Turbine Driven BFP: Better Than Motor Driven?

Maybe if we all knew what a BFP is we might answer.

I'll bet the BFG knows...

Some results from Acronymfinder.com

Burlington Free Press

Bona Fide Purchaser

Body Fat Percentage

Back Focal Plane

Batters Faced by Pitcher (baseball)

Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania (Airport Code)

Bund Freikirchlicher Pfingstgemeinden (Erzhausen, Bundesrepublik Deutschland)

Bureau of Fire Protection (Philippines)

Basic Formula Price

Bid For Power (gaming)

Big Fat Positive

Backflow Preventer

Boiler Feed Pump

Bundle-Forming Pilus

Barbados Free Press (political commentary blog)

This is just the first page. I could get more but I've like to give our poster something to do.

Quite. Smart money is on the Burlington Free Press.

I am thinking that a BFP is a BF Pump, with BF being the same as in BFH (Hammer), BFR (Rock), etc., not to be confused with the BF in "BF Goodrich"! Although Goodrich's competitor, "Goodyear", does fly a BF Blimp!

Sorry STL didn't intend to post the same answer as yours. Didn't see yours 'til after I submitted.

OK, sorry for the jab at you in my other post. Didn't see your 'til after I submitted.

I really need to relax a little, working on three projects at the same time!

It all depends on the FO! If the turbine driven BFP is going to create enough FFP then go with that, if not, then use the motor driven BFP. This will definitely give you a good FFP force so long as your victim is standing in the right place at the right time! Personally, I would not use either! I would go for a pneumatic or high-gain hydraulic Multi function masher, normally refereed to as a CICO converter! Then again I could be barking up the wrong tree!

Check out this for a pictorial idea!

Oh come on guys, it's pretty clear what he's talking about. Don't be so dense.

Seriously, a turbine driven BFP is far better than a motor driven BFP. The motor drive may be cheaper on initial purchase of equipment, and it may be fine for a single BFP; or perhaps for staging BFPs to a turbine platform.

But if the goal is to get as many Bi-Faced Politician out of the country as quickly as possible, then send them by jet.

it's pretty clear what he's talking about...

Perhaps to you. I've been around long enough to be taken out by misinterpretation .

I've been around boilers enough to know a lot of terms but not all of them. I did suspect that BFP might stand for Boiler Feed Pumps but what if it wasn't?

Then again, duindi007 hasn't come back to make any comments to anyone. I don't know if that was him in post #6 (a guest post).

BFP stands for Boiler Feed Pumps.

First Energy had just fired the engineer for delivering the cost analysis to fix the swinging BFPT.

Sounds like another case of shooting the messenger because you did not like the message!

I have found motor-driven Boiler Feed Pumps to have lower maintenance and better control, resulting in higher availability and fewer forced outages in the long run. As Cornstoves noted, the control system is the critical factor. All turbine-driven BFP's regulate feedwater flow by controlling the speed of the turbine. This necessitates a very precise, usually very expensive, governor control. Conversely, electric BFP systems can be set up to regulate flow in 2 different ways:

1. Use an off-the-shelf variable frequency drive to precisely control motor speed. The VFD varies the motor speed, much like the MDT-20 varies turbine speed, to vary flow.

2. Install a control valve in the recirculation line from pump discharge back to pump suction. For good control, the recirc. line must be able to handle higher flow rates than just what is needed for pump protection and cooling. Feed water flow is regulated by controlling how much of the pump discharge is returned to the pump suction, rather than sent to the boiler. The control valve is usually operated by a pneumatic diaphragm, although I've seen newer systems using linear positioners similar to the damper controls on ID and FD fans. The control air to the diaphragm, or the control signal to the positioner, can be precisely managed by your DCS or other centrol control system to provide excellent response and prevent swings.

The cost of a large VFD usually leads designers to go with option 2. My personal preference is option 2 with a linear positioner. The control system components are small, affordable, and easily maintained. By standardizing with controls for dampers, coal mills and other equipment, spares inventory can also be reduced.

