The Boiler Feed Pump

And Variable Speed Operation

1
Contents

Introduction
Boiler Feed Pump Without Speed Control
The Boiler Feed Pump
Boiler Feed Pump and House Load
Boiler Feed Pump Performance Curve
Method of Flow Control
Speed Control and Savings
Variable Speed and the Affinity Laws
Speed Control and Fluid Coupling
Savings
Results

2
Introduction

Sarangani Energy Corporation is a 105-MWn subcritical regenerative thermal power

plant that utilizes the circulating fluidized bed combustion technology. Upon generating
energy to its end users, the plant itself needs some energy to power itself.
Being one of the many power industries, the plant is a player to a competition. The
plant only generates the energy that it is nominated to operate at. Because of this, it is
subject to a fluctuating load demand. Since the plant is designed for base-load operation, it
is not optimized at the aforementioned conditions. Peak efficiency is reached only at
maximum load. As the load decreases, the percentage of house load to gross generation
tends to increase. This means that the energy needed by the plant to generate energy at
low demand tends to not significantly change compared to that when it operates at full load.
As a consequence, plant efficiency suffers.
A way to address this problem is to identify the group of equipment that has
significant shares of house load. The thing with these equipment is the way they respond to
the changing demand to meet the system requirements. Another criterion is the availability
of options that may be implemented to complement or replace existing modes of operation.
Few of the major equipment that needs consideration are the fluid prime-movers,
namely the Primary Air Fan (PAF), the Secondary Air Fan (SAF), the Induced Draft Fan (IDF),
and the Boiler Feed Pump (BFP). The BFP and variable speed operation is the subject of
this paper, and no elaborate discussion is given for the specific type (fluid coupling in this
case) of the chosen variable speed control.

3
Boiler Feed Pump Without Speed Control

The Boiler Feed Pump

The Boiler Feed Pump is a device that imparts energy to the boiler feed water and in
doing so brings the water from deaerating pressure (outlet) to the boiler pressure. The
suction line is a run of pipe from the STG Bldg. rooftop (elevation 195001) to the ground
floor, and the discharge runs through the high pressure heaters, through the economizer to
the steam drum (elevation 41900). It is a horizontal multi-stage centrifugal pump. Table 1
summarizes some relevant details of the pump.

Design Data
Capacity, cu m/h 514
Suction Head, m 76
Discharge Head, m 1742
TDH, m 1666
Pump Shaft Input, kW 2547
Pump Efficiency, % 83.5
Motor Rated Output, kW 2850
Motor Full Load Speed, RPM 3584
Motor Efficiency @ 100% Rated Load, % 96
Motor Power Factor @ 100% Rated Load, PU 91

Data at Normal Operating Condition

Rated Capacity, cu m/h 455
TDH, m 1800
Pump Speed, RPM 3580
Efficiency, % 82
Table 1. Boiler feed pump design and operating data.

Boiler Feed Pump and House Load

Of all the auxiliary equipment, the BFP is the greatest consumer of house load. Table
2 shows the average power consumption of the BFP relative to the house load at different
%BMCR and gross loads, and Figure 1 shows a graphical relation between the house load
and the relatively flat profile of BFP power consumption.

Gross Net Power, House BFP BFP Power/House

%BMCR
Power, MW MW Load, MW Power, kW Load, %
50 57.52 48.13 9.39 2405.93 25.62
60 69.39 59.19 10.20 2528.94 24.79
70 80.83 70.45 10.38 2642.37 25.46
80 91.90 81.19 10.71 2725.07 25.44
90 105.22 93.91 11.31 2827.75 25.00
Table 2. Boiler feed pump house load fraction at different %BMCR.

1
Taken to be of the same level as the coal feeder floor.

2

Figure 1. Time series plot of house load and boiler feed pump power.

With this, the BFP becomes the greatest contributor to the house load gross
generation ratio, as illustrated in Figure 3. Notice that a trough in the gross power curve
corresponds to a crest in the house load-gross power ratio curve, vice versa. This means
that when gross power decreases, house load tends to not decrease or may actually
decrease but the change is so small that the ratio is being driven up. It is now apparent that
the behavior of the house load during low demand drives the plant efficiency low. If only the
house load could vary in the same proportion as the demand, then there would be little
effect in the efficiency of the plant during variable load operation. Below is a density plot of
the net power generated by the plant for one year from 26 Apr 2016 to 25 Apr 2017. From
the five-number summary, it is clear that the plant operates at less than 85.52 MWn (or
81.45% of rated net capacity) 50% of the time.

