Post on 08-Mar-2018
DOI : 10.23883/IJRTER.2017.3069.NTHZU 208
ENERGY AUDITING OF THERMAL POWER PLANT: A Case
Study
M. S. NARWAL1, VINIT2
1Associate Professor In Dcrust,Me Deptt. Murthal -131037 2M.Tech Student In Dcrust, Me Deptt. Murthal-131037
Abstract— In the present, studied “Energy Auditing of Thermal Power Plant: A Case Study” The
Energy aspects tell us how we can increase the efficiency of a thermal power plant. In this work, I
have studied various parameters like boiler, turbine, thermal insulation, cost benefit analysis etc. It is
an engineering technique which can be used for accounting of energy used by a particular system or
sub-system. By applying this technique of energy audit, we can know whether energy is being used
efficiently or not. The Results of the energy audit studies also tell us about the problem areas of a
process or equipment which are under study and define the energy losses. These days Energy
Conservation has become a top most priority in order to achieve a sustainable growth, productivity,
enhancement & Environmental Protection. The Govt. of India enacted the Energy Conservation Act
2001 by considering the huge potential of energy savings and benefits of energy efficiency as per the
report prepared by National Development Council (NDC) Committee on power. For
development of policies and strategies with a thrust on self regulation and market principles, with the
primary objective of reducing the energy intensity of the Indian Economy, the Govt. of India has set
up the Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) under the provision of the Energy Conservation Act 2001
Keywords- Energy Audit, Boiler, Turbine, Economizer, Air Pre-heater, Heat Rate Improvement,
Efficiency, Heat Correction Factor, Cost Benefit Analysis
I. INTRODUCTION
Energy Audit is that the key to a scientific approach for decision-making within the area of energy
management. It tries to balance the total energy inputs with its use and serves to spot all the energy
streams in a facility.
As per the Energy Conservation Act, 2001, Energy Audit is outlined as "the verification, observance
and analysis of energy as well as submission of technical report containing recommendations for
improving energy potency with cost benefit analysis and an action plan to reduce energy
consumption".
Energy audit is mainly carried out in 3 phase:
1. The Pre-audit Phase.
2. The Audit Phase.
3. The Post-audit Phase.
Table 1: Methodology Step for Energy Auditing [1]
Phase – I Pre Audit Phase • Plan and organize.
• Walk through audit.
• Informal interview with energy
manager, plant or production manager.
• Resource planning, Establish/organize a energy
audit team.
• Organize instrument & time frame.
• Macro data collection.
• Familiarization of process/plant activities.
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 209
2. Conduct of brief meeting / awareness
program with all divisional heads and person
connected.
• Building up cooperation.
• Issue questionnaire for each department.
• Orientation awareness creation.
Phase – II Audit Phase 3. Primary data gathering, process
flow diagram & energy utility diagram.
• Historic data analysis.
• Prepare process flow chart.
• Design, operating data and schedule of operation.
4. Conduct surveys and meeting.
Measurements:
• Motor survey, insulation and lighting survey with
portable instruments for collection of more and accurate
data.
• Conform and compare operating data with design
data.
5. Conduct detail trials.
6. Analysis of energy use.
• 24 hour power monitoring.
• Load variation trend in pump, fan & compressor.
• Boilers / efficiency trials.
• Energy and material balance.
• Conceive, develop and refine ideas.
7. Identification & development of energy
conservation opportunities.
• Review the previous idea suggested by unit
personnel.
• Use brain-storming technique.
• Contact vendor for new efficient technology.
8. Cost benefit analysis • Select the most promising project.
• Priorities by long, medium and short term measures.
9. Reporting and presentation to top
management
• Documentation and report presenting to top
management
Phase III Post Audit Phase 10. Implementation and follow up
• Assist and implement the plan and monitor the
performance.
• Follow up and periodic review.
