have been lower with reduced excess air.

Figure 2-38 TVA JSF Performance Test Combustion Process Change

2-46

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Rosemount OCX 4400 and OCX 8800 COe/O2 The OCX 4400 O2/Combustibles monitor, a close-coupled extractive unit, was the first unit installed at JSF for evaluation (see Figure 2-39). The unit was installed and commissioned as a sole evaluation in March 2002 at JSF on Unit 1 SH furnace at the economizer exit. In 2004 Rosemount released the OCX 8800 that they provided for the common duct evaluation.

Figure 2-39 Rosemount OCX 4400 COe/O2 Installation

2-47

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Historical Issues OCX 4400

Several problems were identified with the unit since startup. The unit would drift up to 300 ppm COe within a week, and later the unit stopped responding to changes in the furnace gas. The unit was returned to Rosemount in September 2002 for servicing. The service report is included in Appendix E. The combustibles sensor had lost sensitivity, and the eductor that was used to pull a vacuum through the system to sample the process stream was plugged. Other recommendations were given to Rosemount for improvements, which Rosemount added to the unit. Those recommendations were to: Password screen protection: Protect the screen with a password because currently anyone can access the setting of the unit manually. Blowback reading hold: Hold readings during blowback, which could send a signal to DCS, but it would be best if the unit would perform this on its own. Cal-check: Perform a cal-check or some way to verify readings without going through calibration. Currently, there is no choice given; calibration is automatic.

The OCX 4400 analyzer did not come equipped with an outer ceramic filter for the process. A long open tube was the probe, and the sample gas was pulled from the process into the analyzer housing, where an internal filter removed the particulate from the sample stream. The analyzer came equipped with a blow-back system to keep the inner filter from plugging (see Figure 2-40). The analyzer also came equipped with a dilution air stream to ensure oxygen was present in the sample gas stream.

Figure 2-40 Rosemount OCX 4400 Flow Schematic

2-48

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Because of the flow configuration, when removing the inner filter there was likelihood of particulate passing into the sensor head. This might have been what had been causing the eductor pluggage. By adding a valve between the internal filter and sensor head, the internal filter housing could be open to atmospheric pressure to allow the residual particulate to be pulled back into the process (see Figure 2-41).

Figure 2-41 Rosemount OCX 4400 Internal Filter Arrangement

Rosemount OCX 8800 CO2/O2

By 2004 when the second evaluation was scheduled, Rosemount Analytical had released the new OCX 8800 that incorporated all the changes and upgrades discovered in the first trial and more. Figure 2-42 shows the installation of the OCX 8800 at JSF. It added a new combustibles sensor design and sensor housing upgrades to enhance the reliability of these measurements (see Figure 2-43). The OCX 8800 took the original rugged design of the OCX 4400 and added a new sensor, electronics, and software package. A vacuum fluorescent display was added to make it easier to see than an LCD and also to allow setup and diagnostics without a Model 375 Communicator. The OCX 8800 also had a configurable relay output for alarms.

2-49

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-42 Rosemount OCX 8800 Installation at JSF

Figure 2-43 Rosemount OXC 8800 Configuration

The sensor was still close-coupled to the process for minimal sample handling requirements. An eductor drew a sample past the filter in the sample block and past the sensors and then returned it to the process. The sample block filter was accessible right at the OCX flange, and an air port had been added to open the flow stream to atmosphere while changing the filter. Optional in situ filters and sample tube blow back were available for processes with particulate. Dilution air was added in the combustible sensor chamber to maintain a true combustibles measurement even in the absence of oxygen in the process.
Issues OCX 8800

The first OCX 8800 was installed in February 2004. The analyzer was in service for two months before it was replaced in April 2004 due to positive zero drift issues. The second and final OCX 8800 still had the same issues with positive zero drift, so the combustibles sensor was replaced in June 2004. This sensor was still in the unit for the performance testing in September 2004, but it

2-50

CO/Oxygen Sensors

still had problems. The new combustibles sensor corrected the positive zero drift, but it had a negative span drift issue. This issue was not resolved before performance testing or before the unit was removed from the application. These data are included in Appendix F. Another issue that plagued the OCX 8800 was the blowback system. Although the blowback did keep the filter from becoming completely plugged, it required a daily interval. After the blowback occurred, the combustibles process reading would drift upward until the next blowback routine (see Figure 2-44). The failure mechanism for this problem was a bad combustibles sensor; replacing it in June 2004 resolved this issue.

Figure 2-44 Rosemount OCX 8800 Blowback Drift

2-51

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Performance Test Results

Tables 2-13, 2-14, 2-15, and 2-16 show test results for the Rosemount OCX 8800.
Table 2-13 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Rising O2 Results O2 Rising Cylinder Gas Conc. (%) Mean Reading 8800 ppm 0.42 4.97 8.07 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.998 0.008 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 Linearity Error

Point 0 Point 1 Point 2 Average Slope Intercept

0.40 4.99 8.07

0.03 0.03 0.01 0.02

Table 2-14 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Falling O2 Results O2 Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) 20.95 4.99 0.40 Mean Reading 8800 ppm 8.07 4.99 0.42 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.998 0.015 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.02 Linearity Error

Point 2 Point 1 Point 0 Average Slope Intercept

0.04 0.01 0.03 0.03

2-52

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-15 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Rising CO* Results CO Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) 0 502 997 Mean Reading 8800 ppm 6.50 277.83 1074.00 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 0.55 24.61 54.50 26.55 1.069 -81.597 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 7.00 266.00 132.00 135.00 Linearity Error

Point 0 Point 1 Point 2 Average Slope Intercept

75.18 331.20 128.83 178.40

* All of the instruments measure COe. Table 2-16 TVA JSF Rosemount OCX 8800 Falling CO* Results CO Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) 997 502 0 Mean Reading 8800 ppm 1077.83 282.50 6.50 Standard Deviation (Repeatability) 32.39 27.05 0.55 20.00 1.073 -80.691 Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) 107.00 262.00 7.00 125.33 Linearity Error

Point 2 Point 1 Point 0 Average Slope Intercept

107.25 325.09 74.25 168.87

* All of the instruments measure COe.

The linearity error for each cylinder test gas concentration is the maximum deviation between the measured results and the best fit straight line. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. The repeatability is taken as the standard deviation of the displayed readings at each test gas concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table.

2-53

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Intrinsic error is normally accepted to be equivalent to the frequently used term accuracy and also includes the effects of the two parameters of repeatability and linearity. The intrinsic error was established as the 95% confidence limit of the displayed reading against the test gas of each concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. Drift data were taken weekly and are shown in Appendix F. The drift value is what determines the calibration interval. During the process combustion performance test, the Rosemount trended well with the O2% changes and trended directly with the test measurement (see Figure 2-45).

Figure 2-45 Rosemount OCX 8800 Performance Test O2 Comparison

The Rosemount also detected the CO during the excess air reductions (see Figure 2-46). The unit detected the first set of spikes at 2% O2 and the more dramatic CO production at the 1.5% O2 level. It also trended directly with the test measurement but had a positive bias. By adding a 45 ppm offset to the Rosemount, the readings of the test measurements were more accurate.

2-54

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-46 Rosemount OCX 8800 Performance Test CO Comparison

Initially, relative accuracy was to be computed by using a modified CFR Part 40 Method 10 Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources. The method calls for six 20-minute samples at each test condition. These samples must be at steady state, but in the case of combustion CO at the economizer exit, the variance was too great from the CO spikes. Instead, the correlation coefficients were calculated for COe and O2 against each measured data point (see Table 2-17). A perfect correlation would be a 1:1 ratio, also giving a correlation coefficient of one.
Table 2-17 Rosemount OCX 8800 Correlation to Test Measurements
Correlation Slope Intercept DAQ Min wet 0.99 0.98 -0.16 DAQ Min Wet 0.76 0.28 -10.14 0.76 0.28 0.93 DAQ Max wet 0.99 0.99 0.12 DAQ Max Wet 0.69 1.07 -37.88 0.69 1.07 5.07 DAQ AVE wet 0.99 0.98 -0.02 DAQ AVE Wet 0.72 0.68 -24.01 0.72 0.68 3.00 Superheat O2 0.99 1.07 0.65

xy ge n

om bu st ib le

Correlation slope intercept Correlation slope intercept

RAW

40 ppm offset

2-55

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Summary

In summary, the Rosemount OCX tracked reasonably well with the furnace process changes. The oxygen measurement correlated directly with the test measurement, with an R2 value of 0.99. The COe also correlated well with the test measurement, with R2 values ranging from 0.69 to 0.72. There was an offset of 45 ppm, probably from SO2 in the process gas stream. The COe sensor, however, was lacking in basic fundamentals. The accuracy was below published specification with indications of non-repeatability and non-linearity. Although the sensor picked up the changes in the process, the analyzer cannot be used for combustion control. The sensor still needs some effort from Rosemount to make this an effective analyzer. The system also required the blowback option and ceramic outer filter for coal-fired applications. Without daily blowback, the inner filter became plugged. Tables 2-18, 2-19, and 2-20 show the Rosemount OCX 8800 test results, an estimated maintenance guide, and installation and maintenance notes.
Table 2-18 Rosemount OCX 8800 Test Results Accuracy O2 Test results Published specifications CO Test results Published specifications 0.02% 0.05% 135 ppm 20 ppm Repeatability 0.01% Not available 26.55 ppm Not available Linearity 0.03% Not available 178.4 ppm Not available Drift 0.0054%/mth Not available -33.13 ppm/mth Not available

Table 2-19 Estimated Maintenance Guide for Rosemount OCX 8800 Rosemount OCX 8800 Maintenance interval System Check Monthly Calibration Monthly Outer Filter Check return time to process quarterly. Replacement/ cleaning suggested yearly. Inner Filter Same as outer filter as long as blowback is maintained at daily interval. O2 Sensor Stable. No significant loss of sensitivity. No estimation on lifespan. CO Sensor Issues not resolved

2-56

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-20 Rosemount OCX 8800 Installation and Maintenance Notes Ease of Installation Unit had more wiring and tubing: blow-back, 3 flow meters, 3 regulators. Control cables were easy to hook up. Terminals were easy to access and labeled well. User-friendly instruction manual with diagrams. Maintainability Unit had several failures during test period. Detector cells and internals of sensor head were easy to access, but sensor head had to be unbolted and removed from flange to remove probe.

Ametek WDG-IVC COe/O2 The Ametek Thermox model WDG-IVC (see Figure 2-47) monitors both oxygen and combustibles in flue gases. Oxygen is measured using zirconium oxide sensor technology. The ppm levels of combustibles in the flue gas are detected through the use of a pellister detector. This unit differs from the previously evaluated unit at TVA CUF only by the sample extraction method and the probe length. The WDG-IVC is a close-coupled, extractive method that draws sample gas from the furnace using an air aspirator, decreasing time for the sample to reach the detector but increasing the possibility of pluggage (see Figure 2-48). All sample-wetted parts are heated to maintain the sample above the dew point of the gas.

Figure 2-47 Ametek WDG-IVC CO2/O2 Installation at John Sevier

2-57

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-48 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Close Coupled Extractive Analyzer

One aspect of the Thermox WDG-HPIIC and WDG-IVC that Ametek asserts to be beneficial, especially in coal-fired high particulate laden environments, is the large sample gas lines in the analyzer housing (see Figure 2-49). Ametek maintains that these larger lines help prevent plugging in the analyzer flow path.

Figure 2-49 Thermox WDG-IVC Internal View

According to Ametek, another strength of the Thermox analyzers is their self and externally heated hot-wire catalytic detector (see Figure 2-50). The active and reference element surface temperatures are 200C (392F) hotter than other CO/O2 analyzers that are entirely externally heated.

2-58

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-50 Thermox Self and Externally Heated Hot-Wire Catalytic Detector

These externally heated detectors were the first Ametek Thermox used for COe ppm measurements in the mid 1980s. Ametek found that this detector configuration and operating temperature caused the SO2, SO3, or any other platinum poison to degrade the detector much faster than the self and externally heated hot-wire type they are currently using. The externally heated detectors are manufactured using laser-trimmed resistance temperature detector (RTD) active and reference elements instead of the platinum wire wound pellister construction that Thermox uses with the externally and self-heated hot-wire design.
Issues Installation

The Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC COe/O2 analyzer was installed in May 2004 on the TVA JSF Unit 1 superheat furnace at the exit of the economizer where temperatures range from 345 400C (650750F) and high particulate ash loading exists. The mounting port for the analyzer was unlike the other ports for the other analyzers in the JSF evaluation. The port was extended over 0.3 m (1 ft) from the economizer duct. It is unknown why the installers at the plant configured this port in this manner. This caused a cantilever effect for the Thermox analyzer. At the economizer of most older coal-fired furnaces, there is considerable expansion joint wear. The expansion joints allow for the differential expansion of the furnace relative to the economizer exit duct work as it heats and cools. When these expansion joints wear out, they cause air infiltration and also transmit vibration. The expansion joints were directly above the installation ports for this evaluation. The vibration, coupled with the long port, caused the Thermox unit much more vibration than would normally be seen in a power plant; therefore, the unit vibrated up to 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) from its center point. Bracing was added below the analyzer to help alleviate the problem (see Figure 2-51), but within the first month, the vibration caused circuit board failure on the unit. This atypical installation was the likely cause of the mechanical failure.

