Transcript Document

Coordinated
Performance Program
&
Corporate Culture
Presented by:
Barry Rederstorff, Staff Engineer
Engineering Services
APP Site Visit
October 30 – November 4, 2006
What is your #1 Priority in the Power Plant?
Safety
Legal / Environmental Compliance
KEEP IT RUNNING!
Capacity
Efficiency
2
What Determines Efficiency?
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
D
e
s
i
g
n
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
3
2005
2003
2001
9000
1999
1997
1995
1993
1991
1989
1987
1985
1983
1981
1979
1977
1975
1973
1971
1969
1967
1965
1963
1961
1959
1957
1955
1953
1951
1949
1947
1945
Heat Rate - Btu/kWh
AEP System vs US Average Fossil Heat Rate
17000
16000
15000
14000
13000
12000
11000
US Fossil
10000
AEP Fossil
8000
4
What Determines Efficiency?
• Design
–Cycle
–Equipment
–Cooling
–Emission Controls
5
AEP Operated Coal-fired Units
• First & Largest Operator of Double
Reheat Units (worldwide)
• 10 Active – 450 to 800 MW
• 2 Retired
• Largest Coal-fired Units – 6 x 1300
MW
• 20 supercritical units
Cardinal Plant
– All AEP fossil units built since 1963
were supercritical (does not include
units acquired in C&SOE & CSW
mergers.
Gavin Unit 1 – 1300MW
6
AEP Efficiency Accomplishments
U. S. Firsts
1924
First reheat generating unit -- Philo Plant
1941
First very high pressure (2,300 psi), natural-circulation
generating unit -- Twin Branch Plant
1949
First high-pressure, high-temperature combination (2,000 psi
& 1,050 F main steam & 1,000 F reheat) -- Twin Branch Plant
1950
First heat rate below 10,000 Btu/kwh -- Philip Sporn Plant
1957
First supercritical-pressure steam (4,500 psi) and super-high temperature steam
(1,150 F) & double-reheat -- Philo Plant
1960
First Heat Rate below 9,000 Btu/kwh -- Clinch River Plant
1966
First control room simulator to train power plant operating personnel -- Cardinal Plant
1981
First application of sliding-pressure technique on supercritical-pressure generating
units -- Gen. James M. Gavin Plant
7
What Determines Efficiency?
• Maintenance
–Inspection Interval
–Level of Refurbishment
–Availability for outages
8
What Determines Efficiency?
• Operation
–Training
–Staffing
–Monitoring (availability of Data)
9
What is Required
• Funding ($)
• Culture
– Will – Dedication – Attitude
• Culture is a driving force
– Can help offset lack of resources (both $ and
staff)
– The wrong culture can impair the effectiveness
of adequate resources
10
Corporate
Culture
11
Efficiency Improvement for Existing Plants
•Corporate Culture
Accountability
Organization
Corporate philosophy for Performance
Communication
Proactive programs
12
Efficiency Improvement for Existing Plants
•Corporate Culture
Accountability
Organization
Corporate philosophy for Performance
Communication
Proactive programs
Accountability
13
Accountability
• Who Does What?
• What are the Incentives?