II. LITERATURE VIEW
Vikrant Bhardwaj, Rohit Garg, Mandeep Chahal (October 2012) presented the Energy Audit
work on sub-unit like Boiler ,Turbine and Generator ,Condenser, Pre-heater of Panipat Thermal
Power Station and the result was Overall Plant efficiency at lower loads decreases so we should run
the Plant at higher load. [2]
Paljinder singh, Parag Nijhawan, Suman Bhuller (2013) presented the performance of Boiler,
Air-preheater, Furnace of Guru Hargovind Thermal Power Station Barnala (Bathinda). And the result
was radiation loss in furnace is more than 6% and this loss can be reduced by improving the
insulation of furnace. [3]
Vikas Duhan, Jitendar Singh (March 2014) presented a study of dynamic responses of power
plants through mathematical modeling, identification, and simulation of Rajiv Gandhi thermal power
plant Hisar (600MW).From the analysis part of this work, it is concluded that the overall plant
efficiency varies with the variation or small change in the output loads. [4]
Sourabh Das, Mainak Mukherjee, Surajit Mondal (2015) presented the Energy Audit work on
waste heat recovery boiler (WHRB) ID fan, WHRB FD fan, Cooling Tower of Jindal Steel and
Power limited (JSPL) at Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. And the result was modifying WHRB FD fan suction
duct and then install variable frequency drive (VFD) to reduce the head loss and to reduce the
pressure drop across the condensate line, which in turn increase the efficiency of the plant. [5]
III. PROBLEM FORMULATION
1. Heat Rate improvement by improving operating parameter like the main steam pressure and
temperature, condenser back pressure and reheat steam temperature.
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 210
2. Cost benefit analysis of the above i.e. how the improvement in above parameter can reduce the
cost
3. Identification of equipment and process having possibility of improving the energy efficiency.
IV. UNIT OVERVIEW
V. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF BOILER Table 2: calculation of boiler efficiency by Indirect Method [6]
SI.
No
Design Value Actual Value at 18/05/16,
11.00AM
Gross Generator Output 250 MW 250 MW
1 Oxygen Content in Coal 5.91 % 5.45 %
2 Carbon Content in Coal 41.22 % 42.55 %
3 Hydrogen Content in Coal 2.81 % 2.41 %
4 Sulphur Content in Coal 0.35 % 0.38 %
5 Nitrogen Content in Coal 0.71 % 1.67 %
6 Flue Gas Temperature at APH outlet (FGT) 140 °C 133.5 °C
7 Dry Bulb Temperature (DBT) 46 °C 39 °C
8 % Excess Air supplied in flue gas(EA) 13.56 % 14.62 %
9 Theoretical Air Required for Complete combustion
(TA) (calculated)
5.51 kg/kg of
coal
5.56 kg/kg of coal
10 Actual mass of air supplies (AAS) (calculated) 6.25 kg/kg of
coal
6.38 kg/kg of coal
11 Actual mass of dry flue gas (calculated) 6.50 kg/kg of
coal
6.68 kg/kg of coal
12 Loss due to dry flue gases (L1)=Dry flue gas
quantity×Cp× (FGT-DBT)×100/GCV
3.89 % 4.00 %
13 Hydrogen(H) Content in Fuel 2.81 % 2.41 %
14 Loss due to Formation of Water from H2 in Fuel
(L2)=9×Hydrogen Content(abs.) ×{(584+Cp(FGT-
DBT)}×100/GCV
4.19 % 3.59 %
15 Total moisture Content in Fuel 15.00 % 13.94 %
16 Loss due to moisture in Fuel (L3) = M×( (0. 45× 2.49 % 2.31 %
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 211
(FGT - DBT)+584) ×100/GCV
17 Humidity 0.0175 % 0.0182 %
18 Loss due to moisture in Air (L4) =
