
A SUPERIOR TEST METHOD
AERCO has developed a new efficiency test methodology that reflects how equipment operates in the field. This comprehensive series of tests, performed under realistic operating conditions offers genuine value to engineers. For the first time, it enables designers to accurately size systems, estimate operating costs and set meaningful benchmarks to which field installations can be compared. A description of the test appeared in the Dec.'06 issue of ASHRAE Journal.
|
Comparing Boiler
Efficiencies
Whether you are comparing the performance of different
equipment, or seeking to estimate your potential fuel savings, it
is imperative to gain a basic understanding of how manufacturers
perform efficiency tests and how test conditions differ from
real-world operations. Unfortunately, efficiency ratings will
generally not translate directly to fuel savings because similar
performance is rarely, if ever, consistently achieved in typical
installations. The following material provides an overview of the
standard test procedure and outlines key questions to ask as you
design your overall heating system.
The Boiler Efficiency Test: ANSI Standard
Z21.13
All gas-fired boiler manufacturers that publish an efficiency rating
for equipment with capacities between 300,000 and 12,500,000
BTUs, base it on the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
published efficiency test Z21.13. The test consists of operating
the appliance over a specific period of time, measuring the
temperatures of the inlet and outlet water, and calculating the
energy absorbed by the water. (click to enlarge picture at
left)
While the test itself is straightforward, it is the conditions
under which the test is performed that prove most important. The
test assumes:
Those familiar with hydronic boiler installations will
immediately notice that these conditions are not representative of
most equipment installations. In fact, non-condensing equipment
is not designed to accept return water under 140°F. And
non-modulating equipment will cycle to support loads that are
less than full BTU input. These differences, and their favorable
impact on test results vs. real world performance, are discussed
below.
The Impact of the 30-Minute "Heat
Soak"
The 30-minute heat soak period primes the surface area of the
heat exchanger so that absolute heat transfer can be readily
measured. The heat soak levels the playing field for
manufacturers using different materials of construction and heat
exchanger designs for the sake of testing; it assumes that the
heat required to sustain this surface temperature stays constant in
real world applications.
Such an environment is possible to achieve only where the
equipment runs continuously. In reality, any time a conventional
unit cycles on/off, or anytime a boiler faults or is taken offline,
the internal temperature drops and the metal cools. Restarting
the boiler requires a purge period that forces warm air out of the
exchanger.
The Bottom Line: Some of your unit's capacity will be required to
initially "soak" the surface of the heat exchanger before the
exchange of usable heat can begin. This diminishes real world
performance. Efficiency will suffer with each start or cycle your
unit undergoes in your application. This loss can be minimized
by employing modulating
boilers that run at lower firing rates and by ensuring that
your boiler has been appropriately sized, (rather than "oversized")
to keep the units working.
The Impact of Continuous Firing at
100% of Capacity
Testing is performed with the boilers running at 100% firing for
the duration of the test. Unfortunately, most boiler plants are
oversized to provide adequate heat on a "design day" (a
prediction of the coldest day of the year in a given climate zone)
with extra capacity as a safety cushion. While such demand may
exist a few days per year, the bulk of the heating season is characterized by
mild weather that does not call upon the full resources of the
boiler plant. Consequently, conventional boilers with 100%
ON/OFF or limited turn-down firing capabilities resort to cycling
to meet such "part-load" conditions. Although they may deliver
promised performance when ON, it has been estimated that the
temperature overshoot and cycling losses can contribute to up to
20-30% reduction in overall efficiency over the course of normal
operations.
Modulating boilers
operate at lower firing rates to better meet actual demand. Firing
may incrementally adjust over a wide firing range or may be
fixed to one or two intervals. While this will reduce cycling and
the associated energy loss, it does not insure that low fire
performance will equal the test score at 100% firing rate.
Interestingly, a well designed heat exchanger can actually
increase its performance at lower loads by allowing more time
and greater surface area for heat transfer to take place. Several
manufacturers of modulating equipment publish "part-load
performance schedules" to pinpoint efficiency under part-fire
conditions.
The Bottom Line: 100% continuous firing is an unrealistic
assumption for most real-world applications. Carefully consider
the actual weather patterns in your climate zone when
establishing your overall boiler plant capacity and setting up
automated control schedules. Compare the range of modulation
when evaluating equipment and request part-load performance
schedules to help accurately estimate efficiency.
The Impact of 80°F Feed
Water
The issue of 80°F feed water needs special consideration
because it has, by far, the greatest impact on published efficiency
scores.
In its chapter on boilers, the ASHRAE Systems and Equipment
Handbook published the curve at right to characterize the normal
efficiency profile common to all boilers. (click on picture)
Efficiency increases as water temperature drops - with a dramatic
jump at temperatures <130°F. It is at this point (the dewpoint of
flue gases) that boilers begin to condense -- naturally extracting
latent energy that is created during the combustion process.
Effective condensing is capable of reclaiming as much as
12%-13% of the total energy used by a boiler.
However, unless a boiler is specifically designed for
condensing applications, the appliance cannot accept such low
temperature return water in normal operation due to the corrosive
effect of the condensate. It is, in fact, a breach of many
manufacturer warranties to install NON-condensing equipment in
applications that will supply return water below 140°F.
Nonetheless, all manufacturers are allowed to use 80° supply
water, reaping the efficiency benefits of condensing, to comply
with the ANSI efficiency test.
It is also important to recognize that return water temperature
will also fluctuate under normal operating conditions based on
outlet temperature settings, environmental conditions and the
overall composition and performance of system-wide
components (valves, terminal units, bypasses, etc.) However, by
designing the overall system to take advantage and preserve
cooler water temperatures (i.e. designing >20°temperature rise
across the system) will help to maximize the performance of
condensing boilers.
The Bottom Line: When employed in a heating system that
promotes return water consistently <135°F, condensing boilers
yield efficiencies that are far closer to those published than
conventional equipment.

|
 |
|