– Organizational
• Internal Competition
– Compensation
• Performance Based
– Pride
14
Organizational Accountability
Generation
Fossil & Hydro Generation
Region Engineering
Plants
Engineering, Projects
& Field Service
Engineering Services
15
Efficiency Improvement for Existing Plants
•Corporate Culture
Accountability
Organization
Corporate philosophy for Performance
Communication
Proactive programs
Organization
16
Supporting Organization
•Structure
– No Silos
– All Stakeholders Must be
Organizationally Integrated
– Cross Organization Teams
•Generation Performance Team
•Capabilities
–Engineering Specialists
–Experience
–Thermal Performance Analysis
•Heat Balance Modeling (PEPSE)
•Goals Established for
– Incentive Compensation
– Business Plan
– Management Overview
17
Efficiency Improvement for Existing Plants
•Corporate Culture
Accountability
Organization
Corporate philosophy for Performance
Communication
Proactive programs
Philosophy
18
Corporate Philosophy for Performance
IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE
19
Efficiency Improvement for Existing Plants
•Corporate Culture
Accountability
Organization
Corporate philosophy for Performance
Communication
Proactive programs
Communication
20
Communication
• Information on heat rate performance is readily
available:
– Actual/Design/Baseline Information
• GADS (Generating Availability Data System
• Heat Rate Deviation Report (HRDR)
• Heat Balances
• Thermal Performance Kits
• On-line heat rate monitoring system - PI/OM
• Communicating/Sharing across System
– Region Heat Rate Meetings
– Generation Performance Team (GPT)
21
AEP GADS
G ENERATING
A
ATA
D
S
VAILABILITY
YSTEM
FUEL CONSUMPTION
SERVICE HOURS
AVAILABILITY
BASELINE HEAT RATE
OUTAGE CAUSES
HEAT RATE DEVIATION
COSTS
HEAT RATE
GENERATION
CAPACITY FACTOR
LOAD DISTRIBUTION
•AEP GADS
•Uses North America Electric Reliability Council Standard definitions
•Data is reported to NERC
•Additional data is added to generate custom internal reports
EFOR
22
AEP GADS Standard Reports
Consolidated Data
• Operating Performance Data Summary
Event Data
• Unit Descriptive Listing of Outages & Curtailments
• Continuous Operation Report
• Unit Performance Hours
• Unit Performance Statistics
• Cause Code Summary
Performance & Cost Data
• Generating Plant Production Cost Data
• Coal & Production Expense Summary
• Plant Performance & Fuel Consumption
• Unit Performance & Fuel Consumption
• Heat Rate Statistics
• HR Deviation by Series
• Unit Loading & Starts
23
Efficiency Improvement for Existing Plants
•Corporate Culture
Accountability
Organization
Corporate philosophy for Performance
Communication
Proactive programs
Proactive Programs
24
Routine Heat Rate
Improvement Guidelines
1. Drain Valve Leakage
2. Steam Trap Leakage
3. Reheat Steam Attemperation
4 Sootblowing Schedules
5. On-line Monitoring of
Operator Controllable
Losses (PI/OM Screens)
8. Boiler Flue Gas Exit Losses
9. Steam Temperature
Thermocouple Calibration
or Replacement
10. Steam Temperature
Controls Tuning
11. Feedwater Heater TTD and
DCA
6. Auxiliary Power
7. Condensers
25
Infrared Thermography
Heat Rate Improvements
at Kanawha River Plant
Unit 1
26
Before 2004 GBIR
Managers used the vent stack to
determine if the unit was on-line
Average 15,000 #/hr make up to the boiler
27
Find the Leaks
• Steam Cycle places to look
–
–
–
–
–
Problem valves
High value valves
Blow down tank
Miscellanous Drain Tank
Condenser Drip Leg
• Scans required about 24
hours total (field and
reporting).
After 2004 GBIR, Average 6,000 #/hr make up to the boiler
28
Identify Benefits
• Make-up Water $ Savings
• Fuel $ Savings
• Reduced Maintenance $
– Fewer Pulverizers needed
for Full Load
– Boiler less stressed
• Reduced Emissions $
• Culture
– Increased Support for the
PdM program
– Morale Improvements
29
Drain Valve Leakage Penalty Estimator – Subcritical Unit