AAS×Humidity×2.09×(FGT-DBT)×100/ GCV
0.117 % 0.145 %
19 CO in Flue Gas(%CO) 0.48 % 0.48 %
20 Carbon Content in Coal(C) 41.22 % 42.55 %
21 Carbon dioxide content at outlet(%CO2) 14.00 % 16.00 %
22 Loss due to Partial Conversion of CO to CO2 (L5)=
{(%CO×C(abs.) / (%CO + %CO2)} ×
(23746.8×100/GCV of Fuel)
2.05 % 1.86 %
23 GCV of Carbon(Cv) 33923.4 kJ/kg 33923.4 kJ/kg
24 Ash Content in Coal(Ac) 34.00 kg 32.00 kg
25 Amount of Bottom Ash in 1 Kg of Coal(BA) 0.034 kg 0.032 kg
26 Amount of Fly Ash in 1 Kg of Coal(FA) 0.306 % 0.288 %
27 Un-burnt Carbon in Fly Ash(UCFA) 1.0 % 1.86 %
28 Un-burnt Carbon in Bottom Ash(UCBA) 4.00 % 10.96 %
29 Loss due to Unburnt Carbon in Fly Ash (L6) =
Cv×FA×UCFA/GCV of Coal
0.65 % 1.14 %
30 Loss due to Unburnt Carbon in Bottom Ash (L7)
=Cv×BA×UCBA/GCV of Coal
0.29 % 0.75 %
31 Radiation and Convection Loss (L8) 1.2 % 3.2 %
32 Total Loss(L) = L1+L2+L3+L4+L5+L6+L7+L8 14.877 % 16.995 %
33 Boiler Efficiency=100-L 85.123 % 83.005 %
Figure 1 : Various types of losses from Boiler
VI. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF TURBINE
Table 3 : Performance Analysis of Turbine
Parameter Actual Value at 19/05/16, 11.00 AM
Main Steam Flow (Mms) 7.47×105 kg/h
Main Steam Pressure 15.34×104 N/m2
Main Steam Temperature 535 °C
Main Steam Enthalpy (hms) corresponding to above P & T
[7]
3423.58 kJ/kg
Feed Water Temperature 203.1 °C
Feed Water Pressure 14.78×104 N/m2
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 212
Feed Water Enthalpy (hf) corresponding to above P & T [7] 874.81 kJ/kg
Reheat Steam Flow (Mrhs) 738596.24 kg/h
Hot Reheat Temperature 536 °C
Hot Reheat Pressure 14.78×104 N/m2
Hot Reheat Enthalpy (hhrh) corresponding to above P & T
[7]
3539.88 kJ/kg
Cold Reheat Temperature 357.1 °C
Cold Reheat Pressure 4.30×104 N/m2
Cold Reheat Enthalpy (hcrh) corresponding to above P & T
[7]
3118.20 kJ/kg
RH Spray(Mir) 1.6191 kg/h
Gross Generator Output(Pgen) 250 MW
Turbine H eat Rate= [Mms× (hms-hf)+ Mrhs×(hhrh-hcrh)
+Mir×(hhrh- hf)] / Pgen [8]
8856.58 kJ/kWh
Boiler Efficiency(ή) 0.83005
Unit Heat Rate=Turbine Heat Rate / ή 10669.93 kJ/kWh
Turbine Cycle Efficiency=3600/Turbine Heat Rate×100 [8] 40.78 %
Figure 2 : Various Losses of Thermal Power Plant
Here the total outlet energy at the exit of the turbine is found to be 33.84 %, as shown in fig.
Now, Total Coal Flow = 162 TPH
= 162×1000
3600
= 45 kg/Sec
GCV of coal = 15815.77 kJ/kg
Total Energy input = Coal Flow Rate×GCV of coal
100
= 45×15815.77 / 1000
= 711.7 MW
Total Energy Output = 250 MW
Efficiency = Output / Input
= 250 / 711.7
= 0.3512 (35.12%)
Increase in Efficiency Due to Regeneration, Super heater, Economizer & Air Pre-heater
= 35.12 – 33.84
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 213
= 1.28 %
Now, as we know that a huge part of the thermal energy is lost in the form of Dry Flue Gas, so super-
heater, economizer and air pre-heater are used in the thermal power plant to increase the efficiency
of the plant by utilizing the heat of the flue gas.
Total thermal energy input = 711.7 MW
Losses due to dry flue gas = 4% of total energy
= 4% of 711.7 MW
= 28.46 MW
To utilizing the heat of the flue gas, firstly, it passes through Super-heater, then, it passes through the
Air Pre-heater, then, it passes through the Economizer and at last it passes through chimney to
atmosphere as shown in fig. below.