Figure 2. Density plot of untrimmed net power data (left). Notice outliers near zero generation. Data is trimmed (right) from net
power>30 to flow<110 to remove these outliers.

2
This time series is obtained from historical data from 06-Mar to 12-Mar 2017, and hereafter shall be used as data reference unless
specified.

5

Figure 3. Time series plot of gross power and house load-gross power ratio.

Figure 4 is a scatter plot of feed water flow vs. head for a one-year operation of the
3
BFP . It is apparent that the pump does not operate at its rated capacity all of the time. This
is a good indication for potential energy savings. To illustrate this more clearly, Figure 5 is a
density plot, together with its five-number summary, that shows the distribution of flow rates
over the year. Data is trimmed to remove outliers or flows at non-normal operating
conditions. The five-number summary shows that the pump operates at less than 366.89
cu m/h (or 80.64% of rated flow) 50% of the time. Pump efficiency at this operating point
is approximately 79%.

Figure 4. Scatter plot of BFP operating points for a year from 26 Apr 2016 to 25 Apr 2017 distributed over a wide range of flow rates.

3
Time interval is the same as that of the data for net power.

6

Figure 5. Density plot of untrimmed flow data (left). Notice outliers near the zero flow. Data is trimmed (right) from flow>175 to
flow<455 to remove these outliers.

Boiler Feed Pump Performance Curve

A basic pump performance curve is a graph of flow versus head for a particular pump
system. It shows the head developed for every amount of flow, from shut-off to a few
percent over the rated flow.
Two curves are of
interest the pump curve and
the system curve. The pump
curve is specific to the pump.
This curve is correct as long as
the pump is operating properly
and there are no changes in
pump geometry and speed. The
system curve tells how the
system reacts to the changes in
the operating conditions
especially in hydraulic losses. It
follows the relationship among
all parameters affected by the
flow conditions. The
intersection of the two curves
represents the operating point.
Usually, at design conditions,
the operating point is the point
with the highest efficiency, and
is called the best efficiency
point. It is the point where when
deviated from or is operated
Figure 6. A performance curve with pump, system, efficiency and shaft power curves. away from in either direction,

7
would result in a reduction in pump efficiency. The other curves are the efficiency curve and
shaft power curve. The NPSH curve is generally shown in pump curves but is not considered
in this paper. The efficiency curve determines the efficiency at different flow rates; and the
shaft power curve is for water power, which is the product of the fluids specific weight, flow
and head, all divided by the pump efficiency.

Method of Flow Control

The BFP, just like most of other power plant equipment, operates depending on the
demand of the system. For a pumps case, the main parameter that is subject to change
and is often regulated is the flow. Thus, there must be a means to control flow. In this plant
however, the method used is simple but is not economical.
Flow control is accomplished by throttling, with the use of a feed water control valve
that adds a pressure drop to the system which increases the total head to reduce the
amount of flow that the pump delivers.
Shown in Figure 8 is the condition at full load. The pump and system curves intersect
at the rated (MCR) condition.

Figure 7. The boiler feed pump performance curve with its operating point at MCR condition.

8
 At reduced flows where throttling is used, the operating point shifts to the left of the
curve. To accomplish this, the system curve has to follow the shift leftward, becoming
steeper. The effect of this is that the flow requirement is met but the pump develops a larger
head. It might be concluded that the water power developed at this condition is way smaller
since

Pw QH,

where Pw is the water power, Q is the flow rate, and H is the total head, and that the increase
in head is compensated by a decrease in flow. The area under the pump curve (shaded
light-green) also represents the above proportionality (see Figure 9). The compensation is
shown by a considerable change of the shaded area. Notice, however, that the pump
efficiency at this point is reduced. That is why the change in water power is minimal.
Deviation of flow from the design point (usually leftward) results in a loss of efficiency. Thats
why the pump must, as much as possible, be operated at or near the design or the best
efficiency point.

Figure 8. Flow control by throttling. An increase in head and a decrease in flow results in minimal shaft power reduction due to a drop
in efficiency.

9
Speed Control and Savings

Variable Speed and the Affinity Laws

In a pumping operation where throttling is the means of flow control, there is not
much that can be done with efficiency. It is a very straightforward process. If the system
demands a particular flow, the valve is opened at a particular setting, no more, no less. And
the efficiency is dictated by the location of the operating point along the pump curve.
A better control method would be that the operating point is positioned at a lower
flow, and that the head is reduced as well so that there is not much leftward movement
along the pump curve and that water power is significantly reduced. But this is to say that
the operating point must go out of the curve, specifically diagonally downward to the left
(Figure 10).