Additional Heat Input to Compensate foraa 10,000 lb/h Steam Leak to Condenser
Typical for a Subcritical Unit
12,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
Additional Heat Input - Btu / h
10,000,000
100% Throttle Flow
75% Throttle Flow
2,000,000
50% Throttle Flow
40% Throttle Flow
0
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Full Load Pressure at Source of Leak - psia
30
On-Line Monitoring
Sample PI OM Screens
31
PI/OM Screens (Partial Listing)
• Heat Rate Controllable Cost
–
–
–
–
–
–
Main Steam Pressure Penalty
MS Temperature Penalty
RH Temperature Penalty
Attemperation Penalty
Excess Air Penalty
Auxiliary Power Penalty
• Turbine/Condenser Screen
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Turbine Eff. & Penalty
Condenser Penalty
Waterbox Differentials
Condenser Air Leakage
Air Heater Schematic
Dry gas loss penalty
SCAH penalty
• Feedwater Heaters Screen
–
–
–
–
HP Heater TTD
HP Heater DCA
LP Heater TTD
LP Heater DCA
• Boiler Screen
– Tube Temperature Data
– Sootblower Optimization
• Environmental Screen
– Opacity
– NOx
– SO2
• Business Summary Screen
– Dispatch Accuracy
– Heat Rate
– Commercial Availability
• Miscellaneous
– Water Loss Trends
32
Business Summary Screen
Shift Total Unaudited ICP Score Card
Muskingum River
Dispatch Accuracy Total
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
8/27/02 10:29:04 AM
622 MWG.IPW
Unit 4
Unit 5
$0
$0
$0
Net Load (Mw)
Dispatch Load Mw (High/Low)
Mw Error
Current Steady-State Accuracy ($)
92.3
90 / 90
101.4
100 / 100
110
110 / 110
2
$0
1
$0
-0
Current Ramp Rate Accuracy ($)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Fuel Efficiency Total
$28
$276
$84
$48
$435
Actual Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)
11,118
11,184
10,290
11,032
10,362
10,553
Bad
Bad
9,274
9,398
Target Heat Rate (Btu/Kwh)
Target HR Dev. (Btu/Kwh)
66
747
191
Bad
Fuel Efficiency per Hr ($)
$14
$94
$34
Bad
$142
$189
$146
$-1,560
Commercial Avail. Total
Dispatch Cost
Current Hourly Market Price
Current Spark Spread
Comm. Avail. Credited Load
Extended Load Credit
$18.78 /Mw
$23.22 /Mw
$-21
$-8
-0.4
0 / 0
-0
$0
$0
Dispatch Acc.
80
80
80
$17.98 /Mw
$13.94 /Mw
$23.22/Mw
$23.22 /Mw
$23.22 /Mw
$5.24 /Mw
190
190
205
0
610
0
0
0
0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$325
Current Comm. Avail. per Hr ($)
$96
$106
$85
$-987
$698
Unaudited P&L per Shift
$169
$464
$230
$-1,519
$1,998
$0
$0
Current
CA Left
on Shift
Table P&L
$/ Hr Lost $
Unaudited
Total
$
$0
$
$-1,074
$
$0
Total CA Left on Table Lost
$0
Current NOx Projection $/hr
$847
$-95
$224
Total NOx Projection $/shift
$2,857
$-125
$1,660
$0
$0
$-1,715
Comm. Avail.
900016 80
-20
80 -2080 9000
-1 -1 10
Fuel Eff.
Comm. Avail.
230 230 230220
23010500
100
80
80
0
-3000 -25000
NOx Trend
50
70
0 21
10500
220 1.5
1 300
0 1.5251.525 25 25 25 250
20
9000100 0.5
-1 0-30 0.50 0.50
80 100
80 9000
-100 10
-80 14
0
0
0
Unit 4
Dispatch Acc.
Fuel Eff.
Comm. Avail.
230 230 230 250
230 11500
50 0 70
25 21
12500
250 0
80
80
10
-15 15
8500
-50
80 -50
80 9500
-40 -250
0
-1200 -1800
Unit 5
Dispatch Acc.
Ext. Load Avail. per Hr ($)
Fuel Eff.
Unit 3
$9.27 /Mw
$4.86 /Mw
80
Dispatch Acc.
$1,584
$18.35 /Mw
900010 -10000
-10 0 -140
-500
80 -1080 9000
-7 -110
0
0 0
230 230 230120
23010500
1 1 70
10500
22 160
120 0
136
$136
$23.22 /Mw
NOx Trend
Unit 2
Dispatch Acc.
$18.59 /Mw
Comm. Avail.
Fuel Eff.
230 230 23029023010600
0 1 70
10600
70 40000
290 2 0 300 02 2
597.6
600 / 600
-3
$0
$4.63 /Mw
$4.43 /Mw
Unit 1
Fuel Eff.
630 630 6309800
60 650
0
Comm. Avail.
NOx Trend
90
90 1 700
16
10100
630700 300
2 2 2 2
50
10
300 300 3009000
-140 300
-1609300
300300 010
Units 1-5 Left on Table
$0
-1 00
0 0 0 0
Units 1-5 Comm. Avail.
16
14000
-25000
-20000
This information is considered proprietary and confidential in regards to system operation and should not be distributed.
All information is unaudited. For audited information refer to tapis summary screens.