Figure 3 : Flue Gas Flow
VII. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF AIR PREHEATER
Table 4 : Performance Analysis of Air Pre-Heater
Particulars Design
Value
Actual Value at 20/05/16,
10.00 AM
Air Quantity at APH outlet (Primary) 264.00 TPH 301.41 TPH
Air Quantity at APH outlet (Secondary) 612.25 TPH 732.56 TPH
Total Combustion air 877.25 TPH 1033.56 TPH
Air I/L Temperature of APH (Primary) 35.00 °C 39.00 °C
Air O/L Temperature of APH (Primary) (Topa) 313.00 °C 271.5 °C
Air I/L Temperature of APH (secondary) 35.00 °C 39.5 °C
Air O/L Temperature of APH (secondary) 319.00 °C 255.22°C
Oxygen Content in Flue Gas before APH(Oin) 3.56 % 2.86 %
Oxygen Content in flue gas after APH(Oout) 4.00 % 4.62 %
Flue gas APH inlet temperature(Tifg) 347.00 °C 320.9°C
Flue gas APH outlet temperature(Tofg) 140.00 °C 133.5 °C
APH effectiveness= (Topa-Ambient temperature) / (Tifg-Ambient
Temperature) [8]
89.10 % 82.62 %
Heat Pick-up in APH= (Ma×Specific heat of Flue Gas ×(Topa-
Ambient Temperature) [8]
23.61×106 kJ/h 23.61×106 kJ/h
Gross Generator Output 250 MW 250 MW
VII. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ECONOMIZER
Table 5 : Performance Analysis of Economizer
Particulars Design
Value
Actual Value of
at 20/05/16,
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 214
1.00 PM
Feed water Pressure at Economizer Inlet 17.44×104
N/m2
14.78×104 N/m2
Feed water flow (Mw) 703.7 TPH 740 TPH
Feed water temperature at the inlet (TFWi) 246 °C 203.1 °C
Feed water temperature at the outlet (TFWo) 286 °C 290 °C
Flue Gas Economizer Inlet Temperature (TFGi) 485 °C 411 °C
Flue Gas Economizer outlet Temperature
(TFGo)
347 °C 337 °C
Effectiveness of Economizer= (TFWo–
TFWi)/(TFGi –TFGo) [8]
16.73 41.79
Heat Pick-up in Economizer = Mw × Cp ×
(TFWo–TFWi) [8]
11.82×106 kJ/h 27×106 kJ/h
Figure 4 : Various Losses of Thermal Power Plant
VIII. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR MAIN STEAM TEMPERATURE
Table 6 : Cost Benefit Analysis for MS Temperature Correction
Particulars Actual Value of at 21/05/16,
10.00 AM
MS Temperature ( Measured) 535°C
MS Temperature ( Guaranteed) 540 °C
Deviation from Guaranteed value -5 °C
Heat Rate Correction Factor [8] 0.9985
Calculator Turbine Heat rate (From Table NO. 3) 8856.58 kJ/kWh
Actual Turbine Heat Rate considering Correction Factor 8843.29 kJ/kWh
Heat Rate will be decreased By improving MS Temperature 13.29 kJ/kWh
Output Power 250 MW
Annual Kcal Saved By Improving the MS Temperature Parameter = (Improved
heat rate×output power×24×365)
2.91×1010 Kj
GCV of oil (GCV) per liter 42756 kJ/L
Annual Total Tonn of Oil in liters Equivalent (TOE) Saved = {Annual kcal energy saved
/ (GCV×1000)}
681.95 TOE
Total Financial Saving @ 15000 per TOE Rs. 1,02,29,322
Investment Required NIL
Payback Period Immediate
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 215
IX. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR HOT REHEAT STEAM TEMPERATURE
Table 7 : Cost Benefit Analysis for HRH Outlet Temperature Correction
Particulars Actual Value of at
21/05/16,
1.00 PM
HRH Temperature ( Measured) 536 °C
HRH Temperature ( Guaranteed) 540 °C
Deviation from Guaranteed value -4 °C
Heat Rate Correction Factor [8] 0.9975
Calculator Turbine Heat rate (From Table NO. 3) 8856.58 kJ/kWh
Actual Turbine Heat Rate considering Correction Factor 8834.40 kJ/kWh
Heat Rate will be decreased By improving HRH Temperature 22.18 kJ/kWh
Output Power 250 MW
Annual Kcal Saved By Improving the HRH Temperature Parameter
(Improved heat rate×output power×24×365)
4.85×1010 Kj
GCV of oil (GCV) per liter 42756 kJ/L
Annual Total Tonnes of Oil Equivalent (TOE) Saved 1135.37 TOE
Total Financial Saving Rs. 1,70,38,114
Investment Required NIL
Payback Period Immediate
The hot re-heat steam temperature was near design value (536 °C as compared to guaranteed value
540 °C). There is a heat rate loss of 22.18 kJ/kWh.
X. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR CONDENSER BACK PRESSURE
Condenser Backpressure is the difference between the Atmospheric Pressure and the Vacuum
Reading of the Condenser, that is:
Backpressure = Atm. Pressure - Condenser Vacuum Pressure Reading. The condenser back pressure
was measured as 132.51 N/m2 against the guaranteed value of 105.30 N/m2. The increase in heat rate
due to poor condenser vacuum is 17.72 kJ/kWh. Table 8 : Cost Benefit Analysis for Condenser Back Pressure Correction
Parameter Actual Value of at 22/05/16,
10.00 AM
Condenser Back Pressure ( Measured) 132.51 N/m2
Condenser Back Pressure ( Guaranteed) 105.30 N/m2
Deviation from Guaranteed value 27.21 N/m2
Heat Rate Correction Factor [8] 0.9980
Calculator Turbine Heat rate (From Table NO. 3) 8856.58 kJ/kWh
Actual Turbine Heat Rate considering Correction Factor 8838.86 kJ/kWh
Heat Rate will be decreased By improving MS Pressure 17.72 kJ/kWh
Output Power 250 MW
Annual kcal Saved By Improving the MS Pressure Parameter= 3.88×1010 kJ
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 216
(Improved heat rate×output power×24×365)
GCV of oil (GCV) per liter 42756 kJ/L
Annual Total Tonnes of Oil Equivalent (TOE) Saved = {Annual Kcal
energy saved / (GCV×1000)}
903.53 TOE
Total Financial Saving @ 15000 per TOE Rs. 1,35,53,045
Investment Required NIL
Payback Period Immediate
XI. THERMAL INSULATION
The thermal insulation is one of the most important parameter to reduce the heat loss from various
parts. It is characterized by the critical radius of insulation which is defined as the radius up to which
heat loss decreases and after which heat loss increases.
Table 9 : Details of Heat Loss through Damaged Insulated Area
Name of the Non-
Insulated Area
Length of
Damaged Area
(m)
Surface Temp.
in °C
Non –
Insulated
Area (m2)
Surface
Heat Loss
kJ/h.m2
Total Heat
Loss kJ/h
HRH at 56 M 2 111 0.94 4185.09 3933.98
EX-15 at De-aerator Floor 2.5 149 1.18 7249.41 8554.30
Boiler Drum 15 125 98.01 5243.49 513914.45
HRH(R) at Turbine Floor 0.5 125 0.24 5618.02 1348.32
HRH(L) at Turbine Floor 0.5 110 0.24 4112.64 987.03
MS(L) at 34M 0.8 325 0.38 29351.49 11153.56
CRH(L) at 34M 0.8 159 0.38 8156.61 3099.51
XII. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR THERMAL INSULATION OF DAMAGED AREA
Table 10 : Cost Benefit Analysis for Thermal Insulation of Damaged Area
Particulars Actual Value of at
22/05/16,1.00 PM
Total Heat Loss (THL) 542991.58 kJ/h
Annual Heat Loss (AHL) of @ 365 Days of Running hour = (THL×24×365) .475×1010 Kj
GCV of Oil 42756 kJ/L
Boiler Efficiency(η) 83.005 %
Annual total tonnes of Equivalent Oil Loss (TOE) = {(AHL)/(GCV×η×1000)} 133.969 TOE
Financial Saving (FS) @ 15000 per TOE Rs. 20,09,547
Investment Required (IR) Rs. 10,00,000
Payback Period {(FS/IR)×12} 5.97 Months
XIII. ENERGY CONSERVATION OPTION FOR UNIT-7 OF PANIPAT THERMAL
POWER PLANT
Table 11 : Energy Conservation option for Unit-7 of Panipat Thermal Power Plant
Energy Conservation option for Unit-7 of Panipat Thermal Power Plant
S.I
No.
Improve
Efficiency
Energy Saving Financial
Saving
@15000 per
TOE in Rs.
Investment
in Rs.
Pay Back
Period in
Months A Turbine Heat
Rate
Turbine
cycle Heat
Rate
Energy Saving
in kJ /
Year
Annual
TOE
saving in
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 217
Improvement
in kJ/kWh
TOE
/Year
1 Improving
Main Steam
Temperature
13.29 2.91×1010 681.95 1,02,29,322 Nil Immediate
2 Improving
HRH Steam
Temp.
22.18 4.85×1010 1135.37 1,70,38,114 Nil Immediate
3 Improving
condenser MS
pressure
17.72 3.88×1010 903.53 1,35,53,045 Nil Immediate
B Thermal Insulation
5 Thermal
Insulation of
Damaged Area
NA .475×1010 133.969 20,09,547 1000000 5.97
Total 12.115×1010 2854.81 4,28,30,028 10,00,000 5.97
XIV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
1. Main Steam Temperature of boiler - The average main steam temperature was slightly lower
than design value (535 °C compared to guaranteed value of 540 °C). The heat rate loss due to
lower main steam temperature is 13.29 kJ/kWh by virtue of which a total of Rs.1,02,29,322
loss per annum to the plant.