Figure 9. A better flow control. Flow and head are both reduced resulting in a small change in efficiency.

This is accomplished by changing either the geometry or the rotational speed of the pump.
The former is not an option since an impeller trim is a permanent change, which is not
suitable for the process at hand. However, the latter would produce the same effect. Varying
the speed of the pump would enable the pump to operate at a lower flow rate and lower
head with the same efficiency as that of a higher flow and head. The relationship between
speed and other parameters is shown by the affinity laws.

10
 The affinity laws describe how changes in speed affect
flow, head and power. The first tells the direct relationship
between speed and flow. The second is the direct square
relationship between speed and head, and consequently the
same relationship between flow and head. The third is for power,
and its cubic relationship with speed. From these, it can be
readily seen that a small change in speed results in a large
power savings since the fractional reduction of speed is raised
to the third power.

Speed Control and Fluid Coupling

Speed control can be attained in different ways. Among them is through the use of a
fluid coupling. A fluid coupling is nothing but a coupling that interfaces the drive to the driven
machine with the use of a fluid to transmit rotational energy. The driver acts as a centrifugal
pump that imparts energy to the fluid and that this energy is transmitted to the driven side,
which acts as a turbine. The magnitude of the transmitted torque depends on the radial level
of the fluid since a moving surface in contact with it creates a velocity gradient along the
fluid section.
Variation of the fluid level inside the fluid coupling is governed by a scoop tube (See
Figure 11). This tube recirculates the portion of the fluid through its opening, thus the
position of its tip determines the fluid level.

Figure 10. Fluid coupling section view.

The thinner the fluid, the greater slip, i.e. the difference between the driver speed and the
driven speed increases. This is so since there is no variation in motor speed, it is constant
the whole time that it operates regardless of flow.

Slip s= Driver Speed -(Driven Speed)

11
 This slip is also responsible for a loss in overall efficiency. Since low flow demands
greater slip, a fluid coupling is ineffective in extremely low flows. Also, the energy that the
motor delivers but is not utilized must go somewhere. This energy is wasted in the form of
heat.

Savings

The effectiveness of a process control modification is manifested in how much it

translates to savings. The savings computed here only relates the power consumption
assuming speed control relative to that without speed control, at different %BMCR. Flow
requirement is obtained from historical data. The average feed water flow rates at specific
main steam flows are obtained to represent the requirement. The operating head
requirement is essentially same throughout the range of flows, which is greater than or equal
to 150 barg. See Table 3.

REQUIREMENTS
%BMCR FLOW, cu m/h HEAD, bar
50 221.59 150
60 271.39 150
70 315.30 151
80 351.02 152
90 397.32 153
Table 3. Flow and head requirements at different %BMCR.

Power consumption for the above flow requirements are obtained by getting the shaft
power from the pump performance curve and then factoring in the motor efficiency to get
the motor power.

REQUIREMENTS
%BMCR FLOW, cu m/h HEAD, bar Power4, kW
50 221.59 150 2065.00
60 271.39 150 2198.83
70 315.30 151 2355.44
80 351.02 152 2484.73
90 397.32 153 2609.49
Table 4. Power requirements various flow-head combination at different %BMCR.

It might be tempting to use the affinity laws directly. For instance, the flow
requirement at 70%BMCR is considered. Setting the BEP as a reference point, a new speed,
head, and power can be calculated and are shown in Table 5.

Case SPEED, RPM FLOW, cu m/h HEAD, m POWER, kW

MCR 3580 455.00 1800.00 2736.00
70%BMCR 2481 315.30 864.37 948.38
Table 5. Speed, flow, head, and power at 70%BMCR obtained by applying the affinity laws.

4
96% is taken as the efficiency at all %BMCR.

12
The significant savings is due to the fact that a decrease in flow will result in a significant
decrease in friction head since it varies as the square of fluid velocity which is proportional
to the amount of volume flow. However, this approach is only valid if the system curve has
its vertical intercept at 0. The system curve itself is a second degree curve that follows the
relationship

2
H Q .

The affinity laws are correct in this case since finding a new operating point is no more than
locating a new point along the curve using the squared property of parabola

2
H1 Q1
= .
H2 Q22

In this particular case,

however, the system
curve does not intersect
the origin as shown in
Figure 12. The reason for
this is the systems static
head. In the zero-
vertical-intercept case,
friction loss dominates
the total head whereas in
the non-zero case,
friction loss is way
smaller than the static
head. This static head is
the head innate to the
system, i.e. it is always
present regardless of the
Figure 11. BFP curve showing the actual system curve. The curve assumes a flat shape due to amount of flow. This
a large static head. head arises due to the
presence of a pressure
differential between the steam drum (Figure 13) and the deaerator (Figure 14). Added to the
static head, though relatively small, is the elevation head, equal to the vertical distance
between the said points.

