another drop header

ChrisJ

Hatterasguy said:

ChrisJ said:

@Hatterasguy Is any of this usable to you at this link?

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/wet-steam-quality-d_426.html

"Steam - produced in a boiler where the heat is supplied to the water and where the steam is in contact with the water surface of the boiler - contains approximately 5% water by mass."

I assume some of that or all of that falls out in the header, in theory?

You could use specific enthalpy to get an approximation.

Dry steam has an energy content of 1151 BTU/lb.

94% dry steam has an energy content of 1082 BTU/lb.

Assuming constant mass from the boiler, the energy output from the 94% steam is reduced by 6%.

I am not confident that enthalpy can be used strictly as the single variable for fuel consumption, however.

There are issues with wet steam traveling to the far ends of the system in a timely fashion and the fact that it will condense to a greater degree on the way (due to the reduced velocity). So, you may need to operate the boiler for an extended period of time independent of the enthalpy difference.

The fuel consumption delta would likely be greater than 6%.

You're saying the wet steam would cause the burner to operate for at least 6% longer because the steam contains less energy. Let's use 6% just because it's a number.

Where did that 6% go?

My point was the boiler will just have to move 6% more wet steam. But I don't see how it can produce 6% less output? Where's that 6% going?

Sailah

SeanBeans said:

I talked to someone on the phone at birds all about the bigmouth, he told me it was the ugliest vent he had ever seen lololol but they got good stuff.

Show him this, courtesy of @Christian Garibaldi

DanHolohan

Tiffany calling!

ChrisJ

Sailah said:

SeanBeans said:

I talked to someone on the phone at birds all about the bigmouth, he told me it was the ugliest vent he had ever seen lololol but they got good stuff.

Show him this, courtesy of @Christian Garibaldi

That's enough to put @KC_Jones in his grave!

ChrisJ

Hatterasguy said:

ChrisJ said:

Hatterasguy said:

ChrisJ said:

@Hatterasguy Is any of this usable to you at this link?

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/wet-steam-quality-d_426.html

"Steam - produced in a boiler where the heat is supplied to the water and where the steam is in contact with the water surface of the boiler - contains approximately 5% water by mass."

I assume some of that or all of that falls out in the header, in theory?

You could use specific enthalpy to get an approximation.

Dry steam has an energy content of 1151 BTU/lb.

94% dry steam has an energy content of 1082 BTU/lb.

Assuming constant mass from the boiler, the energy output from the 94% steam is reduced by 6%.

I am not confident that enthalpy can be used strictly as the single variable for fuel consumption, however.

There are issues with wet steam traveling to the far ends of the system in a timely fashion and the fact that it will condense to a greater degree on the way (due to the reduced velocity). So, you may need to operate the boiler for an extended period of time independent of the enthalpy difference.

The fuel consumption delta would likely be greater than 6%.

You're saying the wet steam would cause the burner to operate for at least 6% longer because the steam contains less energy. Let's use 6% just because it's a number.

Where did that 6% go?

My point was the boiler will just have to move 6% more wet steam. But I don't see how it can produce 6% less output? Where's that 6% going?

If a specific amount of input only produces 94% of the output (based upon a 100% dry steam baseline), the difference can only be combustion efficiency. The 6% goes up the stack.

You would need to know the exact procedure of how the companies actually calculate their magical 82% combustion efficiency. I think we'd be quite surprised at the outcome.

No no no, that's a whole other can of worms.
We're comparing a factory spec'ed piped boiler, or perhaps even a bit under to an overpiped boiler as far as efficiency.

If the poorly piped boiler puts out 6% less energy in it's steam, it must be producing 6% more steam, no? If so, where's the efficiency loss?

DanHolohan

The liquid water traveling with the steam causes some of the steam to condense too soon. That's where the loss is.