energy auditing of thermal power plant: … · turbine cycle efficiency=3600/turbine heat rate×100...

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.



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 %



(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



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



= 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,



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



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 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


Annual Total Tonnes of Oil Equivalent (TOE) Saved 1135.37 TOE

Total Financial Saving Rs. 1,70,38,114



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 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



(Improved heat rate×output power×24×365)


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



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



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.



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.

energy auditing of thermal power plant: … · turbine cycle efficiency=3600/turbine heat rate×100...

Documents