2-59

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-51 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Installation at JSF with Bracing

Performance Test Results

The Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC could not be calibrated before the process combustion performance test. This problem might have stemmed from the excessive vibration at the installation location, but once the analyzer was taken back to the Ametek site, the analyzer functioned correctly. Accuracy, linearity, and repeatability data were not taken because the analyzer was unable to be calibrated. The unit had not been calibrated for three months prior to testing. During the process combustion performance test, the O2 trended directly with the test measurements (see Figure 2-52).

2-60

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-52 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC O2 Performance Test Comparison

The Thermox analyzer still tracked the test measurement of CO during the excess air reductions, even with no calibration. The unit detected the first set of spikes at 2% O2 and the more dramatic CO production at the 1.5% O2 level. The analyzer did not have the sensitivity that the test measurement equipment did and also had a 145 ppm offset, probably due to the lack of calibration. The analyzer also seemed to have lost some sensitivity. Figure 2-53 shows the Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC CO Performance Test Comparison.

2-61

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-53 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC CO Performance Test Comparison

As previously stated, at first, relative accuracy was to be computed by using a modified CFR Part 40 Method 10 Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources. The method calls for six 20-minute samples at each test condition. These samples must be at steady state, but in the case of combustion CO at the economizer exit, the variance was too great from the CO spikes. Instead, the correlation coefficients (R2) were calculated for COe and O2 against each measured data point (see Table 2-21). A perfect correlation would be a 1:1 ratio, also giving a correlation coefficient of 1.
Table 2-21 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Correlation to Test Measurements
DAQ Min wet
ge n

DAQ Max wet 0.98 0.95 0.32 DAQ Max Wet 0.64 4.05 -595.59 0.64 4.05 -7.81

DAQ AVE wet 0.98 0.94 0.18 DAQ AVE Wet 0.65 2.51 -368.36 0.65 2.51 -4.75

Superheat O2 1.00 1.03 0.85 RAW

Correlation Slope Intercept Correlation slope intercept Correlation slope intercept

0.98 0.94 0.04 DAQ Min Wet 0.64 0.96 -141.14 0.64 0.96 -1.68

O om bu s tib le s

xy

145 ppm offset

2-62

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Summary

In summary, the installation setup of the Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC COe/O2 analyzer resulted in problems with the analyzer. In retrospect, the installation should have been corrected to allow the analyzer to function properly. Data were taken for the analyzer during the performance test, and an analysis of the installation and maintenance of the unit was captured. The analyzer O2 reading correlated well with R2 values from 0.98 up to 1.00. The CO correlated with R2 values of 0.640.65. Additional test data on this same sensor technology are given in the TVA CUF Ametek WDGHPIIC evaluation. Table 2-22 illustrates the Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC installation and maintenance notes.
Table 2-22 Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Installation and Maintenance Notes Ease of Installation Very easy to install. Only had 3 bolts on flange mount, two tubing connection, a power source connection, and a communication cable. Maintainability Failures due to atypical installation. Very easy to access cell and control board on sensor head. Probe can be pulled without removing sensor head.

Servomex Xendos 2700 Servomex offered another Xendos 2700 COe/O2 analyzer for evaluation at TVA JSF. The Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 close-couple extractive combustibles monitor (see Figure 2-54) is the same as the analyzer evaluated in 2001 at TVA KIF. This new analyzer uses the industry standard zirconium oxide technology for oxygen measurement. The process gas is extracted using an air aspirator and then passes through the COe and O2 detector.

Figure 2-54 Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 Installation at JSF

2-63

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Servomex uses an innovative Tfx cell to make a sensitive combustibles analysis rather than a breakthrough indication. The technique relies on the combustion of carbon monoxide and oxygen over a catalytic surface. A four-quadrant track is precision-printed onto a substrate using platinum ink. Each quadrant forms one leg of a Wheatstone bridge circuit, giving the unit higher accuracy. Any carbon monoxide in the sample will burn on the catalytic surfaces, causing a heating effect. This alters the current on the circuit to produce an output that is proportional to the carbon monoxide concentration in the sample. The combustibles sensors are not specific to carbon monoxide and thus will respond in some degree to all combustibles gases in the sample; this includes SO2. Prior to circa 2000 Servomex had only one version of the combustibles sensor, which was essentially the 1750/702 version. In some applications Servomex found that the sensor catalytic lifetime was unacceptable, and thus steps were taken to improve this situation. The catalyst itself was enhanced to improve sensor performance, and at the same time another version of the sensor was produced to deal with the more difficult applications. The new 1750/703 version has a shroud fitted to reduce the diffusion rate of the sample gas onto the sensor surface, thus making it less vulnerable to inhibiting gases, such as SO2. Due to the apparent loss in sensitivity of the original combustibles sensor at the Kingston plant, Servomex deemed it prudent to use the less sensitive 1750/703 version at the John Sevier plant, and there has been no degradation in the catalyst performance. However, due to the changes in the design of the sensor, the 703 is more reactive to SO2, and the background level caused by the combustion of SO2 on the surface has increased. For a given fuel type, this effect should be more or less a constant static offset level and can be calibrated out using the zero offset facility provided for this purpose in the calibration procedures. This offset correction procedure was not used at John Sevier for the field trial because it was felt to be unnecessary and could be open to confusion. However, it was demonstrated after performance testing was completed.

2-64

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Performance Test Results

Tables 2-23, 2-24, 2-25, and 2-26 show Servomex Xendos 2700 results.
Table 2-23 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising O2 Results O2 Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) Mean Reading 2700 ppm Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 0 Point 1 Point 2 Average Slope Intercept

0.40 4.99 20.95

0.40 4.97 20.99

0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00

0.00 0.02 0.05 0.02

0.01 0.02 0.08 0.04

1.002 -0.013

Table 2-24 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling O2 Results O2 Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (%) Mean Reading 2700 ppm Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 2 Point 1 Point 0 Average Slope Intercept

20.95 4.99 0.40

20.99 4.96 0.40

0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01

0.05 0.09 0.00 0.05

0.08 0.10 0.02 0.06

1.002 -0.017

2-65

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-25 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Rising CO Results CO Rising Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) Mean Reading 2700 ppm Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 0 Point 1 Point 2 Average Slope Intercept

0.00 502.00 1003.00

-51.67 442.33 966.67

29.35 6.41 11.88 15.88

82.00 66.00 59.00 69.00

140.14 116.23 101.46 119.28

1.015 -56.886

Table 2-26 TVA JSF Servomex Xendos 2700 Falling CO Results CO Falling Cylinder Gas Concentration (ppm) Mean Reading 2700 ppm Standard Deviation (Repeatability) Intrinsic Error (Accuracy) Linearity Error

Point 2 Point 1 Point 0 Average Slope Intercept

1003.00 502.00 0.00

953.00 438.50 -51.67

36.73 5.13 29.35 23.74

121.00 70.00 82.00 91.00

175.43 125.17 138.02 146.21

1.002 -55.885

The linearity error for each cylinder test gas concentration is the maximum deviation between the measured results and the best fit straight line. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. The repeatability is taken as the standard deviation of the displayed readings at each test gas concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table.

2-66

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Intrinsic error is normally accepted to be equivalent to the frequently used term accuracy and also includes the effects of the two parameters of repeatability and linearity. The intrinsic error was established as the 95% confidence limit of the displayed reading against the test gas of each concentration. The higher of the rising and falling is taken as a worst case scenario in the final comparison table. Drift data were taken weekly and are shown in Appendix H. The drift value is what determines the calibration interval. The Servomex Xendos 2700 analyzer tracked directly with the process changes during the performance test (see Figure 2-55). The analyzer tracked directly with the plant O2 monitor, rather than the test measurements. This is due to the stratification in the duct work, as mentioned in the introductory section to the TVA JSF evaluation. The Servomex is located on the far left corner of the furnace, where the higher O2 levels were seen while taking data at each test port location.

Figure 2-55 Servomex Xendos 2700 O2 Performance Test Comparison

The Servomex analyzer also detected the CO during the excess air reductions (see Figure 2-56). The unit detected the first set of spikes at 2% O2 and the more dramatic CO production at the 1.5% O2 level. The Servomex trended directly with the test measurement but had a positive bias. By adding a 200 ppm offset to the Servomex, readings were more accurate to the test measurements. The Servomex control unit has an option to add in an offset to the readings. 2-67

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Figure 2-56 Servomex Xendos 2700 CO Performance Test Comparison

As stated previously, relative accuracy was initially to be computed using a modified CFR Part 40 Method 10 Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources. The method calls for six 20-minute samples at each test conditions. These samples must be at steady state, but in the case of combustion CO at the economizer exit, the variance was too great from the CO spikes. Instead, the correlation coefficients (R2) were calculated for COe and O2 against each measured data point. A perfect correlation would be a 1:1 ratio, also giving a correlation coefficient of 1. Table 2-27 illustrates the correlation to test measurements.

2-68

CO/Oxygen Sensors Table 2-27 Servomex Xendos 2700 Correlation to Test Measurements
Superheat O2 0.99 1.18 -0.54 RAW

DAQ Min wet

xy ge n

DAQ Max wet 0.98 1.08 -0.96 DAQ Max Wet 0.69 4.74 -951.41 0.69 4.74 -4.12

DAQ AVE wet 0.98 1.08 -1.10 DAQ AVE Wet 0.71 2.93 -589.02 0.71 2.93 -2.48

Correlation Slope Intercept Correlation slope intercept Correlation slope intercept

om bu st ib le s

0.98 1.07 -1.23 DAQ Min Wet 0.70 1.13 -226.63 0.70 1.13 -0.84

200 ppm offset

Summary

The Servomex Xendos 2700 tracked reasonably well with the furnace process changes. The oxygen measurement correlated directly with the test measurement, with an R2 value of 0.99. The COe also correlated well with the test measurement with R2 values ranging from 0.690.71. The COe sensor, however, is lacking in basic fundamentals. The accuracy was below published specifications with indications of non-repeatability and non-linearity. The 200 ppm most likely from SO2 in the process gas stream is also above the published specification of 60 ppm. After the performance testing was completed, a 180 ppm offset was added. A verification test after this indicated a significant negative zero and span drift with the CO sensor sensitivity remaining. Although the sensor tracked the changes in the process, the analyzer cannot be used for combustion control. The sensor still needs some effort from Servomex to make this an effective analyzer. Table 2-28 shows the test results.
Table 2-28 Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Results Accuracy O2 Test results Published specifications CO Test results 0.05% 0.01% 91 ppm Repeatability 0.01% Not available 23.74 ppm Linearity 0.06% Not available 146.21 ppm Drift 0.01%/mth zero; 0.16%/mth span Not available -35.74 ppm/mth Zero; -65.37 ppm/mth Span Not available

Published specifications

75 ppm

Not available

Not available

2-69

CO/Oxygen Sensors

Table 2-29 shows the estimated maintenance guide for Servomex Xendos 2700, and Table 2-30 shows the installation and maintenance notes.
Table 2-29 Estimated Maintenance Guide for Servomex Xendos 2700 Rosemount OCX 8800 Maintenance Interval System Check Quarterly Calibration Monthly Outer Filter Check return time to process quarterly. Replacement and/or cleaning suggested yearly. O2 Sensor Stable. No significant loss of sensitivity. No estimation on lifespan. CO Sensor Stable. Reacts to SO2 for offset. Drift issue unresolved.

Table 2-30 Servomex Xendos 2700 Installation and Maintenance Notes Ease of Installation Unit was a little harder to wire. It takes a 14 pair cable between the sensor head and controller. Servomex representative did wiring on startup. Tubing was very easy due to the pre-fabricated air and gas flow panel furnished by Servomex. Maintainability No failures during testing period. Did not perform any maintenance on unit. Sensor head must be removed in order to remove probe.

References for Section 2

1. D. Simmers, Improving Heat Rate Performance Through Better Flue Gas Analysis and Control, Rosemount Analytical, Birmingham ISA Conference, Birmingham, AL (October 2000). 2. D. Simmers, Establishing Calibration Intervals for Zirconium Oxide Oxygen Analyzers, 13th Annual Joint ISA POWID/EPRI Controls and Instrumentation Conference, (June 2003). 3. D. Simmers, Rosemount Failure Analysis, Rosemount Analytical In-House Presentation (March 2005). 4. CO Monitoring Instrumentation and Applications. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000. 1000343. 5. Instrumentation for CO Monitoring. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001. 1003979.

2-70

TUNABLE DIODE LASER

Discussion of Technology
The TDL gas measurement is an optical measurement based on the absorption of infrared laser light by a particular gas species. A typical configuration for this type of instrument can be seen in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1 General Configuration of Conventional Tunable Diode Laser Technology [1]

The measurement technology is based on measuring the absorption of infrared radiation (IR) by the gas molecules present in the flue gas. An IR laser of a known wavelength is passed through the gas and received on the other side of the duct. Based on how much of the laser energy is absorbed by the flue gas, it is then possible to determine how much of a specific gas is present. 3-1

Tunable Diode Laser

The wavelengths used are specific to the gas being considered. For instance, a different laser wavelength is required to measure oxygen than that used to measure carbon monoxide or ammonia. The measurements that are output from this type of system are path averages.

