Anda di halaman 1dari 86

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D . A S M E P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L L985 m 0 7 5 7 L 7 0 OhOb958 9 7 9 m

Guidance
for Evaluation PERFORMANCE
TEST
of Measurement CODES
Uncertainty in
Performance Tests
of Steam Turbines
ANSVASME PTC 6 Report-1985

SPONSORED AND P UBLlSHED BY


THE AMERICAN
SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL
ENGINEERS
United Engineering
Center 345 East 47th Street New York, N.Y. 10017

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
Date of Issuance: August 31,1986

This document will be revised when the Society approvesthe issuance of the
next edition, scheduled for 1991. There will be no Addenda issued t o PTC 6
Report-1985.

Please Note: ASME issueswritten replies t o inquiries concerning interpretation


of technical aspects of this document. The interpretations are not part of the
document. PTC 6 Report-1985 is being issued withan automatic subscription
service to the interpretations that will be issued t o it up to the publicationof
the 1991 Edition.

This report was developed under procedures accredited as meeting the criteria for American
National Standards. The Consensus Committee thatapproved the report wasbalanced t o assure
that individuals from competentand concerned interestshave had an opportunity t o participate.
The proposed report was made available for public review and comment which provides an op-
portunity for additional public input from industry,academia, regulatory agencies, and the public-
at-large.
ASME does not "approve," "rate," or "endorse" any item, construction, proprietary device, or
activity.
ASME does not take any position with respect to the validity of any patent rights asserted in
connection with any items mentioned in this document, and does not undertaket o insure anyone
utilizing a standard against liability for infringement of any applicable Letters Patent, or assume
any such liability. Users of a code or standard are expressly advised that determination of the
validity of any such patent rights,and the risk of infringement of suchrights, is entirely theirown
responsibility.
Participation by federal agency representativels) or personls) affiliated with industry is not to
be interpreted as government or industry endorsement of this report.
ASME accepts responsibility for only those interpretations issuedaccordance
in with governing
ASME procedures and policies which preclude the issuance of interpretations by individual vol-
unteers.

No part of this document may be reproducedin any form,


in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise,
without theprior written permission of the publisher.

Copyright O 1986 by
THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS
All Rights Reserved
Printed in U.S.A.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~

S T D - A S M E P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L L985 m U 7 5 9 6 7 0 ObObSbO 5 2 7

FOREWORD

(This Foreword is not part of ANSIIASME PTC 6 Report-1985.)

The Test Code forSteam Turbines, ANSVASME PTC 6-1976 (R1982),hereafter called
“the Code,” provides for the accurate testing of steam turbines for the purpose of
!
obtaining a minimum-uncertainty performance level. The Code i s based on theuse
of accurate instrumentation and the best available measurement procedures. Use of
test uncertainty as a tolerance to be applied to the final results is outside the scope
of theCode. Such tolerances, if used, are chiefly of commercialsignificance and sub-
ject t o agreement between the partiesto thetest.
It i s recognized that Code instrumentation and procedures are not always eco-
nomically feasible or physically possible for specific turbine acceptance tests. This
Report provides guidanceto establish the degree of uncertainty of thetest results.
Increased uncertainties due to departures from the Code proceduresare also dis-
cussed.
The Report provides estimatedvalues of uncertainty thatcan be used t o establish
the probable errors in test readings during steam turbine performance tests. It is rec-
ognized that the statistical method presentedi n this Report isdifferent from and much
simpler than the method presented in ANSVASME PTC 19.1-1985. ANSVASME PTC
19.1-1985, Measurement Uncertainty, includes discussions and methods which en-
able the user t o select an appropriate uncertainty model foranalysis the and reporting
of test results. For the purposes of this Report, the committee has used a simplified
version of the root sum square model presentedi n ANSUASME PTC 19.1.The possible
errors associated with steam turbine testing are expressed as uncertainty intervals
which, when incorporated into this model, will yield an overall uncertainty for the
test result which provides95% coverage of the true value. That is, the model yields
a pluslminus interval about thetested value which can be expected to include the
true value i n 19 instances out of20. It should be notedthat, i n general, measurement
errors consist oftwo components- a fixed component, called the bias or systematic
error, and a random component, called the precision or sampling error. Since Sta-
tistics deals with populations which are essentially randomly distributed, in a strict
sense, only the random component is amenable to statistical analysis. Consequently,
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