I think the major reason for going with turbine driven boiler feed pumps (and turbine driven burner fans) is that the boiler then only needs a minimal amount of electrical power, for the controls, to operate in the case of a power failure. The advantage is being able to get by with smaller emergency generators. Usually the steam driven equipment has electric driven back-up, for the times when the turbines are down for maintenance.

If there is a use for low pressure steam, a back pressure turbine can be significantly cheaper to run than an electric motor. If the turbine exhaust has to be vented, then electric will be cheaper. If there is a condenser on the discharge, the cheaper method depends on the utility rates with electric usually the cheaper way to go.

Small steam turbines used for pumps and fans cannot be started automatically. They have to be started manually and gradually warmed to avoid having a slug of water hit the blades and destroy the unit. For this reason, boilers with combination turbine and electric auxiliary equipment will run on the turbines, even though it would be cheaper to operate on electric.

Summarizing:

BFP=BOILER FEED PUMP?

ok.

Then go for 3 running parallel with 200% redundancy with outlet header and check valves:

1>Motor Driven(Its Synchronous speed causes output pressure just less than Turbo driven #3's Output Pressure!

2>Diesel Engine Driven( Governor Controlled low speed-letting 3> do most work, yet ready to take over immediately)

3> Turbo Driven basic workhorse -rated full capacity 24x365

Cost is in a tiny% extra blocked Capital. But look at the Blackouts avoided!!!

yes, tdbfp is better than mdbfp...if u consider aux power point of view

the overall energy consumption is less in turbine driven bfp than m bfp

AEP power plants utilize a single BFPT for each boiler. BFPT speed varies from startup, to minimum load to full load. Clifty Creek has an electric driven startup pump with bypass to the steam driven BFPT at min load to full load. Unit reliability is dependent on BFPT maintenance and reliability. If the BFPT is off line, the unit is off line. Maintenance is minimized because there is only one BFPT to be maintained. Water is routinely drained off the lube oil tank at night or during times of reduced load. AEP BFPTs are highly reliable and obviously never fail. A single BFPT with a reliable variable control system results in highly reliable units with acceptable MTBF. AEP BFPTs are highly reliable and trouble free.

TVA power plants utilize multiple BFPT for each boiler. Each unit will have at least two, probably three, and possibly four BFPTs. Some units have an electric driven startup BFPT with bypass to two or more steam driven BFPTs. Full unit load is dependent on all BFPTs being in service. Unit MW load will be curtailed if a single BFPT maintenance is pulled on line. Typically, the oil tank will be serviced at night, on weekends, or other times when full unit load is not required. The highest maintenance item on the TVA BFPT is the GE MDT-20 control system. GE management will not face TVA workers directly but rather sell their rotten GE-MDT-20 turbines directly to TVA's "out of touch" upper management. Patomic Electric Power has taken court action against GE without being able to technically resolve the GE BFPT control problem. AEP configures and tunes the MCR, CCS and BFPT control circuits in house without outside or OEM advise.

TVA has never figured out how to operate multiple BFPTs without always having only one BFPT in auto at any one time while the other BFPT controls are in hand or manual control. The one BFPT in auto will swing with load while the other manual controls stabalize and prevent swinging. If two are in auto at one time, the two will begin to swing each other and cause MW load swings. Unfortunately TVA control circuits have an independent PID control for each BFPT. The multiple PID control circuits should be reconfigured to prevent BFPT interaction when load changes are made. The requirement is simple but TVA management does not know how to make simple control circuit improvements. TVA is totally dependent on the OEM for simple control revisions including but not limited to the simpliest MCR, CCS, or BFPT PID tuning. TVA operators are to be commended for being capable of operating units with obsolete combustion control software that was reconfiguraded based on original obsolete pneumatic control system hardware.

The Southern Company is fully capable of "all of the above". Full load output is not unusual even during periods of BFPT maintenance. In house control circuit design, installation, tuning, quality control, and improvements are routine at The Southern Company.

As you can see, each utility has a different concept regarding the selection, installatioon, operation, and maintenance of BFPT. The companies that do it all are the most fun places to work because there are no hands tied behind the backs and no time for stabbing in the back. The companies that have their hands tied, must result to the blame game for lack of more attractive options.