Tunable Diode Laser Measurement Applications

The accurate measurement of un-reacted ammonia (NH3) or ammonia slip is of interest to utilities employing urea or ammonia-based SCR or SNCR processes for NOx control. Ammonia slip has important impacts upon deposition, plugging, and potential corrosion of cold-end equipment located downstream of the SCR or SNCR system. Excessive ammonia slip can also impact ammonia adsorption in the fly ash and can contribute to stack plume and visibility problems. The levels of ammonia slip will also indicate the proper operation of the SCR/SNCR systems. As part of this project, available NH3 monitors were surveyed, along with commercially available combustions gas monitors, including CO, NOx, SOx, O2, and exit gas temperature. The survey included cost of purchase, licensing options, features, and, to the extent available, market penetration. The second phase currently under way and reported here demonstrates the most promising instrumentation, determined from the market survey, at different sites. Because many of these analyzers are new to the market, the performance testing and maintenance recording will be beneficial to all coal-fired plants. Comparisons of the operational issues and long-term maintenance issues will be helpful in deciding which analyzer fits an application best. This has spawned breakout projects for FEGT monitors, stack flow monitors, and NOx analyzers. One technology of specific interest found during the initial survey was that of the new TDL monitors. Unlike their optical, infrared predecessors manufactured for combustion gas monitoring, these new lasers hold the promise of eliminating background interferences due to high temperatures and high dust loading found in the coal-fired generating units. These monitors scan a small spectrum of wavelengths and can pinpoint specific gas constituent peaks while avoiding interference from the harsh process conditions. The units have the capability of measuring several different components in the gas stream, including combustion CO, CO2, and O2, as well as NH3 for SCR applications. Table 3-1 provides the list of manufacturers of TDL technology.

3-2

Tunable Diode Laser Table 3-1 Tunable Diode Laser Companies Manufacturer Boreal Laser, Inc. Instrument GasFinder FC Headquarters Canada Budgetary Cost (approx.)* Single Channel $25K/ 4-Channel $57K Single Channel $45K Multi-channel not available Single Channel $45K/ 4-Channel $65K Single Channel $40K/ 4-Channel $80K Single Channel $55K/ 4-Channel $95K Single Channel not available 16-Channel $280K Web sites www.boreal-laser.com

Norsk Elektro Optikk

LaserGas

Norway

www.neomonitors.com

Opsis, Inc.

LD500

Sweden

www.opsis.se

Siemens Laser Analytic Unisearch Associates Zolotech

LDS 3000 LDS 6 LasIR

Sweden

www.siemens.com

Canada

www.unisearchassociates.com www.zolotech.com

ZoloBOSS

United States

*Cost varies by application. Contact vendor for a specific estimate.

TVA NH3 Demonstration at Kingston

Several of the TDL analyzers took part in an initial demonstration at TVA Kingston in 2002. The vendors installed their analyzers in an attempt to measure NH3 at the exit of the economizer on Unit 9 for an SNCR test application. The vendors involved were Boreal Laser Inc., Norsk Electro Optikk, and Unisearch Associates. Unisearch and Boreal also used this opportunity to attempt the measurement of other gas constituents, including O2, CO, CO2, and temperature. Norsk Electro Optikk LaserGas The Norsk Electro Optikk LaserGas system was the initial system used by the Kingston SNCR system. This unit has the source and detector mounted directly on the duct work and provides one single-path reading. Due to interferences from the heavy dust loading of approximately 11.4 g/m3 (5 grains/ft3) and temperatures of approximately 345C (650F), the path length of approximately 7.6 m (25 ft) at the economizer had to be reduced by adding tubes inside the gas path. These tubes reduced the path length to approximately 1.22.4 m (3.97.9 ft), thereby reducing the path average of the ammonia measurement. Issues arose with keeping the system

3-3

Tunable Diode Laser

aligned from one furnace condition to the next due to expansion and retraction of the duct work itself. The high temperatures on the duct wall at the economizer can also cause inconsistencies in the output from the source laser, creating possible limitations in accuracy. Unisearch Associates LasIR Unisearch Associates LasIR uses fiber optics to transmit the signal that can be contained in a shelter from a source to the detector and away from the duct. This process will hopefully alleviate problems with temperature on the duct work. Their system can also provide multiple channels by splitting the source signal, thus providing multi-path measurements. It is also possible to send signals to different generating units by placing the source analyzer between both and sending signals out to each. Unisearch was attempting a full path measurement when the SNCR test ended at Kingston. They were also attempting measurement of the other gas constituents at the economizer and air pre-heater inlets. They have taken the data they obtained from this demonstration to improve their technology. Boreal Laser Inc.s GasFinder FC Boreal Laser Inc.s GasFinder FC also enables multi-channel measurements by using fiber optic techniques. Boreal entered late in the project but was still able to collect data for two weeks. Once installed, their unit was able to obtain a full path measurement. They did, however, have accuracy problems because of the temperatures and dust loading. A double path measurement to reduce the interference was being attempted when the SNCR test ended. Although these demonstrations were not fully completed, the laser technology did show promise in obtaining reliable NH3 readings, as well as other gas constituents for coal-fired boilers. It is also important to note that these demonstrations were only for a 7.6 m (25 ft) path on a 200 MW generating unit, and no demonstrations have occurred on larger units with 12 m (39.4 ft) path lengths.

Past EPRI Research

EPRI and the Orlando Utilities Commission co-sponsored a continuous ammonia analyzer demonstration program to assess the current status of analyzer development and applicability to utility boiler systems in 2000 [2]. The results demonstrated good reliability and accuracy over long operating periods of time for the TDL technologies. The instruments followed the expected trends, given varying SCR operating parameters. Although the technology was proven, many difficulties in the normal operation of the monitors were discovered, including alignment and path length issues. Inner tube shields were required to limit the exposed path length of the laser beam, which created alignment problems with the ever-changing conditions in the furnace.

3-4

Tunable Diode Laser

An updated survey of NH3 monitoring technologies was released in 2003 [3]. The information obtained from the past efforts was updated, and additional analyzer manufacturers that appeared to be entering in the utility market were also surveyed to create a complete listing of available vendors.

EPA Environmental Technology Verification Report

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, through the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Advanced Monitoring Systems Center, has concluded an evaluation of the Siemens Laser Analytics LDS 3000 TDL instrument for continuous emission monitoring of ammonia. The ETV program has been established by the EPA to verify the performance characteristics of innovative environmental technology across all media and to report this objective information, thus substantially accelerating the entrance of new environmental technologies into the marketplace. The Siemens unit was placed at the exit of the SCR and the inlet of the air heater at AEPs Mountaineer Plant. The LDS 3000 provided integrated ammonia readings over 15 second intervals over a path length of 5.5 m (17.9 ft). The Siemens system performed well with relative accuracies from 79% with high linearity confidence. The results also show the capability of the LDS 3000 to monitor low ppm levels with a precision within 1 ppm with rise/fall times of approximately two minutes.

Future Research Possibilities

In 2003, Texas passed legislation requiring industries to monitor NH3 emissions. Although the new regulations in Texas are not very stringent, it does show a move toward regulating NH3 emissions. The ammonia measurement in utility boiler systems is difficult because of the reactive nature of NH3, the presence of potential interference, and the loss of gas phase NH3 from reaction with ash, chlorides, or SO3 in the flue gas. Technology has progressed significantly so that practical and reliable means to overcome the difficulties of this measurement have been evolving and now appear to be available for SCR applications. One of the more promising technologies for NH3 is the TDL. Currently, EPRI has Project Opportunity 1007606 for a Continuous Multi-Point Ammonia Measurement Demonstration. Multiple utilities will take part in this project with one utility providing the host site. Initial testing has occurred at Duke Energys Allen Plant with promising results. The project uses TDL technology, along with a multi-point probe developed by the University of California in Riverside. The probe attempts to eliminate interferences with temperature and dust loading by stretching fully across the duct while providing a multi-point reading. No limitations on length have been determined, so this technology could be used on the larger units. The probe contains quartz reflectors that enable several readings in each probe. Problems may arise with 3-5

Tunable Diode Laser

dust on the reflectors obscuring the readings in coal-fired applications, but provisions have been made to reduce the possibility of this occurring. Problems with bowing and thermal expansion require further exploration into this technology. Opportunities also exist with EPRI to co-fund a TC effort to evaluate the various vendors TDL instruments at a site with an SCR or SNCR system. The EPA ETV report supports the possibility of measuring the full duct length at the exit of the SCR without the use of inner tubes. The past evaluations at Orlando were concluded in 2000, and many of the vendors have upgraded their instruments to achieve this goal.

Conclusion
TDL technology has the potential to replace maintenance-intensive in situ and extractive flue gas instrumentation. In addition, TDL provides an entire cross-section sample, thereby improving accuracies. Applications of full path length measurements without the use of inner tubes that create alignment problems have been reported by the EPA ETV program. These units not only promise capabilities of measuring NH3 slip in SCR and SNCR applications but can also be used for other gaseous constituents in the furnace area. Development of the multipoint probe has the possibility of creating a grid type measurement system free from problems that normally occur due to high temperatures and high dust loading. A sensor system based on the use of TDLs will also allow in situ determination of the concentrations of carbon monoxide, oxygen, and water vapor, as well as gas temperature in harsh environments. The chemical species targeted are useful in controlling the combustion space for improved energy efficiency, reduced pollutants, and improved process quality. The non-intrusive nature of the technique is ideally suited for harsh, high-temperature environments with high particulate levels. The use of advanced telecommunication fiber optical components and rapid TDLs enables the monitoring of multiple chemical species and temperatures. Conventional analysis applied to combustion processes generally relies on extractive sampling techniques, which suffer from slow response times due to long sampling lines and inherent delays from the analyzers. In addition, high maintenance is required because of probe degradation from plugging or corrosion and frequent calibration. The ability to monitor at key process locations makes the sensor ideally suited for use with advanced combustion control techniques. With these features, low maintenance, and autonomous operation, the sensor offers numerous economic benefits compared with conventional sensor technology.

Available Tunable Diode Laser Systems

Boreal Laser GasFinder MC Boreal Lasers GasFinder MC (U.S. Patent No. 5,748,325) shown in Figure 3-2 measures gas concentrations in up to eight measurement channels. The central control unit is a 0.5-m (1.6-ft) rack mountable unit that contains the laser, multiplexing, and data processing components. Fiberoptic cable carries the laser light to transmitter heads that direct the beam along a path to a 3-6

Tunable Diode Laser

reflector. The return light is collected on a non-biased photo-detector. A central control unit (CCU) contains the laser diode source, drive electronics, detector signal processing, and microcomputer subsystems. The photo current is returned to the central box using coaxial cable. This analyzer system is available in open-path, stack/duct, and process monitoring configurations.

Figure 3-2 Boreal GasFinder MC [4]

The transceiver can be mounted in one of several different measurement head configurations. A long path transmitter head can be used for open-path monitoring to 1 km (0.62 mi). A variable length cross-duct probe is used for permanent stack or duct monitoring. A multi-pass gas cell is available for high sensitivity extractive monitoring. A portion of the laser beam is passed through an onboard reference cell to provide a continuous calibration update. The measure and calibration signals are processed to determine the gas concentration in each optical path. The computed gas concentration is displayed on the front panel of the CCU as well as being transmitted to the customers central computer, where the data may be collected, stored, and displayed [4]. Boreal Laser GasFinder FC GasFinder FC (see Figure 3-3) is a portable laser-based gas detector that incorporates a fiberoptic port to which a variety of measurement heads can be connected. These heads can enable stack monitoring, short and long open-path monitoring, or local point measurements.

3-7

Tunable Diode Laser

Figure 3-3 Boreal GasFinder FC [4]

Therefore, the GasFinder FC is a very flexible analyzer that can bring the advantages of laserbased gas detection to many new applications. The GasFinder FC houses a laser diode, drive electronics, and micro-computer subsystems. Fiber-optic cable carries the laser light to a separate transmitter/receiver head, which directs the beam along a measurement path to a reflector. The return light is collected on a photo-detector housed in the transceiver head, and the photo current is carried by coaxial cable to the GasFinder FC for analysis. The transceiver can be mounted in one of several different measurement head configurations. A fixed length probe is used for temporary or permanent stack monitoring. A short path configuration is used for paths to 20 m (65.6 ft), including cross stack/duct and cross road measurements. A long path transmitter head can be used for open-path monitoring to 1 km (0.62 mi). Other custom probes are used for vehicle/airborne monitoring and point monitoring. A portion of the laser beam is passed through a stable, built-in reference cell to provide a continuous calibration update. The measure and reference signals are then compared to determine the actual concentration of gas along the measure path. This value is displayed on the back panel of the instrument. Serial and analog signals are also available. The serial signal contains self-diagnostic data. The GasFinder FC also has a built-in data logger than can store up to 10,000 readings [4]. Norsk Elektro Optikk AS Neo Monitors LaserGas II LaserGas II (see Figure 3-4) monitors employ the measurement principle known as single line spectroscopy, which eliminates cross interference from other gases. A single gas absorption line with no cross interference is chosen in the near IR spectral range and scanned by a single-mode diode laser. The laser beam is coupled into the measurement cell, called a Herriott cell, where it is reflected multiple times between two spherical mirrors. Subsequently, a detector collects the transmitted light for further analysis and calculation of the gas concentration.