as illustrated inANSVASME PTC 19.1-1985,the two error components should treated


be
separately throughout the uncertainty analysis and combined only in the calculation
at the final test uncertainty after the individual error componentshave been prop-
agated, through the use of the appropriate sensitivity factors, into the final result.
In compiling the possible errorsassociated with the myriad of measurements re-
quired forsteam turbine performancetesting, the committee has used theconsensus
of people knowledgeablein the field based on information published in the various
documents of the PTC 19 series on Instrument and Apparatus Supplements and
gleaned from numerous industry tests and manufacturers’ supplied data. Unfortu-
nately, thedetailedinformationon thesemeasurementerrors whichwould
allow separation into their fixed and random components i s not available. Conse-
quently,the accuracies associated withthe variousmeasurement devices and

iii

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
techniques given in Section 4 are expressed as uncertainty intervals providing95%
coverage and as such are presumed to include both the fixed and random compo-
nents. In keeping withthis simplifying assumption, thecalculations described in Sec-
tion 5 do not differentiate between fixed and random errorsin the computation of
the uncertaintyof the final result. Accordingly,as stated in Section 5, caution should
be used in applyingstatistical techniquessuch as reducing instrument errors by the
use of multiple instruments or sampling errors by increasing the number of sampling
locations, without sufficient knowledge of the relative importanceof the fixed and
random error components.
After approval by Performance Test Codes Committee No. 6 on Steam Turbines,
this ANSVASME PTC6 Report was approved as an American National Standard by the
ANSI Board of Standards Review on November 27, 1985.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D S A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1785 9 0757b70 ObUb7b2 3 T T D

PERSONNELOFPERFORMANCE TEST CODES COMMlllEE NO. 6 ON STEAMTURBINES

(The following is the roster of the Committee at the time ofapproval of this Code.)

OFFICERS
C. B. Scharp, Chairman
N. R. Deming, Vice Chairman

COMMITTEEPERSONNEL
J. M. Baltrus, Sargent & Lundy Engineers
J. A. Booth, General Electric Co.
P. G.Albert, Alternate to Booth, General Electric Co.
B. Bornstein, Consultant
E. J.Brailey, Ir., New England Power Service Co.
W. A. Campbell, Philadelphia Electric Co.
K.C. Cotton, Consultant
J.S. Davis, Jr., Duke Power Co.
J. E. Snyder, Alternate to Davis, Duke Power Co.
N. R. Deming, Westinghouse Electric Corp.
P. A. DiNenno, Jr., Westinghouse Electric Corp.
A. V. Fajardo, Jr., Utility Power Corp.
C. Cuenther, Alternate to Fajardo, Utility Power Corp.
D. L. Knighton, Black & Veatch Consulting Engineers
Z. Kolisnyk, Raymond Kaiser Engineers, Inc.
C. H. Kostors, Elliott Co.
F. S. Ku, Bechtel Power Corp.
J. S. Lamberson, McGraw Edison Co.
T. H. McCloskey, EPRI
E. Pitchford, Lower Colorado River Authority
C. B. Scharp, Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.
P. Scherba, Public Service Electric & Gas Corp.
S. Sigurdson, General Electric Co.
E. J.Sundstrom, Dow Chemical USA

V
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~~ ~

S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 W 0759b70 ObOb9b3 23b

BOARD ON PERFORMANCE TEST CODES

C. B. Scharp, Chairman
J.S. Davis, Jr., Vice Chairman

A. F. Armor K. G. Grothues S . P. Nuspl


R. P. Benedict R. Jorgensen E. Pitchford
W. A; Crandall A. Lechner W. O. Printup, Ir.
J. H. Fernandes P. Leung J.A. Reynolds
W. L. Carvin S. W. Lovejoy, Jr, J. W. Siegrnund
G. J. Gerber W. G. McLean J.C . Westcott
J. W. Murdock