33
0
Feedwater Heaters Help Screen
Heater Troubleshooting Guideline
Heater Penalty
High
Did
TTD
Increase
Yes
No
Did
DCA
Increase
Yes
Check
Heater
Venting
Done
No
Yes
Check for low
heater level
Did
DCA
Increase
No
Adjust Level to
set design set
point
Done
Check for heater
tube leaks & inc.
drain flow
Write J.O. to
check for tube
leaks. take htr
out if necessary
Done
Is there
High Htr
Level ?
Yes
Adjust Level
to design set
point
Done
No
Partion Plate
Maybe Leaking
Write J.O. to
check partion
plater
Done
34
35
GPT Mission
• Develop an integrated performance monitoring
program for the entire Fossil & Hydro Generation
fleet in order to provide a disciplined approach to
monitoring and tracking of performance to support
the improvement of System Heat Rate
• Deliver a program that includes accountability,
data collection, analysis, and retention, an
educational program, and a reporting/ distribution/
communication system
36
Components of an Integrated Program
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Centralized Accountability and Coordination
Education Program
Monitoring System
Test Program
Data Evaluation and Test Trends
Maintenance of Records
Management and Engineering Reports
Audit for Quality and Compliance
Benchmark other Utilities
37
GPT Make-up
F&H Mgt
Sponsor
Region
Engineering
Generation
Performance
Team
Engineering
Services
Plants
38
Team Organization
Generation
Performance
Team
Region HR
Champions
Plant HR
Champions
39
Roles and Responsibilities
Generation
Performance
Team
Establish and coordinate the overall
program
Engineering
Services
Provide a system heat rate overview and
Expertise
Region
Engineering
(Region Heat Rate
Champions)
Support Plant Heat Rate Champions
and plants
Plant Heat Rate
Champions
Support heat rate monitoring and
improvement activities at their plant
40
Education Program
• Audience
• Subject Matter
– Test/Analysis Personnel
– Equipment/System
Engineers
– Operators
– Management
T
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modeling Software
Test Instruments
Test Procedures
Test Analysis
Power System Concepts
Data Relevance
Optimization
• Providers
– Simulator Learning Center
– Generation Performance Team
– Engineering Services
41
Formal Testing Program
• 1960s
– Extensive Program
– Faded away by 1970s due to focus on capacity
• 1988
– New Test Program Defined in response to Regulatory Interest
– Backed by inclusion in the Incentive Compensation Plan
• 1990s
– Scope Reduced to Mostly Voluntary due to Staffing and
Organization Issues Resulting from Restructuring for Competition
• 2005
– Revised Voluntary Program to align with Instrumentation and Data
Collection Improvements
• Future
– Full Automation of Collection & Calculation with Station
Instrumentation
42
Formal Testing
• Requirements
– Corporate Guideline identifies tests and frequency
• Instructions for Performing Tests & Calculating
Results
– In-house developed Performance Test Manual
• Type of Instrumentation
–
–
–
–
Dedicated Test Instrumentation
Installed Plant Instrumentation
PI Data Collection System
Combination of the above
43
Components of an Integrated Program
• Data Evaluation and Test Trends
– Automate to the extent possible
– Look at trends, do not just accumulate and file
• Management and Engineering Reports
– Formatting Important
• Good Summary
• Graphs of trends
• Maintenance of Records
– Retrievability
– Completeness
– For Tests, Design Basis, Computer Models, etc.
44
45
Heat Rate Deviation Report (HRDR)
The Heat Rate Deviation is the difference between
the Actual Heat Rate and Baseline Heat Rate.
This tool is designed to breakdown the unit
deviation into individual equipment and
operational components.
46
HRDR Benefits
– Replaces time consuming, manual to semiautomated data collection and calculations requiring
a high level of expertise with limited availability of
results to others outside of the plant
– Engineering or management tool, unlike real time
displays that are more of an operations tool
– Provides consistent results across the system for
easy unit to unit comparison
– Widespread data availability
47
HRDR Summary Screen
48
HRDR Summary Screen
(Lower Portion)
49
HRDR Detail Screen
50
Questions?
51
Come Join Us
Performance Focus Session
52
Performance Focus Session
• Barry Rederstorff, Engineering Services
– Generation Performance Team Lead
• Generation
Performance Team
–
–
–
–
Charlie Powell
Kim Stalnaker
Dan Keck
Warren Ashton
• Engineering
Services
– Tom McCartney
– Bill Reinhart
– Bal Sood
53