3-8

Tunable Diode Laser

Figure 3-4 Neo Monitors LaserGas II System [5]

The current version is available in four different configurations and for several gases. The configurations are: Single-path monitor (for stacks and ducts) Dual-path monitor (also for stacks and ducts) Open-path monitor (up to 500-m [1640-ft] path) Multi-path monitor (for extractive set-ups)

Single-path monitors are designed for in situ measurement with path lengths in the range 0.515 m (1.649.2 ft) (pipes, stacks, ducts). This model operates over the range 23 bar maximum pressure and temperatures up to 500C (932F), but it is possible to operate at up to 20 bar and 1500C (2732F) with some gases. The dual-path monitor is designed for in situ measurements with path lengths in the range 0.515 m (1.649.2 ft) (pipes, stacks, ducts). Pressure and temperature ranges and available gases are the same as those for the single-path monitor. The dual-path monitor includes the additional feature of automatic zero and span check, which is a requirement for certain emission monitoring applications. The open-path monitor is designed for long distance monitoring in ambient air, monitoring of production halls, gas fencing, or leak detection of gases such as HF, CH4, and H2S. Measurement lengths of up to 500 m (1640 ft) are possible. The extractive multi-path monitor allows a gas sample to be removed from the process and analyzed offline. Based on multiple reflections in the analysis cell, this instrument combines a 11-m (36.1-ft) measurement path with a very compact design and was developed for trace measurements of H2O, O2, or H2S. One laser is usually needed for each gas to measure, but for some gas combinations a dual gas approach is possible; that is, two or more gases can be measured using a single laser in one monitor. The detection limit and other specifications are subject to variations of gas temperature,

3-9

Tunable Diode Laser

pressure, path length, and gas composition. Not all combinations of the pressure and temperature are feasible [5]. Opsis LD500 Opsis offers a laser diode system (See Figures 3-5 and 3-6) that is the central unit in a gas monitoring system. The analyzer can house up to four laser diode heads. Each head is a complete laser control and data sampling system.

Figure 3-5 LD500 Send and Receive Unit [6]

Figure 3-6 LD500 Processing Unit [6]

The laser diode gas analyzer emits light from the internal laser diode to an emitter through a fiber optic cable. A receiver receives the light and distributes it through a second fiber optic cable back to the laser diode gas analyzer, which will process and evaluate the signals and provide measurement results with response times with accuracy to one second. The laser diode gas analyzer provides very fast monitoring of a range of gaseous compounds. Several gases can be monitored, and a multiplexer offers several monitoring paths. Typical compounds are HF, NH3, O2, HCl, H2O, CO, CO2, and temperature [6]. Siemens LDS 6 The LDS 6 is a diode laser-based gas sensor with a measuring principle based on the specific light absorption of various gas components. The LDS 6 is suitable for fast and non-intrusive measurements of gas concentrations, temperatures in process, or flue gases. One or two signals of up to three measuring points are processed simultaneously with one central analyzer unit. The cross duct in situ sensors at each measuring point can be separated up to 1 km (0.62 mi) from the 3-10

Tunable Diode Laser

central unit by using fiber optic cables. The sensors are designed for operation under harsh environmental conditions and contain a minimum of electrical components. By connecting a bypass stream to a separate flow cell, measurements can also be carried out extractively instead of in situ [7]. LDS 6 enables the measurement of one or two gas components in some cases or, if desired, the gas temperature directly in the process. The Siemens LDS 6 is to be installed at the TVA Paradise Fossil Plant on Unit 3. Unit 3 is a cyclone boiler with a generating capacity of 1100 MW. This will be a test of the systems capability as an oxygen measuring device within the combustion zone of the boiler. Unisearch LASIR The LASIR is a simple, compact instrument, configured for permanent or portable applications where highly specific and sensitive real-time measurements of selected gases are required. The system is suitable for many types of applications, such as in situ stack and extractive point source measurements. The LASIR will meet requirements for most types of exhaust gas monitoring. The LASIR measures the absorption of IR from a low-powered diode laser similar to those used in CD players and laser printers. The measurement is completely free from the interference of other gases; and, because the measurement is based on the inherent fundamental physical properties of the target gas, it requires no calibration. This eliminates the need to carry gases to the measurement site [8]. ZoloBOSS The system shown in Figure 3-7 conducts measurements without any physical contact inside the boiler and without any reliance on gas extraction. The sensors do not intrude into the boiler. Because the laser beams are sent from and received into optical fibers, all sensitive instrumentation is located in the control room, rather than on the boiler. Installation requires only a 63.5-mm (2.5-in.) access port on each side of the laser path. There are no sensor tips to wear out or replace, no references gases are required, and no probes are needed. Zolotech claims that because the system is based upon molecular absorption, it does not require calibration and does not drift [9].

3-11

Tunable Diode Laser

Figure 3-7 Zolotech ZoloBOSS System at TVA Gallatin

The ZoloBOSS system is installed on Unit 3 at TVA Gallatin. Unit 3 is a CE tangentially-fired split-furnace with a generating capacity of 285 MW. TVA Gallatin is located approximately 48 km (30 mi) northeast of Nashville, Tennessee. The system has a total of 16 paths. Fifteen of these paths are installed on the super-heat side of the unit, and one path is located on the reheat side. There is a 2 x 2 grid just above the top burner elevation and a 4 x 2 grid above the overfire air (OFA). In addition, there are four parallel paths located in the economizer exit near the unit oxygen sensors on the superheat side and one path similarly located on the reheat side. In the presence of a grid, the system is capable of producing a topographic map of the measured quantities. Figure 3-8 is a demonstration of the type of output produced by this mapping scheme. The current status of the ZoloBOSS application is that the system is currently undergoing initial calibration testing. This is a TC project under EPRI Program 71, Combustion Performance and NOx control.

3-12

Tunable Diode Laser

Figure 3-8 ZoloBOSS Mapping Example [9]

MetroLaser LTS-100 Laser Temperature Sensor The MetroLaser LTS-100 Laser Temperature Sensor (see Figure 3-9) is an instrument for the measurement of gas temperatures of up to 2204C (4000F). The non-intrusive nature of this laser-based system and its insensitivity to obscurity make it ideally suited for furnace temperature measurement in fossil fuel power plants. Specific applications for the system in this environment include: FEGT monitoring and control Support for intelligent sootblowing systems Fireball centering [10]

Figure 3-9 MetroLaser LTS-100 [10]

3-13

Tunable Diode Laser

Bergmans Mechatronics, LLC (BML) and the EPRI I&C Center have performed demonstration testing of the system at the coal-fired TVA KIF plant. This testing demonstrated the feasibility of using the LTS-100 for furnace gas temperature measurement. BML is currently developing an auto-alignment system to be used with the LTS-100. The modular nature of this alignment system could enable it to be used with any TDL system, and it may be marketed separately from the LTS-100.

References for Section 3

1. Analytical Specialties, Tunable Diode Laser Theory, Applications, and Instrument Design, http://www.analyzer.com, January 2005. 2. Demonstration of Continuous Monitoring of Ammonia Slip in an SCR System. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000. 1001120. 3. Continuous Ammonia Analyzer Survey. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2003. 1007737. 4. Boreal Laser General Information, www.boreal-laser.com, GasFinder Open Path Monitor Brochure, January 2005. 5. Norsk Elektro Optikk AS, http://www.neo.no, January 2005. 6. Opsis, http://www.opsis.se, January 2005. 7. Siemens Process Analytics General Information, LDS 3000 Brochure, www.zolotech.com. 8. Unisearch Associates Inc., General Information, LasIR Brochure, www.unisearch-associates.com, January 2005. 9. Zolo Technologies Inc. General Information, ZOLOBOSSTM Brochure, www.zolotech.com, January 2005. 10. Bergmans Mechatronics, LLC Information, MetroLaser LTS-100 Brochure, www.bergmans.com, January 2005.

3-14

FURNACE EXIT GAS TEMPERATURE

Measuring FEGT has become a significant element of boiler control systems because it is an important indicator of the quality of heat transfer within the boilers furnace section. Each boiler is designed with an optimum heat transfer distribution that corresponds to a specific design temperature. Unfortunately, boiler combustion profiles change continuously during operation due to variations in the coal quality, boiler loading, ash deposition, and other process parameters. The continuous online measurement of FEGT enables the operators to monitor furnace trends and to react to undesirable conditions. For example, ash accumulation on the lower furnace walls can be reduced by initiating cleaning operations only when and as needed. This helps to avoid unnecessary tube erosion resulting from excessive sootblowing. In utility boilers, temperature measurement is valuable within both the furnace and post-furnace regions. Control over furnace fireside temperatures can yield beneficial results, such as the reduction of NOx emissions, the control of ash deposition, improved overall process efficiency, and the prevention of damage to heat transfer surfaces. Coupled with an intelligent sootblowing system, FEGT can result in lower peak combustion temperatures, resulting in lower NOx emissions. In the post-furnace sections of the boiler, temperature measurement is useful for the control of ash deposition and cleaning. It also impacts the new post-combustion systems designed to reduce NOx and SO2 by providing real-time temperature information for process optimization. FEGT indicates the temperature of the gas stream as it exits the furnace and enters the first pendant sections, which is an indication of the character of the ash as it passes into the convection platens. Coals with ash fluid temperatures in the range of 10931260C (2000 2300F) have a strong tendency for deposit accumulation at the inlet pendants whenever this temperature threshold is exceeded. Therefore, it is essential to limit high-temperature excursions and to maintain a stabilized and balanced flow of furnace gas passing through the convection sections of a boiler. In this way, ash deposition occurs in predictable locations that can be managed with proper cleaning operations.

Non-Contact FEGT Technologies

Optical Pyrometer An optical pyrometer consists of a sight tube that collects radiation emitted and projects that radiation onto a fiber optic bundle. The optical fibers bring the radiation to photo-detectors that have interference filters to limit the detected radiation to specific narrow wavelengths. The detectors generate signals in proportion to the detected radiation, and after amplification they are digitized and supplied to a microprocessor. The microprocessor is programmed with the appropriate algorithms to use the information and calculate the temperature [1]. 4-1

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

All solid bodies emit and absorb thermal radiation. Optical pyrometers measure the emitted radiation, which increases as temperature increases. If the object being measured is an opaque, black (totally absorbing), solid surface, Planks Blackbody Radiation Law shows that at a given wavelength, the intensity of the emitted radiation varies with the temperature of the surface. Therefore, a measurement of radiant intensity can be used to infer the temperature. If the absorptivity (equal to the emissivity) is less than unity, the surface emits radiation with an intensity less than that of a black body. In this case, it is still possible to infer temperature accurately, provided that the emissivity is known. Because site-specific conditions almost always seem to vary, most pyrometers incorporate an emissivity adjustment, which allows this correction to be made by the user [1]. The quantity of radiation may be calculated by the StefanBoltzmann formula: q/S = T4 Where, q S T = = = = = the radiant thermal energy per unit time the surface area the Stefan-Boltzmann constant the emissivity of the surface the absolute temperature difference between the emitter and the absorber

The radiation of hot gasses, however, is not like those of hot solids because gasses do not emit a continuous spectrum of radiation. Instead, the thermal emissivity of a gas exhibits a rapid variation with optical wavelength. That is, gasses radiate or emit strongly at certain characteristic wavelengths that correspond to absorption lines. Principles of radiation pyrometry for the measurement of gas temperatures are in this manner different from the principles of radiation pyrometry for the measurement of solid bodies [2]. Optical pyrometers measuring in the infrared band of the spectrum can measure gas temperature if their operating waveband is coincident with an absorption band in the target gas. If the gas path is optically thick (that is, the thermometer does not see through to a back wall) and of uniform temperature, the thermometer will read the gas temperature directly. This condition depends on absorption strength, path length, gas concentration, temperature, and pressure [3]. The basic physics governing the emission and absorption of radiation determines the intensity incident at the pyrometer, which is given by: I = B(T)*(1-e-l) Where, B(T) T, and wavelength, , l 4-2 = = = the Plank blackbody function at temperature the absorption coefficient the distance

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

This is a non-linear relationship, meaning that radiation from regions of the furnace that are closest to the device has a greater effect on the temperature measurement of the pyrometer. The device does not give just a line of site average but more of a conical shape extending into the furnace. The band selection will determine the depth of penetration and usefulness of the measurement [1]. The longer the depth of penetration, the less impact the cooler boundary layer temperature closer to the wall will have on the temperature measurement. In simplistic terms, it is easier to visualize a reverse conical shape to see the effects of each zone on the final temperature. The zones closer to the instrument have more weight on the path average reading than the areas farther away from the instrument. The farther depth the measurement area cone reaches will result in the boundary layer being less of the ratio of the full path length. This raises concerns about the penetration depth of the various optical technologies and the accuracy of the full measurement, although some applications may warrant shorter path lengths due to limitations of line of sight area. Infrared CO2 Waveband Pyrometer Probably the most well-known type of radiation pyrometer is the infrared pyrometer that measures the intensity of radiation emitted from a surface or region with wavelengths in the infrared range. When dealing with non-opaque materials, such as furnace gases, measuring temperature with an infrared pyrometer becomes far more complicated. In this case, the emissivity depends not only on the properties of the radiating material to be measured but also on the distance along the pyrometers line of sight. As a result, the amount of radiation detected by the infrared detector has a spatial dependency. Gases radiate only at discrete wavelengths that are characteristic of their molecular composition and concentration. These emissions occur within specific absorption/radiation bands whose emission/absorption strengths are dependent on temperature and pressure. These factors give rise to different emissivities and hence different penetration depths [4]. In a coal-fired furnace, for example, one primary gas constituent for measurement purposes is CO2, which is known to emit primarily at three different wavebands near 4.3, 2.7, and 1.9 m, which have different penetration distances, ranging from a few inches to well over a hundred feet. H2O wavebands are also used in this fashion [1]. Ash Particle Emission Spectroscopy A class of radiation pyrometers using optical emission at visible wavelengths has been applied to measure the temperature emitted from ash particles suspended in a heated gas stream. This technique enables the device to avoid errors introduced by uncertainty with molecular gas emissivity. In addition, it allows the use of an optical system that measures very short wavelengths to help reduce the spatial problems associated with other types of radiation pyrometers. It is dependent upon the ash particles being in thermal equilibrium with the surrounding gas and in sufficient concentration to permit detection [1].