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Vi

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD.ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 H 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 ObOb9b4 1 7 2

All ASME codes are copyrighted, with all rights reserved to the Society. Re-
production ofthis or any otherASME code ¡sa violation ofFederal Law. Legalities
aside, the user should appreciate that the publishing of the high quality codes
that have typifiedASME documents requiresa substantial commitment by the
Society. Thousands of volunteers work diligently to develop these codes. They
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

participate on their own or with a sponsor’s assistance and produce documents


that meet the requirements of an ASME concensus standard. The codes are very
valuable piecesof literatureto industry and commerce, and the toeffort improve
these ”living documents” and develop additional neededcodes must be con-
tinued. The monies spent for research and further code development, admin-
istrative staff support and publicationare essentialand constitute a substantial
drain on ASME. The purchase price of these documents helps offset these costs.
User reproduction undermines this system and represents an added financial
drain on ASME. When extra copies are needed, you are requestedt o call or write
the ASME Order Department, 22 Law Drive, Box 2300, Fairfield, New Jersey07007-
2300,andASMEwill expeditedeliveryof such copies to you by returnmail. Please
instruct your people to buy required test codes rather than copy them. Your
cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

vi i

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
1
This Report describes alternative instrumentation and procedures for use in commercial
performance testing of steam turbines. Such tests do not fulfill the requirements of PTC 6 and
cannot be considered acceptancetests unless both parties to the test have mutually agreed
PRIOR TO TESTING, preferably in writing, on all phases of the test that deviate from PTC 6.
I I

viii
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L L785 D 0751b70 DbOb9bb T 4 5

CONTENTS

Foreword ............................................................... iii


Committee Roster ....................................................... v
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Section
O Introduction ...................................................... 1
1 Object
and Scope ................................................. 3
2 Description
andDefinition
of Terms ................................ 3
3 Guiding Principles ................................................. 5
4 Instruments
and Methods of
Measurement .......................... 11
5 Computationof Results ............................................ 37

Figures
3.1 Maximum Recommended Values for the Effect of Test Data Scatter
on Test Results for Each Type of Measurement ..................... 6
3.2 Required Number of Readings for Minimum Additional Uncertainty
in the Test Results Caused by Test Data Scatter .................... 7
3.3 Base Factor. % .................................................... 9
4.1 GeneratorConnection Types ....................................... 13
4.2 Error Curves for Equal Voltage and Current Unbalance in One Phase
and for Three Possible Locations of Z Coil for 2; Stator Watthour
Meters ......................................................... 14
4.3 WatthourMeterConnections ....................................... 15
4.4 Typical Connections for Measuring ElectricalPower Output by
the Three-Wattmeter Method ..................................... 20
4.5 Minimum StraightRunofUpstream Pipe After Flow Disturbance.
No FlowStraightener ............................................ 28
4.6 P Ratio Effect ...................................................... 28
4.7 Effect of Number of Diameters of Straight Pipe After Flow
Straightener ..................................................... 29
4.8 Effect of Number of Sections i n FlowStraightener .................... 29
4.9 Effect of Downstream PipeLength .................................. 29
5.1 Typical Throttle Pressure Correction Curves For Turbines With
Superheated Initial Steam Conditions ............................. 43
5.2 Typical Throttle Temperature Correction Curves For Turbines With
Superheated Initial Steam Conditions ............................. 43
5.3 Typical Exhaust Pressure Correction Curves ......................... 44
5.4 Slope of Superheated Steam Enthalpy at ConstantTemperature ....... 46
5.5 Slope of Superheated Steam Enthalpy at Constant Pressure ........... 46
5.6 Slope of Saturated Liquid Enthalpy (Pressure) ........................ 47
5.7 Slope of Saturated Liquid Enthalpy(Temperature) .................... 47