Static Head=134-6 barg

=128 barg
=1433 m

Because of the static head, the system curve assumes a flat shape. Directly using the affinity
laws will overestimate the savings.

13

Figure 12. DCS image showing steam drum pressure at full load.

Figure 13. DCS image showing BFP suction pressure.

The approach done in this case is simple but not that straightforward. The whole procedure
is done in MS excel spreadsheet. First, the pump curve at design speed is set as the
reference curve. Then at a specific point along the curve, the affinity laws are applied to
locate another point outside the curve which has the same efficiency but with a reduced
flow rate and head. See Figure 16.

14

The degree of reduction
depends on the new
speed desired. First a
3500 RPM-speed is
selected, then a 50 RPM-
decrement is applied for
the subsequent curves.
This is done on many
points along the curve
until a new pump curve is
created, but with a
different speed, as
shown in Figure 17.
There would be an
unlimited number of
curves that can be
created this way. But
since there is only a finite
amount of data that can
be practically handled,
Figure 14. Location of lower flow and lower from initial operating point using the affinity laws.
only a number of curves
are generated, namely
until 2850 RPM.

The next step is to
simply identify any
particular flow
requirement. Flow at
50%BMCR is taken as
an example. This is
represented by a vertical
line at flow = 221.59 cu
m/h. This line is going to
intersect all of the curves,
but when head is
restricted, there are only
specific curves that are
going meet the criteria.
These curves are
evaluated by calculating
the power for every flow-
head combination using
the equation
Figure 15. Application of affinity laws at multiple points along the original pump curve to
generate a new curve with a different speed.
gQH
P=
(1-%s)EM

15
 where P is the power
input to the motor, is
the density of feed water
(991. kg/cu m), g is the
acceleration due to
gravity, s is the fluid
coupling slip, and EM is
the motor efficiency.
Whichever curve has the
lowest water power is
picked as the new
operating point.

The whole process is

done by launching the
input window in the
spreadsheet. The desired
flow is set with a
tolerance value set at +/-
10 cu m/h. This is to
make sure that for
Figure 16. New pump curves created with the affinity laws, from 3500 to 2850 RPM. whatever input, there are
a number of values
considered for comparison since the data set is discrete and is spaced by a finite value.
Thus, for an input of 221.59, the values 211.59 and 231.59 are interpreted as valid.

Next step is to input the

desired head. Unlike that
for flow, no tolerance
value is included since
the input is interpreted
as the minimum head
requirement and values
greater than this is
correct. Then if both
values are set, the
Figure 17. Flow and head input window.
selection process
begins. An iteration
process takes care of this by looking at all flow values for all curves. If the desired flow is
within the allowable range, the corresponding head value is checked if it is at least the
desired value. If it is, the flow-head combination is stored in memory. Otherwise, the iteration
proceeds until all combinations are checked.
A spreadsheet is then generated. This contains all the combinations that has met the
criteria, including other parameters, both given and calculated. See Table. The power
consumption without speed control is the corresponding power for the flow-head
combination at the rated speed (3580 RPM). The difference between this and all other power
consumptions are included in the table, the least among them is highlighted. The entire
process is repeated for all %BMCR.

16
 Power w/ Power
Speed, Flow Rate, Head, Efficiency, Power w/o Power
SPD CTRL, Savings,
RPM cu m/h bar % SPD CTRL, kW Savings, %
kW kW