4-3

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Acoustic Pyrometry Velocity of sound is a strong function of the temperature within the medium through which the sound wave travels, as indicated by the following equation derived from the Universal Gas Law: c = d/ = rRT/M Where, c d r R T M = = = = = = = the speed of sound distance over which sound wave travels flight time of acoustic wave the ratio of specific heats universal gas constant temperature molecular weight

Therefore, changes in sound speed can provide a direct measurement of the mediums temperature. Acoustic pyrometers measure the flight time of sound over a known distance, the furnace path. The result is the average temperature of the entire acoustic path. A sound source (transmitter) is mounted on one side of the furnace, and a receiver is mounted on the opposite side. When measuring hot gases in large utility furnaces, robust signal detection techniques must be employed in order to overcome the noisy furnace environment, including sootblower operation [5]. The two techniques for acoustic pyrometry differ mainly in sound wave source production and analysis. One technique uses a sound generator that produces a high-energy sound wave (over 170 dB) using a unique patented pneumatic device. One shortcoming of this technique is the requirement of a 300 psi (2067 kPa) air source, such as an air multiplier or plant air if it is available at that high pressure. This sound wave produced by the pyrometer has a sharp leading edge that is propagated concentrically from the generator. This sound source enables the measurement of gas temperatures in furnaces as wide as 30.48 m (100 ft), and within sootblower lanes [1]. The other accepted technique is operated using a much lower intensity sound source (126 dB). Difficulties overcoming furnace noise are counteracted through the use of specially developed digital signal processing methods and by operating the system in coordination with sootblower control logic [5].

4-4

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant Evaluation

As previously discussed, TVAs CUF plant has a history of slagging due to high-heat release design and low ash fusion temperature fuels. This has been aggravated by the retrofit of low NOx burners. Within the past few years, damaging outages have occurred due to this slag accumulation. With the installation of FEGT devices to monitor the exit gas temperature on the 10th elevation on Unit 1, this project determined whether the instrumentation could be applied to CUFs large furnaces. Three FEGT devices were installed on the 10th elevation front wall of Unit 1. The continuous online measurement of FEGT enables the operators to monitor furnace temperature trends and to react to undesirable conditions. For example, ash accumulation on the lower furnace walls can be reduced by initiating cleaning operations only when and as needed. FEGT increases indicate less heat transfer in the furnace and accumulation of slag in the boiler. Monitoring FEGT will help to avoid tube erosion resulting from excessive cleaning operations and provide an early warning of potential fouling conditions in the convection pass. The devices were mounted with an automatic retractable system in the event that cooling air was lost to ensure the units were not destroyed by the hot temperatures of the furnace. This project also demonstrated a newly developed automatic port rodding system that can be used with other instrumentation applied to the hot side of the furnace where ash accumulates.

TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant Selection and Installation

Slag deposition discussed previously on the upper furnace sections, particularly the pendants at CUF, two 1300 MW opposed-wall fired units burning Illinois Basin coal, has been a recurring problem. Both units are rated at 10 million lb/hr (1260 kg/s) main steam flow at 3500 psig (24.13 MPa) and 539C (1003F) turbine throttle conditions. The boiler dimensions are 33.8 m (110 ft) wide by 15.5 m (50.9 ft) deep and are configured with 88 burners fed by eleven MPS 89 mills. The furnaces were originally designed with cell burners and were retrofitted with Foster Wheeler CF/CS low NOx burners in the late 1990s. The combination of a high-heat release ratio and the medium-to-high sulfur and iron content of the fuel resulted in the troublesome combination of high FEGTs and low ash fusion temperatures. This, in turn, resulted in ash deposits forming on the first convection pendants. TVA and EPRI co-funded the demonstration of FEGT monitors on CUF Unit 1 Furnace. Both furnaces were already equipped with boiler optical cameras installed on the 9th elevation front wall to allow operators a view of the pendant sections above the nose of the furnace. These equally spaced cameras provided a view of the north, mid, and south sections of the furnace. The goal of adding FEGT was to monitor each section temperature at the 10th elevation above each camera (see Figure 4-1) to provide the operators not only a visible view of each pendant section but also the gas temperature of each section. Combined with incoming coal data, the FEGT data could provide information on slag conditions in each section, and correlations could be made with the visible images and the coal analysis data. 4-5

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-1 FEGT Installation Location

Several techniques for FEGT measurement were considered, including acoustic, optical, and high-temperature thermocouples. High-temperature thermocouples are maintenance intensive and are single-point measurement devices. The width of the boiler 33.8 m (110.9 ft) and the presence of wing walls across the boiler made acoustics impractical. As shown in Figure 4-2, a single north to south path was not possible due to the wing walls spanning the 33.8 m (110.9 ft) width of the furnace. The wing walls also hinder a multipoint technique with receivers and generators. Three receiver/generator configurations would be necessary, increasing the cost of acoustics. The acoustic vendors were not comfortable sending the sound signal between the wing walls.

4-6

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-2 Furnace Wing Wall Configuration

Optical technology was selected because it was non-intrusive and required minimal maintenance. Diamond Power GasTemp optical FEGT monitors were chosen and implemented at three locations across the boiler front. Most optical FEGT monitors are equipped with a 6 degree field of view that would require a 3-m (9.8-ft) width as the path reached the 15 m (50 ft) path length. The distance between wing walls ranged from 1.98 m (6.5 ft) in the mid section to 2.4 m (7.9 ft) in the north and south sections. To reduce the chance of wing wall interference, Diamond Power supplied GasTemp monitors with a 3 degree field of view, which reduced the width to approximately 1.5 m (4.9 ft) at the 15-m (49.2-ft) path length. This configuration provided a weighted average temperature at three front-to-back paths. In addition to the monitors, automated retracting mechanisms were installed on all three GasTemp devices in case of cooling air loss (see Figures 4-3 and 4-4). Also, as part of this project, one automated port-cleaning device was installed for demonstration purposes. 4-7

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-3 Diamond Power GasTemp Controls

Figure 4-4 Diamond Power GasTemp Monitor

High Velocity Thermocouple Verification Tests

TVAs Testing Services Group was enlisted to verify the FEGT monitors with actual furnace conditions. A high velocity thermocouple (HVT) probe provided gas temperature readings from the 9th elevation below the existing cameras for comparison to the FEGT monitors. The HVT probe obtained temperatures at 0.6-m (2-ft) increments up to 6.1 m (20 ft) into the depth of the furnace from each corresponding section: north, mid, and south. Data were taken at two different load settings: 1040-MW low load and 1300-MW base load. As seen in Figures 4-5 and 4-6, the Diamond Power GasTemp FEGT monitors followed the same trend as the HVT data. The monitor temperatures were expected to be lower than the HVTs because the HVT data were taken at a lower elevation closer to the burners. During this testing, these trends were used to identify burner imbalances in the Unit 1 furnace; the plant has since corrected those imbalances with burner damper adjustments.

4-8

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-5 FEGT Average Comparison 1040 MW Low Load

Figure 4-6 FEGT Average Comparison 1300 MW Base Load

4-9

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Differences in temperature due to load change were not well established during the HVT verification tests. Data have since been recorded from the plant historian that indicate the drop in temperature as load drops. Figure 4-7 shows CUF Unit 1 operation at base load, then dropping load due to fouling in the pendant section. The FEGT monitors indicated a temperature increase, as shown by the trend lines on Figure 4-7, as expected. As the furnace walls accumulated slag, heat flux was reduced and temperature increased. The rise in temperature increased the probability of fouling in the pendant section due to the ash fusion temperature of the coal.

Figure 4-7 FEGT Versus Unit Load

Automatic Port Rodding System

In a unit prone to slagging in the furnace, ports added to the furnace section were likely to accumulate slag and close. Prior experience with the boiler cameras in use at CUF indicated that keeping the ports clear of ash and slag would be an issue. Current operation of the boiler cameras included manual rodding of the ports daily. With the cameras, the operator could see when the port had become blocked. The FEGT monitors, on the other hand, would only lose the signal, making it difficult for operators to know when the data were true. Applied Synergistics, a Diamond Power International Company, developed an automatic port rodding system for this application. The port rodding device consisted of a pneumatically operated tube that would push through the port, clearing it of any ash accumulation (see Figures 4-8 and 4-9). The device was installed on the middle Diamond Power GasTemp. A separate controller was added and allowed the user to set the interval of cleaning. 4-10

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-8 Automatic Port Rodding System

Figure 4-9 Automatic Port Rodding System

According to experienced operations personnel, CUFs Unit 1 was more prone to slagging on the mid and south side of the furnace. As shown in Figure 4-7, the south GasTemp monitor lost the signal intermittently. Investigation showed ash accumulation was the cause. The mid GasTemp, which has the automatic port rodder, has not had this problem. A port rodding system on the south side should remedy it.

Summary
Diamond Power GasTemp FEGT monitors were installed at the TVA CUF Plant Unit 1 in late 2003 and have been functioning well. HVT probe data were used to verify the measurements from the monitors with actual furnace conditions. During this testing the FEGT monitors identified side-to-side spatial differences in the furnace exit temperatures and have been helpful in trimming burner secondary air flows. The sensors have also confirmed marginally high exit gas temperatures across the furnace. The port rodding system was also installed and is functioning smoothly. Installation and integration were simple. The data from the FEGT monitors will be used in the development of an intelligent slag mitigation system for TVA CUF. 4-11

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Dairyland Power Cooperatives John P. Madgett Station

The John P. Madgett Station (JPM) in Figure 4-10 is adjacent to the Alma Station, just south of it on the Mississippi River. JPM was built in the late 1970s at a cost of $179 million. Named after the late John P. Madgett, general manager of Dairyland Power Cooperative from 1947 to 1978, JPM has been in commercial operation since November 1979. The single unit station has a generating capacity of 376 MW of electricity.

Figure 4-10 Dairyland Power Cooperatives John P. Madgett Station

JPM burns about one million tons of low sulfur western coal from mines in the Powder River Basin area of Wyoming each year. The coal is received by two unit railroad trains of 115 cars each. Each car carries 120 tons of coal, for a total of 14,000 tons per train. One trainload of coal lasts approximately three days. The pulverized coal burned in the boiler is supplied by four double-ended ball tube mills with a maximum output capacity of 60 ton per hour/per mill. The stations turbo-fired boiler has approximately 203,784 ft2 (18,932.15 m2) of heating surface that generates a steam flow of 2,700,000 lb (1,224,699 kg) per hour at 510C (950F). JPMs turbine is a tandem compound double-flow reheat machine. The hot side electrostatic precipitator at JPM is equipped to remove approximately 99% of all particulate from the stations flue gas. Objective Gas temperatures are critical to determining cleanliness of backpass heat transfer surfaces to guide operators in sootblowing. The plant has a control screen to monitor these temperatures for sootblowing. The conventional method for measuring these points was the use of 4-12

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

high-temperature thermocouples. The plant began to suspect that the in situ gas thermocouples were giving erroneous readings. In some cases the indicated outlet gas temperature was higher than the indicated inlet (see Figure 4-11). This could have been due to particulate buildup around the thermocouple or a failed thermocouple.