ix

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
Tables
3.1 .
8. and O2 Influence Factors for Calculating 2 for Fig 3.2 ............... 8
4.1 Number of Current Transformers (CT’s) and Potential Transformers
(PT’S) Required for Each Metering Method and Metering Method
UncertaintiesSummary .......................................... 16
4.2 WattmeterUncertainties ........................................... 16
4.3 WatthourMeterUncertainties ...................................... 17
4.4 PotentialTransformerUncertainties ................................. 17
4.5 CurrentTransformerUncertainties .................................. 19
4.6 Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Torque or
Power Measuring Devices ........................................ 22
4.7 Summary of Typical Uncertainty for DifferentShaft Power
MeasurementMethods .......................................... 23
4.8 Measurement Uncertainties for Testing of Boiler Feed Pump Drive
Turbines ........................................................ 23
4.9 Measurement Uncertainty - Typical Rotary Speed Instrumentation .... 24
4.10 Base Uncertainties of Primary Flow Measurement .................... 26
4.1 1 Minimum Straight Length of Upstream Pipe for Orifice Plates and
Flow Nozzle Flow Sections With No Flow Straighteners ............. 27
4.12 RadioactiveTracerUncertainties .................................... 31
4.13 ManometerUncertainties .......................................... 33
4.14 Deadweight Gage Uncertainties .................................... 33
4.15 Bourdon Gage Uncertainties ....................................... 34
4.16 TransducerUncertainties ........................................... 34
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

4.17 Number of Exhaust Pressure Probes ................................. 35


4.18 Thermocouple and Resistance Thermometer Uncertainties ............ 35
4.19 Liquid-in-GlassThermometerUncertainties .......................... 36
5.1 Values of the Student’s r- and Substitute t-Distributions for a95%
Confidence Level ................................................ 39
5.2 Effect on Heat Rate Uncertainty of Selected Parameters ............... 41
5.3 Heat Rate Uncertainty Due to Instrumentation ....................... 51
5.4A Heat Rate Uncertainty Due to Variability With Time .................. 52
5.4B Heat Rate Uncertainty Due to Variability With Space ................. 53
5.5 Overall Heat Rate Uncertainty ...................................... 54

Appendices
I ComputationofMeasurementUncertainty in Performance Test for
a Reheat TurbineCycle .......................................... 55
II Derivationof Fig 3.2 . ............................................... 71
III References ........................................................ 73

Figures
1.1 Heat Balance ...................................................... 61
1.2 Initial Pressure Correction Factor for Single Reheat Turbines With
SuperheatedInitial Steam Conditions ............................. 63
1.3 Initial Temperature Correction Factor For Turbines With Superheated
Initial Steam Conditions ......................................... 63
1.4 Reheater Pressure Drop Correction Factor For Turbines With
SuperheatedInitial Steam Conditions ............................. 67
1.5 Reheater Temperature Correction Factor For Turbines With
SuperheatedInitial Steam Conditions ............................. 67
1.6 Exhaust Pressure Correction Factor For Turbines With Superheated
Initial Steam Conditions ......................................... 68
X

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
Tables
1.1 Errors in CalculatedHeat Rate Due to Errorsin Individual
Measurements .................................................. 69
11.1 ValuesAssociated With the Distribution of the AverageRange . . . ...
.. 72

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

xi

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD-ASME P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L 1 9 B 5 E 0757b7D O b O b 9 b 9 754 E

ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


A N AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

A N AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

ASMEPERFORMANCE TEST CODES


Report on
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS
OF STEAMTURBINES