3580 215.00 203.37 62.40% 2027.48 2027.48 0.00 0.00%

3580 220.00 203.17 63.20% 2027.48 2046.42 -18.94 -0.93%
3580 225.00 202.98 64.00% 2027.48 2064.78 -37.30 -1.84%
3580 230.00 202.69 64.80% 2027.48 2081.61 -54.14 -2.67%
3500 215.08 194.19 63.20% 2027.48 1955.98 71.50 3.53%
3500 219.97 194.01 64.00% 2027.48 1973.53 53.95 2.66%
3500 224.86 193.73 64.80% 2027.48 1989.63 37.85 1.87%
3500 229.75 193.45 65.60% 2027.48 2005.20 22.28 1.10%
3450 212.01 188.68 63.20% 2027.48 1900.49 126.99 6.26%
3450 216.83 188.50 64.00% 2027.48 1917.55 109.93 5.42%
3450 221.65 188.23 64.80% 2027.48 1933.19 94.29 4.65%
3450 226.47 187.96 65.60% 2027.48 1948.32 79.17 3.90%
3450 231.28 187.69 66.40% 2027.48 1962.97 64.51 3.18%
3400 213.69 183.08 64.00% 2027.48 1862.38 165.10 8.14%
3400 218.44 182.82 64.80% 2027.48 1877.55 149.93 7.39%
3400 223.18 182.55 65.60% 2027.48 1892.25 135.23 6.67%
3400 227.93 182.29 66.40% 2027.48 1906.48 121.00 5.97%
3350 215.22 177.48 64.80% 2027.48 1822.74 204.74 10.10%
3350 219.90 177.22 65.60% 2027.48 1837.01 190.47 9.39%
3350 224.58 176.97 66.40% 2027.48 1850.82 176.66 8.71%
3350 229.26 176.71 67.20% 2027.48 1864.20 163.28 8.05%
3300 212.01 172.22 64.80% 2027.48 1768.74 258.74 12.76%
3300 216.62 171.97 65.60% 2027.48 1782.58 244.90 12.08%
3300 221.23 171.73 66.40% 2027.48 1795.99 231.49 11.42%
3300 225.84 171.48 67.20% 2027.48 1808.97 218.51 10.78%
3300 230.45 171.23 68.00% 2027.48 1821.53 205.95 10.16%
3250 213.34 166.80 65.60% 2027.48 1728.97 298.51 14.72%
3250 217.88 166.56 66.40% 2027.48 1741.98 285.50 14.08%
3250 222.42 166.32 67.20% 2027.48 1754.56 272.92 13.46%
3250 226.96 166.08 68.00% 2027.48 1766.75 260.73 12.86%
3250 231.49 165.68 68.80% 2027.48 1776.84 250.64 12.36%
3200 214.53 161.48 66.40% 2027.48 1688.79 338.69 16.71%
3200 218.99 161.24 67.20% 2027.48 1700.99 326.49 16.10%
3200 223.46 161.01 68.00% 2027.48 1712.81 314.67 15.52%
3200 227.93 160.62 68.80% 2027.48 1722.59 304.89 15.04%
3150 215.57 156.24 67.20% 2027.48 1648.25 379.23 18.70%
3150 219.97 156.02 68.00% 2027.48 1659.70 367.78 18.14%
3150 224.37 155.64 68.80% 2027.48 1669.18 358.30 17.67%
3150 228.77 155.27 69.60% 2027.48 1678.28 349.20 17.22%
3100 212.15 151.32 67.20% 2027.48 1596.34 431.14 21.26%
3100 216.48 151.10 68.00% 2027.48 1607.43 420.05 20.72%
3100 220.81 150.74 68.80% 2027.48 1616.61 410.86 20.27%
Table 6. Summary of all valid operating points with all speeds considered at 50%BMCR, with the highest power savings highlighted.

17
Results

Below is the summary of the power savings with variable speed operation using fluid
coupling at all %BMCR.

REQUIREMENTS OPERATING POINT

FC
Pump Power W/O Power
FLOW, HEAD, SPEED, FLOW, HEAD, Power Percent
%BMCR Efficiency, SPD CTRL, W/ FC,
cu m/h barg RPM cu m/h barg Savings, Savings
% kW kW
kW
50 221.59 150 3100 212.15 151.32 67.20 2027.48 1596.34 431.14 21.26%
60 271.39 150 3150 263.97 152.26 74.00 2179.05 1786.06 392.99 18.03%
70 315.30 151 3200 308.38 153.33 77.80 2334.24 1967.37 366.87 15.72%
80 351.02 152 3250 344.97 154.63 80.40 2462.37 2114.76 347.60 14.12%
90 397.32 153 3350 388.34 159.02 82.00 2586.01 2328.76 257.25 9.95%
Table 7. Summary of results.

Figure 18. Summary of results (%BMCR vs Power Savings, Percent Savings and Efficiency).

18
 Filename: paper_VSO.docx
Folder: /Users/erickflores/Library/Containers/com.microsoft.Word/Data/Documents
Template: /Users/erickflores/Library/Group Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/User
Content.localized/Templates.localized/Normal.dotm
Title:
Subject:
Author: Microsoft Office User
Keywords:
Comments:
Creation Date: 6/2/17 8:48:00 AM
Change Number: 2
Last Saved On: 6/2/17 8:48:00 AM
Last Saved By: Microsoft Office User
Total Editing Time: 1 Minute
Last Printed On: 6/2/17 8:48:00 AM
As of Last Complete Printing
Number of Pages: 18
Number of Words: 3,571 (approx.)
Number of Characters: 20,358 (approx.)