Figure 4-11 Dairyland JPM Backpass Temperature Stratification

Duane Hill of Dairyland Power Cooperative wanted to determine if other methods were available, rather than the conventional in situ thermocouple method because thermocouples measure only one point in the gas stream and can become covered with ash to give erroneous readings. His main objectives were to: Check the accuracy of existing thermocouples Determine the accuracy and depth of measurement of each device Determine which FEGT devices would work in the backpass regions Determine which device(s) would work best at each elevation

4-13

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Taking into consideration the configuration of the convection backpass, acoustics were ruled out due to the number of units necessary to make all of the measurements, which would be a considerable expense. Optical units were best suited for this application. Several vendors were contacted to provide demonstration units for evaluation. The three infrared temperature measurement devices evaluated included: Land combustion JNT Micron

The following two ash cloud visible spectrum temperature devices were included in the evaluation: Micron PectraTemp

Testing Testing was conducted at the JPM Station on November 1415, 2001. The purpose of the tests was to determine the accuracy of several gas temperature measuring devices at various elevations in the boiler backpass. The gas temperature measuring devices were compared to a gas temperature traverse conducted at the same elevations using thermocouples. A test of a CO monitoring device at the air heater inlet was also conducted in conjunction with a gas traverse at the air heater inlet. For the purposes of the gas traverse tests, the unit was held at a constant load. The load was held at 381 gross MW, plus or minus 10 MW, on November 14, 2001. The unit remained at this condition from 0800 until 1730. Operators were allowed to blow soot but not in the areas of testing. Soot was blown in the testing areas when the test team was moving equipment from one location to another. The unit was held at 348 gross MW, plus or minus 10 MW, on November 15, 2001. The unit was at this load from 0800 until 1200. The same sootblowing restraints were in place as on November 14, 2001. The unit was at a lower load on November 15, 2001, due to system constraints. Gas temperature measurement testing was conducted on the west side, in the reheat backpass area of the boiler. Gas temperature measurements were made at the 9th, 8th, 7th, and 6.5 elevations. This corresponds to the gas entering the upper reheat bundle, between the upper and middle reheat bundles, between the middle and lower reheat bundles and leaving the lower reheat bundle, respectively. Gas traverses at the 9th and 8th elevations were conducted with a water-cooled HVT probe. Access to the gas pass was through a 100-mm (3.94-in.) test port in a boiler access door. Gas traverses on the 7th and 6.5 elevations were conducted with a non-cooled probe. Access to the gas pass at the 7th elevation was through a 50-mm (1.97-in.) test port through the webbing of the tubes. Access to the gas pass on the 6.5 elevation was through an unused sootblower port. Gas temperature measurements were taken in 0.6-m (2-ft) increments at each location. 4-14

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Three gas temperature traverses were taken at each elevation. Between each gas traverse, gas temperature measurements were taken with the following other temperature measurement devices: A JNT infra-red, portable temperature measurement sensor, owned by Dairyland Power Cooperative A Spectratemp optical gas temperature measuring device, supplied by Applied Synergistics A Micron Instruments model LX infrared portable temperature measurement device, supplied by Micron Instruments A Micron Instruments model R1 optical pyrometer, supplied by Micron Instruments A LandTemp infrared gas temperature measurement device, supplied by Land Instruments

Because of shipping problems, the LandTemp device was not available on November 14, 2001. The LandTemp was checked against two traverses at the 7th elevation, along with the JNT and Micron instruments. These three instruments were also checked against each other at the remaining three elevations [5]. Results First, operators attempted to keep the unit at steady-state conditions for the first set of HVT tests. Several indicators, including MW output, were collected over the test time to confirm steady state (see Appendix I). Because other tests were required on a different test date, the same indicators were collected and compared with the original test date indicators to confirm the same type of test conditions as possible (see Appendix I). The three traverses were averaged to compare to the evaluation instruments. The three traverses should have been close to the same if steady-state conditions were held. The traverses of the 9th elevation show this to be true (see Figure 4-12). Other elevations are also included in Appendix I.

4-15

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-12 JPM Gas Temperature 9th Elevation

To determine if the average of each elevation HVT could be combined in an overall average for comparison to evaluation instruments, the variance was charted (see Figure 4-13) This also supplied more proof of steady-state conditions in the furnace during testing.

Figure 4-13 Variance of Elevation Traverse Data

4-16

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

The problem of higher outlet temperatures than inlet temperatures was disproved by examining the overall elevation traverse data (see Figure 4-14). The temperatures declined from the 9th to the 6.5 elevation, as would expect because the 9th elevation was closer to the combustion zone. This did not show the possibility of gas short circuiting due to ash buildup.

Figure 4-14 JPM Gas Traverse, Elevation Comparison

The question of erroneous readings of the current thermocouples in use was evaluated by comparison of the thermocouple data to the HVT Test data (see Figure 4-15). The existing thermocouples read as much as 232C (450F) lower, primarily in the upper elevations.

4-17

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-15 Existing Thermocouple Comparison with HVT Test Data

As discussed in the beginning of this FEGT section, the optical pyrometry measurement is a non-linear relationship, meaning that radiation from regions of the furnace that are closest to the device have a greater effect on the temperature measurement of the pyrometer. These devices do not give just a line of site average but more of a conical shape extending into the furnace. The zones closer to the instrument have more weight on the path average reading than the areas farther away from the instrument. When comparing the readings from the instrument to an HVT traverse, it is best to use an average of all the readings from the profile. The actual measurement of the optical pyrometry is a weighted average, with more weight given to the zones closer to the instrument. The farther depth the measurement area reaches will result in the boundary layer being less of the ratio of the full path length. Some had suggested using a moving or running average of the HVT data, but that technique does not give weight to the separate readings. The purpose of using a running average is to smooth out local fluctuations in the raw data, usually time series, so the transformation is called data smoothing or a smoothers [6]. Concerns about the penetration depth of the different optical technologies and the accuracy of the full measurement were difficult to capture with test data. Figure 4-16, the depth profile, using the JNT probe, based on the peak valve over 20 seconds, still does not indicate a specific depth in the instruments measurement. The arrows show where the unit matched the depth temperature best at each elevation. The various optical monitors values versus the temperature at each elevation and the depth profiles are included in Appendix I. A method could probably be developed to determine the depth of penetration, but many of the units boast long depths up to 12 m (39.4 ft), for which the traverse data are unavailable. 4-18

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-16 JNT 20 Second Peak Depth Profile

Once the decision was made to use the average of the HVT traverse data for each elevation, a comparison of each instrument was made. The resulting data in Figure 4-17 indicate that each of the instruments did well in the comparison. The data also indicate that the optical units were more accurate than the current thermocouples the JPM station was using. The Micron RX, which is rated for the higher temperature areas, was able to measure the 8th and 9th elevations well. The LX, rated for lower temperatures, returned a measurement down to the 7th elevation, but it was unable to measure below that level. After a discussion with Micron, some adjustments were made to enable the measurement at that elevation.

4-19

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

Figure 4-17 Difference from Elevation Average

Further investigation showed some important data for the JNT unit. The 20 second peak average was more accurate than the normal average of the JNT unit or the 20 second peak value. This was valuable information because Dairyland Power Cooperative was already using a JNT unit at one of their other stations. In general, all the optical units were able to read the temperatures in the convection backpass.

References for Section 4

1. G. Kychakoff, P. Ariessohn, S. DeGroot, and G. Hayes, Recent Advances in Acoustic Pyrometry Provide Improved Temperature Measurement for Combustion and Emission Control. Power Generation Conference, Miami, FL, 2000. 2. J. A. Kleppe, Principle and Applications of Acoustic Sensors Used for Gas Temperature and Flow Measurement. University of Nevada, 1995. 3. T. G. R. Beynon, Direct Measurement of Gas Temperatures by Radiation Thermometry Near 4.3m. AIP Conference Proceedings Volume 684, Issue 1, pp. 819-824. (September 2003). 4. S. Clausen, Local Measurement of Gas Temperature with an Infrared Fibre Optic Probe. Measurement Science Technology 7, 1996, pp. 888896.

4-20

Furnace Exit Gas Temperature

5. J. A. Kleppe, Engineering Applications of Acoustics. Artech House Press, Boston, MA, 1989. 6. D. Hill, FEGT System Tests and Overview of ISB at J. P. Madgett Station. EPRI Sootblowing Conference, Nashville, TN (2000). 7. WOLFRAM Research, Mathematic Documentation (Statistics DataSmoothing, http://documents.wolfram.com/v5/AddonsLinks/StandardPackages/Statistics/DataSmoothing.html, January 2005.

4-21

STACK FLOW MEASUREMENT

The CAAA of 1990 mandated that all large power plants install CEMS in order to track plant emissions at all times. One major change in the CEMS required by the CAAA was that emissions of SO2 had to be reported on a total mass basis and not on a rate basis. This was necessary because the CAAA was structured to reduce the total tons of SO2 emitted nationwide. To determine the total mass emissions of SO2, the CEMS had to measure the SO2 concentration and the stack gas flow rate. Continuous measurement of stack gas flow rate had not been done on a large scale before this effort; therefore, many technologies were evaluated for the application. The EPA reference method for stack flow used a manually traversed pitot tube, but this was not practical for a continuous measurement. Three technologies achieved significant market share for the stack flow application. These were the ultrasonic system, hot-wire anemometer systems, and averaging pitot tube systems. Although these flow measurement systems have generally worked satisfactorily in the 10 years they have been in service, each has its own limitations and drawbacks. For this reason, the industry has continued to search for alternative flow measurement systems. TVA had installed hot-wire anemometer type systems on several of their plants and in two cases had experienced problems with measurement drift between calibration intervals. TVA was interested in finding a new sensor to replace their relatively old thermal systems. They could have chosen an ultrasonic system, but because the transmitting and receiving heads must be mounted at different elevations, the installation cost of ultrasonic systems is high. If possible, TVA wanted to find a system that could be installed at a single elevation in the stack to minimize installation costs.

Optical Flow Sensors

A few years ago, a new gas flow measurement system was introduced to the power market based on an optical phenomena called light scintillation. Scintillation is a general term that describes changes in the apparent position or brightness of an object when viewed through the atmosphere. The new optical flow meter uses a light source on one side of the stack and two detectors on the opposite side of the stack, as shown in Figure 5-1. The detectors are positioned about 76.2 mm (3 in.) apart in the direction of the flow stream. As the light beam traverses the stack, the flue gases cause scintillation of the light. The detectors measure the variations in the light intensity caused by the scintillation and convert the light signal to a time series digital data sequence. The main concept behind the flow meter is that the scintillation pattern that is measured by the two

5-1

Stack Flow Measurement

detectors will be very similar but shifted in time. A cross-correlation function is used to determine the time shift between the two detectors, which is directly related to the velocity of the flow stream.

Figure 5-1 Schematic of Scintillation Flow Measurement

Optical Scientific Inc., offers the OFS 2000 flow monitor. The sensor consists of a control panel teamed with an optical transmitter and optical receiver that are installed on opposite sides of a smokestack, duct, vent, or other confined space. The OFS resides outside the stack chamber behind optical windows for easy access, more accurate measurements, and greater durability. The instrument mounts on the same horizontal plane in order to transmit the LED beam directly across the perpendicular to the flow.

Plant Demonstration
Because the optical flow meter had the potential to replace TVAs existing thermal flow meters without excessive installation costs, TVA volunteered to test the instrument at their Widows Creek Fossil (WCF) Plant in northeastern Alabama. Widows Creek Units 16 are Babcock and Wilcox pulverized coal-fired boilers that share a common stack. Units 14 are 100 MW each and Units 5 and 6 are 125 MW each. Some or all of Units 16 typically reduce load at night, so the flow in the common stack changes significantly. This was a major factor in selecting this site for the demonstration. The WCF stack is a steel-lined concrete structure about 304 m (997.4 ft) tall. The flow meter was installed at the 122-m (400.3-ft) level, where the steel liner is 8.2 m (27.2 ft) in diameter. Two 101-mm (4-in.) diameter ports with standard flanges were installed on the stack liner and used to mount the transmitter and receiver (See Figures 5-2 and 5-3). Thermocouple and pressure transmitters were also added to the stack for the calculation of mass flow (see Figure 5-4). The control unit was mounted on the hand rail next to the stack for easy access (see Figure 5-5). The

5-2

Stack Flow Measurement

output signal from the instrument was routed to an instrument shack at the base of the stack for data acquisition (see Figure 5-6).

Figure 5-2 OSI Stack Flow Monitor Control Unit

Figure 5-3 OSI Stack Flow Monitor Transmitter

Figure 5-4 OSI Pressure and Temperature Transmitters

5-3

Stack Flow Measurement

Figure 5-5 OSI Control Unit Mounting

Figure 5-6 Schematic of OSI Stack and Control Unit

Performance
An EPA flow relative accuracy test audit (RATA) test was performed by TVAs test crew in July 2002 to provide calibration data for the optical flow meter. The vendor used the data from the test to configure a correction curve for the flow meter. From the very beginning, the flow data produced by the instrument did not correspond to the flow data from the existing thermal instrument or to the total MW output from Units 16. Examples of the data collected are shown in Figure 5-7. 5-4

Stack Flow Measurement

Figure 5-7 Comparison of OSI Versus Current CEMS Flow (Kurz) and Unit Load

The vendor visited the plant on several occasions to troubleshoot the meter and attempt to fix it. New firmware was installed on two occasions, but the problems persisted. After doing some spectral analysis of the raw data, the vendor suspected that mechanical vibration of the mounting of the light source or the detectors might be the problem. In other stack installations, the liner was made of brick and not prone to vibrations. If the vibration were at the proper frequency, it could cause interference with the scintillation fluctuations. The plant staff measured the vibration amplitude and frequency at the transmitter and receiver and on the mounting flange to help troubleshoot the problem. A new version of firmware that had special filtering was installed, but the problem remained. As can be seen in Figure 5-8, data from August 2002, the unit still seemed to respond with the opposite of what it should have been representing. As the Unit MW load dropped, the flow should also react in the same direction.

5-5

Stack Flow Measurement

Figure 5-8 Comparison of OSI Versus CEMS (Kurz) During Load Drop

The vendor then suggested that electrical interference was causing the erroneous readings. The vendor visited the site again and used an oscilloscope to determine if there was any electronic or magnetic interference. They also removed the unit from its mounting to inspect the sensor itself and inspected the inside of the stack to determine if there were any other light sources that cause interference. The firmware chip was replaced again, but the problems remained. There was one brief period when the flow meter appeared to operate properly, as shown in Figure 5-9. However, this was the only time that happened over several months of testing.