SECTION O - INTRODUCTION

0.01 ANSllASME PTC 6-1976 (R1982),Test Code the parties to a test on all phases of the test that
for Steam Turbines (hereafter called "the Code"), deviatefrom PTC6ifthe resultsarecompared with
of steam turbines
provides for the accurate testing expected performance.Such alternatives affectthe
I
for the purpose of obtaining a minimum uncer- accuracy of thetest results. Themagnitudes of the
< taintyperformance level. TheCode is based on the resultant errors and their effectson the final results
use of accurate instrumentation and the
best avail- become subjects to be resolved between the par-
able
measurement procedures
and is recom- ties to thetest. It is recommended that the parties
mended foruse in conductingacceptance testsof discuss and agree on all deviations from PTC 6 dur-
steam turbines. ing the design and planning stage if at all possible.
In n o case should a test b e started, where the re-
sultsarecompared to expected performance, with-
I
0.02 For reasons of expediency and economics, out prioragreement. It is the intent ofthis Report
alternativeinstrumentationandproceduresare to provide guidanceto the parties to thetest in ar-
sometimesconsideredandfrequently used. In riving at values of uncertainty based on industry
such cases, prior agreementi s necessary between tests and statistical treatment of the data.

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSUASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAMTURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD

SECTION 1 - OBJECT AND SCOPE

1.01 The object ofthis Report is to provide guid- 1.03 In thisReport, numerical values have been
ance for the parties to the
test t o establish the de- assigned to the uncertainty of instruments var-of
gree of uncertainty of thetest results when there ious qualities. These numerical values, represent-
are deviations from requirements of PTC 6. ing theconsensus of knowledgeable professional
people, cover 95% uncertainty intervals and there-
1.02 The parties to the test should become fa- fore will be exceeded, on average, in one instance
miliarwiththe Code. Since this Reportdoes not in 20.
contain a complete test procedure, it should be
used only in conjunction with the Code. Cornpli-
ance withtheCode is expectedwhere no alter- 1.04 Some ofthe referencesused incompiling
native i s shown
in this Report.
these'values are given i n Section 6.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
2.01 The nomenclature given in Section 2 of the value of error selected by the Committee and is
Codeapply.
shall
expected to be exceeded
in-
one
more
than
notin
stance i n 20. Error is defined as the difference be-
tween the truevalue and thecorrected value based
2.02 In this Report, uncertainty i s apossible ontheinstrument reading.

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D *ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL. 302 m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OFMEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

SECTION 3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES

3.01 When a test not in accordance with the and recovery cone where applicable. If the existing
Code is planned, the parties to the test must agree calibration facilities cannot cover the entire range
on the expected uncertainties in the test readings of Reynolds numbers expected during a test, ex-
prior to the test and determine the expected over- trapolation of the calibrationdata is permissible in
all combined uncertainty of the testresults. accordance with Code Par. 4.33.
With accuracy ratio defined as the accuracy o f
3.02 Numerical values to be used as guidance the measuring standard compared t o accuracy of
for agreement on instrumentation aregivenin Sec- the instrument beingcalibrated, a ratio of 1O:l i s
tion 4 of this Report. Procedures for calculating
the recommended for calibration work. New devel-
combined uncertainty of thetest results are given opment of extremely accuratetest instruments may
in Section 5. necessitate lowering this ratio to 4 : l .
Consideration shall be given to the calibration
3.03 Calibration of Instruments. Instrument cal- environment. Even under laboratory conditions,
ibration plays an important role in the reduction the measured quantity and the measuring instru-
o f test uncertainty by minimizing fixed biases or ments can be influenced by vibration, magnetic
displacement of measuredvalues. In performance fields, ambient temperature, fluctuation, instabil-
testing, calibration i s defined as the process of de- ity of thevoltage source, and other variables.
termining the deviation of indicatedvalues of an
instrument or device from those aof standard with 3.04 If Code procedures relative to frequencyof
known uncertainty traceable to the National Bu- readings, allowable variation in test readings, and
reau of Standards. A calibration should cover the prescribed limits for cycleleakages cannot be es-
range for which the instrument i s used. The in- tablished for the test, agreement must be reached
crement betweencalibration points and the to estimate the probable increase in uncertainty.
method of interpolation between these points shall
be selected to attain the lowest possible uncer- 3.05 Frequency of Readings and Duration of Test.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
tainty of the calibration. The frequencyat which test readings are recorded
Tabulated data and a plot of the observed de- and the running time required fora test is deter-
viations for a series of measurements overa range mined by the time variabilityin the test data [see
of expected test values, and the values obtained Par. 5.02(b)]. When a test that deviates from the
from the instrument being calibrated, maybe used Code instrumentation requirements is run with a
as calibration data for determining the correction mutually agreed upon pretest uncertainty, the ef-
applied to a test value. Thecalibrationreport fect dueto time variability must be minimal to pre-
should be signed b y a responsible representative vent an increase in this uncertainty. To avoid an
of the calibration laboratory. When a formal report appreciable effect on thepretest uncertainty, Fig.
is required, the calibration report should include 3.1 can be used as a guide to establish the maxi-
the identification of the calibration equipment and mum time variability effect each measured param-
instruments, a description of the calibration pro- eter may have on the results. This figure, used with
cess, a statement of uncertainty of the measuring Fig. 3.2 and Table 3.1, provides a means for esti-
standard, and a tabulation of the recorded cali- mating the number of readings required afor test
bration data. t o achieve this. An example for the use of Figs. 3.1
Flow measuring devices shall be calibrated as- and 3.2 i s given in Par. 5.12. The derivation of Fig.
sembled with their own upstreamand down- 3.2 is given in Appendix II in this Report. Nomen-
stream pipe sections including flow straightener clature used in Fig. 3.2 are as follows.