In current we use the cascade PID control to control the MS Temperature. Neural Network
control is one of most popular alternative to control the MS Temperature exactly to the design
point. It is recommended to improve the heat rate by improving MS Temperature by improving
the control system.
2. Hot Re-Heat steam temperature of turbine- The hot re-heat steam temperature was 536 as
compared to guaranteed value 540 °C. There is a loss of 22.18 kJ/kWh by virtue of which a
total of Rs. 1,70,38,114 loss per annum to the plant.
It is recommended to improve the Heat Rate by improving HRH Temperature by improving the
control system.
3. Condenser Back Pressure - The condenser back pressure was measured as 132.51 N/m2
against the guaranteed value of 105.30 N/m2. The increase in heat rate due to poor condenser
vacuum is 17.72 kJ/kWh.
It is recommended for improve heat rate by improving the condenser vacuum by:
Improving the performance of vacuum ejector system.
Flange joints shall be tightened properly to avoid any ingress of air.
Exhaust side of the turbine shall be properly sealed to avoid any ingress of air.
4. Thermal insulation – The thermal insulation at various places of Boiler, Turbine and steam
pipe lines is damaged and same is furnished in the detail report. It is recommended for
improving heat rate, by applying new insulation to damaged insulated area.
5. The calculate boiler efficiency is at Turbine Maximum Continuous Rating (TMCR) 83.005%
against the design value of 86.52%.The shortfall is substantial considering the aging factor of
the plant. This can be partial recovered by implementing short term measures and
implementation of better O & M practices. The main reason for falling in efficiency is high un-
burnt carbon in bottom ash (10.96%) and poor combustion. This can be reduced by combustion
optimization such secondary air damper control, synchronization of burner tilt.
6. The flue gas temperature at APH found to be 133.5 ˚C against the design value of 140˚C.This
requires the detailed inspection of APH basket/replacement.
International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research (IJRTER) Volume 03, Issue 03; March - 2017 [ISSN: 2455-1457]
@IJRTER-2017, All Rights Reserved 218
XV. SCOPE OF FUTURE WORK
In spite of my best efforts, there still remains sufficient scope to extend this work further by
introducing various kinds of complexities about the domain area. These are below:
1. Energy Auditing For Draft system
2. Energy Auditing for Coal Mills
3. Energy Audit can also be made for other units
4. Ash handling or disposal system can also be Audit.
5. Energy Auditing for electro static precipitator
Energy Auditing for Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning System can also be done
REFERENCES 1. Guide to Energy Management, 7th Edition- kindle Edition by William Kennedy (author), Barney Cape Hart,
Wayne Turner.
2. Vikrant Bhardwaj, Rohit Garg, Mandeep Chahal, “Energy Audit of 250 MW Thermal Power Stations PTPS,
Panipat”, Proceedings of the National Conference on Trends and Advances in Mechanical Engineering, YMCA
University of Science & Technology, Faridabad, Haryana, Oct 19-20, 2012.
3. Paljinder singh, Parag Nijhawan, Suman Bhuller, “A Thiesis Report on Energy Auditing of Thermal Power Plant,
Department of Electrical and Instrumentation Engineering Thapar University,2013.
4. Vikas Duhan, Jitendar Singh, “Energy Audit of Rajiv Gandhi Thermal Power Plant Hisar”, JRPS International
Journal for Research Publication & Seminar Vol 05 Issue 02 March -July 2014.
5. Sourabh Das, Mainak Mukherjee, Surajit Mondal, “Thermal Audit of Power Plant” WSN 21 (2015) 68-82,
EISSN 2392-2192.
6. http://www.energyefficiencyasia.org/energyequipment/assessment_boiler_indirectmethod.html.
7. http://www.peacesoftware.de/einigewerte/wasser/_dampf_e.html
8. Steam Boiler Operation by James J. Jackson, Prentice-Hall Book Company, U.S, 1961.
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=pONSAAAAMAAJ&q=steam.boiler+operation+by+james+jackson&dq=stea
m.boiler+operation+by+james+j+jackson&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y.