5-6

Stack Flow Measurement

Figure 5-9 Comparison of OSI Unit with Load and Stack CEMS Showing Correct Response

At this point, the vendor did not have any more reasonable suggestions for fixing the instrument, so the project was halted.

Infrared
Another new type of flow instrument that was similar in concept to the optical flow meter described previously was investigated. Instead of using cross-correlation of optical scintillation signals, this instrument used cross-correlation of infrared absorption signals. An infrared source was mounted on one side of the stack, and two infrared detectors were mounted on the other side. The detectors were mounted a known distance apart in the direction of the flow stream. The variations in flue gas constituent concentrations caused variations in the amount of energy absorbed as the infrared signal crossed the stack. The variations were picked up by the detectors and the two signals should have been similar, but time shifted from one to the other. Cross-correlation of the two signals was used to determine the time shift, from which the gas velocity could be easily computed. The signals from each detector were amplified so that the AC component of the electrical signal was processed. The two waveforms were different but a portion of the signal was the same although it had been shifted in time by an amount dependant on the velocity of the gas stream, as shown in Figure 5-10.

5-7

Stack Flow Measurement

Figure 5-10 Diagram of Infrared Stack Flow Monitor

Cross-correlation is then employed to find the time shift between the two signals, as shown in Figure 5-11.

Figure 5-11 Waveform Cross-Correlation

Epsilon Technologies
Epislon Technologies has released the IR4 Hi-Temp Flow Meter Gas Velocity Monitor by combining infrared absorption, time-of-flight, and cross-correlation infrared signature technologies. The non-contact IR4 Hi-Temp Flow Meter is promoted to handle hightemperature, high dust, and/or gas composition applications. At last discussion, the path length limitations were 5.8 m (19 ft), which was not adequate for the TVA WCF application. Epsilon is working to increase this path length to attempt an across-the-stack measurement. 5-8

Stack Flow Measurement

Figure 5-12 Epsilon Technologies LLC IR4 Hi-Temp Flow Meter

5-9

MOISTURE

The monitoring of moisture in combustion can provide useful information for both the efficient operation and the operating condition of a boiler. Moisture has significant impacts on heat rate, either as inherent fuel moisture, surface moisture, or hydrogen loss. Furthermore, moisture from sootblowers can affect heat rate, as well as provide an indication of proper or improper sootblowing control and even blower failures. Lastly, and perhaps of greatest interest to operations personnel, is the indication of a tube leak from moisture monitoring. Depending on its initial size and increasing flow rate, moisture monitoring can provide an early indicator for bringing the unit down for maintenance. The importance of each of these factors has convinced the EPRI I&C Center, in collaboration with Tennessee Technological Universitys (TTU) Center for Electric Power (CEP) to install and begin testing of a Cimtec moisture analyzer at TVAs Kingston Unit 9. The primary purpose of this installation was to determine the importance of an accurate moisture measurement and its effect in calculating heat rate. Secondary to this goal was to see if sootblower operation can be quantified and tube leaks can be detected by this moisture flow indicator.

Kingston Cimtec Moisture Meter Installation

TTUs CEP has installed the heat rate calculator/coal quality indicator at the Kingston Fossil Plant (KIF) Unit 9 as a research project with TVA. This project is currently evaluating the accuracy of this calculation in comparison to the input loss method and the EPRI Plant Monitor Workstation (PMW), a real-time indicator of heat rate. PMW is installed across five of the nine units at Kingston, including Unit 9. PMW calculates a given moisture flow in the exit gas stream, as does an older version of the TTU software. A comparison of these two references to the newest version of the TTU software (using the actual moisture flow from the Cimtec moisture meter) will provide a metric of the improved accuracy. Figure 6-1 shows a screen capture of the TTU software that uses the moisture meter value in its heat rate calculation. Figure 6-2 shows a picture of the Cimtec model 120 moisture meter. This meter uses a pressure-corrected capacitive measurement from an extracted sample to determine moisture content, and it can operate in gas flows up to 650C (1200F).

6-1

Moisture

Figure 6-1 Screen Capture of the TTU Heat Rate Calculator Installed on Kingston Unit 9

Figure 6-2 Cimtec Model 120 Moisture Meter Installed on Kingston Unit 9

Although testing is ongoing, a sample set of data collected from the moisture meter shows there can be significant variation from the calculated moisture flow. Figure 6-3 shows a comparison between the PMW calculated moisture flow and the observed flow from the Cimtec moisture meter. Determination of the cause of these variations is ongoing.

6-2

Moisture

Figure 6-3 PMW Calculated Moisture Flow Compared with Cimtec Moisture Meter

6-3

TVA CUF UNIT 2 PROFILE DATA

CUF Unit 2 HVT Traverses 11-19-03

10th Floor Port C Depth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Temperature 1185 1219 1251 1260 1267 1276 1269 1319 1312 1329 O2 5.1 5.2 5.4 5.7 5.5 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.8 5.1 CO 2 1 2 2 1 0 1 32 3 4

Start:

10:15

Stop:

10:38

A-1

TVA CUF Unit 2 Profile Data

Unit 2 Analzyer B Traverse 7th Floor

Purpose = determine if the 4-ft insertion depth obtains a representative sample
Time 12:18:55 12:20:34 12:23:02 12:25:32 12:27:55 12:29:40 12:31:11 12:38:25 12:41:00 04:26:25 04:27:56 04:28:59 04:29:41 04:31:49 Depth m (ft) 1.2 (4) 1.8 (6) 2.4 (8) 3 (10) 3.7 (12) 4.3 (14) 3 (10) 3 (10) 2.7 (9) 1.2 (4) 1.5 (5) 1.8 (6) 2.1 (7) 2.4 (8) O2 4.3 4.2 3.4 2.7 2.9 2.0 2.9 3.2 3.6 3.4 4.0 3.3 3.5 3.8 CO 4 8 46 57 45 40 43 8 9 5 5 5 5 11 EFF 99 99.1 98.9 98.4 98.5 98.7 98.4 97.8 98.3 96.8 96.8 96.8 96.8 96.7 CO2 15.1 15.2 15.9 16.5 16.4 17.2 16.4 16.1 15.7 15.9 15.4 16.0 15.8 15.5 NO 390 382 405 410 430 441 434 399 397 496 484 511 516 489 NO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOx 390 382 405 410 430 441 434 399 397 496 484 511 516 489 SO2 1153 1115 1317 1137 999 1151 1091 940 926 1204 1202 1255 1181 1140

A-2

TVA CUF Unit 2 Profile Data

A-3

TVA CUF Unit 2 Profile Data

A-4

TVA CUF Unit 2 Profile Data

A-5

CO/O2 TEST PLANS

The CO/O2 test plans have been modified for all CO/O2 instrumentation applications.

Test Plan for Evaluation of Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 Analyzer at TVA Kingston Fossil Plant
Sponsored by EPRI/TVA PPT Tailored Collaboration Boiler Instrumentation Project

Introduction
New and increasing limits on emissions, and in particular NOx, and emphasis on heat rate have underscored the need to measure flue gas constituents more accurately and in more locations. Utilities are spending millions of dollars per unit installing low-NOx burners, over-fired air, and other boiler modifications and chemical plant additions (SCR and SNCR) to control and reduce NOx emissions. Effective emissions control can be gained through the use of new innovative instrumentation closer to the furnace combustion zone and obtained on a near real-time basis. Current sensors are usually implemented as part of a CEMS, and some of them are installed in a shared stack far downstream of the combustion process. Therefore, there is a significant time delay in the measurements, and it is difficult to obtain accurate feedback on an individual units performance. New innovations have made it possible to monitor the CO of the combustion process on a continuous basis for boiler efficiency and emission control viable. Past difficulties, due to the harsh environments encountered in coal-fired boilers, have been addressed in the re-engineering of these in situ continuous CO monitors. The addition of continuous CO monitoring to the boiler system enables close control of the process at peak efficiency while reducing harmful emissions. This document describes a test plan for evaluating the performance of the Servomex Xendos 2700 COe/O2 analyzer. This is part of the EPRI and TVA PPT tailor collaboration boiler instrumentation project. The proposed test will evaluate the accuracy of analyzer measurement in an operating power plant facility. The test and data analysis procedures are based largely on the EN 61207-1 and 2: 1994 Expression of performance of Gas Analyzers and the US CFR Title 40 Part 60, Performance Specification 4 Specifications and Test Procedures for Carbon Monoxide Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources.

B-1

CO/O2 Test Plans

Background
The TVA KIF serves as the test site for this evaluation. For this project, the Servomex analyzer is installed at the exit of the economizer of Unit 9 RH at high temperatures approximately 399C (750F) and high particulate loading. This test will evaluate this unit as operating in a coal-fired utility under typical operating conditions. The results will be compared to Servomex product performance specifications to verify the analyzer meets requirements for considering purchase by TVA KIF per the TVA KIF Servomex Xendos 4900 performance contract. This evaluation will also aid other TVA sites in determining if the analyzer would suit their specific applications. During the TVA KIF tests, measurements will be made at the combustion zone for an analysis of the movement of CO through a coal-fired process. KIF was chosen because a three-point profile can be obtained with the inclusion of the Unit CEMS CO readings. Analyzer Operating Principle Sample gas is withdrawn from the flue gas stream at approximately 300 ml/min by a sample probe with compressed air aspirator, and it is passed to the two sensors in the heated sensor head assembly. A 20 micron filter with a metal sheath is at the end of a probe assembly in the flue gas stream to prevent particulate from entering the unit. The oxygen concentration is measured with a zirconia-type oxygen transducer, and the combustibles concentration is measured with a thick film calorimeter transducer. The zirconia sensor is industry standard and relies on the Nerst equation to calculate the percentage of oxygen. The combustibles sensor relies on the combustion of carbon monoxide and oxygen over a catalytic surface. The zirconia sensor consists of a disc of yttria-stabilized zirconia with platinum electrodes on each face, heated to 700C (1292F). Sample gas is passed to one face of the disc, and reference air (instrument air) is passed to the other. At temperatures above 600C (1112F), the disc becomes permeable to oxygen ions; therefore, when the two sides of the disc are exposed to differing oxygen concentrations (flue gas and ambient air), oxygen ions pass through the zirconia disc, giving rise to a potential difference across the platinum electrodes. The potential difference is proportional to the logarithm of the ratio of the oxygen concentrations on the two sides of the disc. The thick film sensor consists of a printed platinum resistance electrode on a ceramic disc mounted within a tubular oven designed to heat the sample gas to the same temperature as the sensor prior to reaching the sensor. Then the sensor is partitioned into four quadrants. Two of the quadrants are coated with a proprietary catalyst, and the remaining two are not. Carbon monoxide in the sample gas is oxidized to carbon dioxide on the catalyzed quadrants, thus changing the resistance of those quadrants. The four quadrants are electrically connected in a bridge configuration so that the temperature difference among the quadrants can be measured. The bridge output varies linearly with the carbon monoxide concentration. Because oxygen must be present to enable oxidation, an auxiliary air supply is mixed with the sample gas prior to entry into the sensor.

B-2

CO/O2 Test Plans

Test Background Online analyzer performance testing requires a comparison of analyzer readings to measurements obtained from other instruments or measurement techniques. The TVA test crew will gather test data using a Servomex Xentra 4900 Infrared CO analyzer, along with other gas constituents. A probe inserted at close to the same location as the extraction probe of the unit will be used to obtain the referencing sample. A Thermo Environmental Instruments Model 48C Infrared CO monitor, downstream from the analyzer, will also be used as reference. An HVT will be run during the test to obtain the CO profile in the furnace and to ensure safe operation of Unit 9.

Test Procedures
Interferences Servomex has stated four possible interferences that can cause errors in the measurement when operating in a power plant as compared to a laboratory environment. They are: Atmospheric Pressure: possible 5%. This can be counteracted by adding the barometric pressure reading at the plant. Flue Gas Pressure: This can be counteracted by keeping the process close to steady state during testing. Calibration Gas Flow Rates: This can be counteracted by keeping the process close to steady state and monitoring calibration gas flow indicator closely during testing. Other Combustibles: The secondary combustible at this location is SO2. The combustibles monitor measures all combustibles. We will also analyze for SO2 at the test location.