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D e A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1 9 8 5 W U759b70 ObOb972 2 4 9 W

ANSVASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY


AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

0.3

O 1.o 2.0 3 .O 4.0 5 .O 6.0

Expected Test Results Uncertainty,%

FIG. 3.1 MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED VALUES FOR THE EFFECT OF TEST DATA SCATTER ON TESTRESULTS
FOREACH TYPE OF MEASUREMENT

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~

S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 2985 m 0757b70 ObOb473 2 8 5 m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


INPERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD

1000
900
800
700

600

500

400.

300

200

2
ÜI
.-
P
[r
Y- 100
O
L 90
d
6 80
z
u 70
.-?!
60
II:
50

40

30

20

10
2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 20 30 40 50
ll
60 709080 100

FIG. 3.2 REQUIREDNUMBEROFREADINGSFOR MINIMUM ADDITIONALUNCERTAINTY IN THE TEST


RESULTS CAUSED BYTEST DATA SCATTER

7
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E PTC b REPORT-ENGL 198.4 M 0759b70 O b O b 9 7 4 O11 m

ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT


UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

Z = effectofinstrumentreadings TABLE 3.1


(average range) on the test re- e, AND e2
INFLUENCE FACTORS FOR
sults for the number of
samples CALCULATING 7 FOR FIG. 3.2
offivereadingsbeingconsid- Type of Data 01 e2
ered, expressed as:
Power 1.o ...
Flow (volumetric) by weigh
tanks 1.o ...
by
Flow flow nozzle differentials 0.5 ...
Steam pressure and
or average of O2 (I,,, - I,,,,) temperature O,' + O," Oz' + ozn
Feedwater temperature ... O,"
Exhaust pressure 01, 82'
where
8, = influence factor from Table 3.1 GENERAL NOTES:
effect per percent of reading (a) 0, is expressed as percent effect per percent of instrument
reading.
O2 = influence factor from Table 3.1, (b) Oz is expressed as percent effect perunit of instrumentread-
effect per unit of reading ing.
I,,, - Imin = maximum minus minimum read- (c) O,' and Oz' are the slopes of the correctionfactor curves.
(d) O," and Oz1 are used to take into account the effect of the
ings in each sample of five read- instrument reading range for variability with time measure-
in
ings being considered ments usedto establish any enthalpy appearing in theheat rate
0.5(/,ax +
r,,,,) = approximately the average of the equation. ForO," and O," values, usethe applicable Figs. 5.4,5.5,
5.6, or 5.7 after converting the ordinate to percent effect per
five readings. A scanned average percent of absolute temperature for O," or percent effect per
can be substituted for this term. unit of reading for 02".
U, = maximum permissible effect on
results due to test data scatter,
percent, from Fig. 3.1
relationships, particularly for first stage shell, re-
heat inlet, crossover, and extraction sections;
TIMING OF TEST
(4) inspecting flow measurement elementsin
3.06 Regardless ofthecalculateduncertainty the cycle for deposits; and
agreed to foran acceptance test, the timing of the ( 5 ) inspecting the last stage from the exhaust
test should conform Par.
to 3.04of the Code. Timely end.
testing will minimize additional uncertainty in the ( d ) Ifnoinitialoperationbenchmarkdata is
turbine performance due to normal-operation de- available, the actual overall deterioration cannot