Pre-Test Procedures Calibration will be performed on all test equipment preceding the tests. The Servomex analyzer will be calibrated prior to testing with the following gases already piped in at KIF: Gas 1 Gas 2 Gas 3 Instrument Air 0.515% O2 510 ppm CO balance N2 balance Air

B-3

CO/O2 Test Plans

The following analyzer operational outputs will be obtained between each test: Sensor and probe head temperatures O2 ppm, mV COe ppm, mV

Drift Drift is the change of the indications of an analyzer for a given level of concentration over a stated period of time, under reference conditions that remain constant and without any adjustments being made to the analyzer by external means. Drift tests involve performing repeated measurements on the same sample over a given time period. This provides a fundamental measurement of the accuracy limit of an analyzer because the instruments accuracy cannot be better than any drift that may occur. The drift performance characteristics will consist of a value for output fluctuation over at least one time interval. Analyzer operational parameters will be measured using the three verification gases used in normal calibration for a period of six seven-day spans spaced equally apart. No adjustments (including calibration) shall be made by external means during the one-month period. The drift test start date will be the beginning of the performance test, which is when the unit is calibrated. Readings will be corrected for barometric pressure variation. The results will be analyzed to state the output fluctuation over the period and to determine linear regression with respect to time. Repeatability/Linearity Linearity error is the maximum deviation between actual analyzer readings and the readings predicted by a linear function of the measured quantity. These include the indicated values at the upper and lower limits of the effective range. Repeatability is the spread of the results from measurements taken on successive samples at short intervals of time with identical test material carried out by the same method with the same measuring instrument by the same observer in the same laboratory in unchanged environmental conditions. The results obtained will be used to calculate and report the standard deviation for each input value. In this report, repeatability is expressed as one standard deviation of the errors from average error at each point of the measurement, for rising and falling inputs separately. A five-point calibration check for rising and falling concentrations will be carried out over the ranges of 0 to 21% oxygen and 0 to 500 ppm carbon monoxide. Gases include: B-4 Gas 1 Gas 2 Gas 3 Instrument Air 0.515% O2 120.7 ppm CO balance N2 balance N2

CO/O2 Test Plans

Gas 4 Gas 3

277.6 ppm CO 510 ppm CO

balance N2 balance Air

The measurements will be repeated six times for rising and falling input, and the same values will be used in each direction. The results will be used to perform linear regression using all the readings for each test gas mixture. The maximum deviation between the recorded values and the straight line is the linearity error expressed ppm CO and percentage of O2. From this test average error, hysteresis, repeatability, and linearity will be determined. Relative Accuracy Analyzer Location A side-by-side comparison test will be performed to determine the degree of agreement among measured values from the analyzer and the calibrated test equipment at three different CO levels in the furnace at the economizer exit. An extraction probe equipped with a thermocouple for temperature readings will be inserted next to the inlet filter of the Servomex CO/O2 analyzer using the adjacent port at the economizer exit. Samples will be drawn from the gas path and analyzed for CO, CO2, SO2, and O2. A short version of CFR 40 Part 60 Method 10 will be used but only collecting three averages over 20-minute periods. The data will be sampled at least 1s/sec for more in-depth analysis using a data logger. The data logger computer clock needs to be synchronized with Datawares clock. The O2 set point will be lowered by the Unit 9 operator until the desired CO levels are produced, as shown in Table B-1. There will be a short settling time for the furnace after each O2 drop. At this point during the start of each set of test runs, gas samples will be analyzed for moisture for conversion of the dry basis readings to wet basis.
Table B-1 Test Matrix for Dynamic Tests Test Run Set 1 Sampling Interval (minutes) 320 minute intervals 320 minute intervals 320 minute intervals Unit 9 Oxygen Set Point CO result 0-50 ppm CO Economizer Measurements CO, CO2, O2, SO2, Hydrocarbons, temperature, moisture CO, CO2, O2, SO2, Hydrocarbons, temperature, moisture CO, CO2, O2, SO2, Hydrocarbons, temperature, moisture Furnace HVT Measurements (ran once for each set of runs) CO, O2, CO2, Temperature

100-200 ppm CO

CO, O2, CO2, Temperature

300 ppm CO

CO, O2, CO2, Temperature

B-5

CO/O2 Test Plans

HVT at Furnace Nose An High Velocity Thermocouple HVT will be run at the beginning of each set of test runs obtaining CO, O2, CO2, and temperature. A 20-ft (6.096-m) probe will be inserted at the nose of Unit 9 RH furnace. High/Low O2 and CO will be taken at 2-ft increments up to 1416 ft (4.267 4.877 m) into the furnace. This data will be used in conjunction with the economizer outlet readings and the unit CEMS CO readings to create a CO profile for the furnace. The HVTs will also serve as a safety checkpoint for the process during the test.

References
1. IEC 1207-1, Expression of Performance of Gas Analyzers Part 1: General, International Electrotechnical Commission, 1994-02. 2. IEC 1207-2, Expression of Performance of Gas Analyzers Part 2: Oxygen in Gas (Utilizing High-Temperature Electrochemical Sensors), International Electrotechnical Commission, 1994. 3. CFR 40 Part 60 Method 10, Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources, Code of Federal Regulations, July 2001.

B-6

TVA CUMBERLAND FOSSIL PLANT AMETEK THERMOX WDG-HPIIC TEST DATA AND RESULTS

C-1

TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC Test Data and Results

C-2

TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant Ametek Thermox WDG-HPIIC Test Data and Results

C-3

TVA KINGSTON FOSSIL PLANT SERVOMEX XENDOS 2700 TEST DATA AND RESULTS

D-1

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

D-2

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

D-3

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

D-4

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

D-5

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

D-6

TVA Kingston Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

D-7

TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT ROSEMOUNT OCX 4400 SERVICE REPORT

Report on RMR 24706 TVA Unit Serial Number R01005008

Initial Inspection of Unit Inspected By: David H. Bachman Date of Inspection: September 26, 2002

1. This is a three-heater sample line unit. 2. The sample is taken directly through the flange, instead of through the oxygen assembly hub. 3. The check valve is bent on the male pipe thread, which is threaded into the filter retaining nut. 4. The eductor dead-ended vacuum was measured with the unit at room temperature, and it measured -114.3 mm (-4.5 in.) of vacuum. 5. The eductor and reference external tubes and tube tee were missing. 6. I checked the heater resistance, and they seemed normal as follows: Sample line heaters measured 41.6 ohms Oxygen sensor heater measured 62.6 ohms Combustibles sensor heater measured 149.4 ohms Reference RTD, 108.5 ohms Active RTD, 108.5 ohms

7. The resistance of the Combustible Sensor RTDs at room temperature measured:

These values seemed reasonable. 8. The line earth ground to chassis safety ground was not tight enough at the electronics termination. This may or may not have left the factory in this condition.

E-1

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 4400 Service Report

Paramater Settings as Received from TVA Line Voltage: 115 Vac Oxygen Sensor Range Values: Upper Range Value: 25.00% Lower Range Value: 0.00% Combustibles Range Value: 1000 ppm CO O2 Calibration Setup: O2 Hi Gas: O2 Lo Gas: OP Tracks TG Time: Purge Time: Sol. Present: 8.0700% 0.4000 120 sec. 120 sec. YES

Combustibles Calibration Setup: High TG: 997.0 ppm CO All the remaining combustibles settings are the same as O2. O2 Setup: Slope: Constant: Combustibles Setup: Slope: Constant: 1626.1577148 ppm/mV 1.215933184 mV 48.8 mV/ Decade 5.0 mV

Note: These values are from the calibration that last passed successfully. If the calibration failed, these values would not be updated. Last Calibration Constants: O2 Slope: O2 Constant: O2 Cell Impedance: Combustibles Slope: Combustibles Constant: 48.2 mV/ Decade -4.5 mV 0.0 Ohms 688.8 ppm/ V 0.9 V

Note: These values are from the calibration before the last calibration. This is because if the last calibration did not pass, you could put in these values manually and still have use of your instrument temporarily until it can be fixed. E-2

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 4400 Service Report

Blow Back Settings: Enabled: Interval: Duration: Purge: YES 30 min. 5 sec. 60 sec.

Settings Changed So the Sensors Can Be Evaluated O2 Calibration Setup: TG Time: 300 sec. Purge: 60 sec. Sol. Present: NO Blow Back: Blow Back Enabled: NO Note: We left the test gas values the same at this time because they would have a minimum effect on the calibration. Vacuum Test and Initial Calibration Results Date: September 27, 2002 Tests By: David H. Bachman The unit was allowed to soak overnight in order for the temperatures of the heaters and sensors to stabilize. The eductor dead end vacuum measured: Checked the A/O trim and was OK Readings before calibration with unit up to temperature and measuring ambient conditions: O2: Combustibles: 21.29% 299.33 ppm -406.4 mm (-16 in.) water column

Initiated a manual calibration (The values below are before the calibration for the O2 and combustibles was completed.) Test Gas 0.4% O2 O2 Cell mV 77.5 mV Active mV 1.53 mV E-3

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 4400 Service Report

8.0% O2 1000 ppm CO

14.8 mV N/A

1.50 mV 1.51 mV

After the calibration was completed, the result was a combustibles slope error. From the previous values, this is understandable because we would expect the difference between the 1000 ppm active reading and the 8.0% active reading to be more than 0.01 mV. This small difference could be attributed to the following possibilities: Faulty combustibles sensor Faulty electronics Incorrect wiring of the combustibles sensor or cable between the sensor assembly and the electronics assembly

We eliminated the faulty electronics by simulating the RTDs with two individual decade resistance boxes. We also thoroughly checked out the wiring, both of the sensor and the interconnecting cable. On September 28, 2002, we replaced the combustibles sensor and applied power to the unit. On September 30, 2002, the unit successfully passed both the oxygen and combustibles calibration. We removed the filter, and it appeared clean. However, some foreign material came out that appeared to be a sulfur compound. We, therefore, inspected the filter cavity, the process inlet port, and the exhaust outlet port, and they appeared clear. We want to remove the oxygen assembly in order to visually inspect the process gas path more thoroughly to ensure that the unit would not plug again. October 01, 2002 We powered the unit down, removed the O2 assembly, inspected process cavity, and removed the process tube that connects between the combustibles block and flange manifold block. There was a small layer of what appeared to be a sulfur compound in the process cavity. We removed this material by scraping and using a vacuum cleaner to remove the particles. The above-mentioned process tube did not show any signs of foreign material. We powered up the unit and will recheck the vacuum and calibrate tomorrow. Also, Doug Simmers mentioned that Doug Foulds saw an increase in O2 reading when he increased the Dilution Air Flow. We will also check this tomorrow. October 01, 2002 Rechecked dead end vacuum and measured -403.9 mm (-15.9 in.) water column vacuum. E-4

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 4400 Service Report

Recalibrated with the following results: Test Gas 0.4% O2 8.0% O2 1000 ppm CO O2 Cell mV 77.8 mV 14.5 mV Active mV 1.66 mV 1.64 mV 3.72 mV

Calibration Parameters: O2 Combustibles Slope = Slope = 48.7 mV/Decade 484.5 ppm/mV Constant = -5.6 mV Constant = 1.6 mV

We checked the effects of dilution air flow on the oxygen reading. We first set the dilution air flow to 0.5 SCFH, and with 8% O2 Balance N2 the O2 reading went from 8.0 to 8.4% O2. We then opened up the dilution air rotometer as far as possible, and the O2 value increased to 17+% O2. This is, we believe, due to the incoming dilution air flow being more than the sample flow due to the vacuum. This, in turn, causes the dilution air back flowing into the O2 sensor. We rechecked the vacuum and it was -403.9 mm (-15.9 in.) water column.

E-5

TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT ROSEMOUNT OCX 8800 TEST DATA AND RESULTS

F-1

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 8800 Test Data and Results

F-2

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 8800 Test Data and Results

F-3

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Rosemount OCX 8800 Test Data and Results

F-4

TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT AMETEK THERMOX WDG-IVC TEST DATA AND RESULTS

G-1

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Test Data and Results

G-2

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Ametek Thermox WDG-IVC Test Data and Results

G-3

TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT SERVOMEX XENDOS 2700 TEST DATA AND RESULTS

H-1

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

H-2

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

H-3

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

H-4

TVA John Sevier Fossil Plant Servomex Xendos 2700 Test Data and Results

H-5

DAIRYLAND JOHN P. MADGETT STATION FEGT TEST DATA AND RESULTS

I-1

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-2

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-3

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-4

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-5

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-6

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-7

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-8

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-9

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-10

Dairyland John P. Madgett Station FEGT Test Data and Results

I-11

Export Control Agreement Access to and use of EPRI Intellectual Property is granted with the specific understanding and requirement that responsibility for ensuring full compliance with all applicable U.S. and foreign export laws and regulations is being undertaken by you and your company. This includes an obligation to ensure that any individual receiving access hereunder who is not a U.S. citizen or permanent U.S. resident is permitted access under applicable U.S. and foreign export laws and regulations. In the event you are uncertain whether you or your company may lawfully obtain access to this EPRI Intellectual Property, you acknowledge that it is your obligation to consult with your companys legal counsel to determine whether this access is lawful. Although EPRI may make available on a case by case basis an informal assessment of the applicable U.S. export classification for specific EPRI Intellectual Property, you and your company acknowledge that this assessment is solely for informational purposes and not for reliance purposes. You and your company acknowledge that it is still the obligation of you and your company to make your own assessment of the applicable U.S. export classification and ensure compliance accordingly. You and your company understand and acknowledge your obligations to make a prompt report to EPRI and the appropriate authorities regarding any access to or use of EPRI Intellectual Property hereunder that may be in violation of applicable U.S. or foreign export laws or regulations.

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), with major locations in Palo Alto, CA, and Charlotte, NC, was established in 1973 as an independent, nonprofit center for public interest energy and environmental research. EPRI brings together member organizations, the Institutes scientists and engineers, and other leading experts to work collaboratively on solutions to the challenges of electric power.These solutions span nearly every area of power generation, delivery, and use, including health, safety, and environment. EPRIs members represent over 90% of the electricity generated in the United States. International participation represents over 10% of EPRIs total R&D program.

Program: I&C and Automation for Improved Plant Operations

1008144

2005 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Togethershaping the future of electricity Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America

Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA 800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com