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
terioration and deposit buildup. be determined. However, if there is reasonable as-
surance that the unit has not been damaged and
3.07 Thefollowingguidelinesfortimingthetest, i s free of excessive deposits, an estimated value of
listed in the order of preference, should be con- deterioration may be established by mutual agree-
sidered before testing. ment and taken into account in the comparison of
(a) The test should be conducted as soon as the test results with guarantees.
practicable after initial startup per Code recom- For guidance purposes, Fig. 3.3 may be used to
mendations. establish an estimated value of deterioration for
(b) If the tests must be delayed, they should be turbines operating with superheated inlet steam.
scheduledimmediatelyfollowing an inspection Thiscurve is based on industryexperienceand rep-
outage, provided any deficiencies have been cor- resents an average expected deterioration for units
rected during the outage. with a history of good operating procedures and
(c) If (a) and (b) are impossible,the condition of water chemistry. The curve was developed from
the unit can be determined by: the results of enthalpy-drop efficiency tests run pe-
(I) comparing results of an enthalpy-drop ef- riodically on a number of turbines of various sizes.
ficiency test run on turbinesections in the super- The method cited in Appendix III, Ref. (13)was used
heat region with startupenthalpydrop test results, to determine the effect of deterioration on heat the
to provide guidance on the action to be taken; rate. The estimated deterioration was calculated
(2) reviewing operating and chemistry logs; using theenthalpy-drop test data on high pressure
(3) reviewing operating data on pressure-flow and intermediate pressuresections, and assuming
8

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D m A S M E D T C b REPORT-zENGL 17fl5 H 0757L7G ububq75 ~ 5 8

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT


UNCERTAINTY
ANSllASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985
INPERFORMANCETESTSOFSTEAMTURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

were then factored into the mean of this data to


developthecurve.Thecurveappliestobothreheat
and nonreheat fossil-fired units usingan ffactor of
1.0. A study of performancedata on nuclear units
published by the NuclearRegulatory Commission
indicates that the average expected deterioration
of nuclear unitsis 0.7 times that expected on fossil-
fired units. The Fig. 3.3 curve and formula multi-
plied by the factor 0.7 can, therefore, be used to
predict the estimated percentage deterioration in
O 12 24 36 48 heat rate of nuclear units with a history of good
Number of Months Since Initial Operation or Restoration, N operating procedures.
As an example, to estimate the deterioration of
GENERAL NOTES:
a 150 MW, 1800 psi turbine with12 months of nor-
(a) Estimated percent deterioration in heat rate after N months mal operation, using Fig. 3.3, read the base factor
of operation = from the curve at N = 12. Then calculate the es-
timated deterioration by the formula given with the
BF J initial pressure,
psig figure usingan ffactor of 1.0for fossil units. Using
(f)
log M W 2400 a base factor of 1.0 as read off the curveat N = 12,
the estimated heat rate deterioration is 0.4%,de-
where
MW = megawatt rating of turbine termined thus:
f = 1 .O for fossil units
= 0.7 for nuclear units (l.O/log 150) J(1800/2400) (1.0) = 0.4%

(b)Periods during which the turbine casings are open should not
(e) For units with a history of detrimental inci-
be included.
dences, the amount of deterioration cannot be
(c) This curve i s for guidance purposes when no other data for determined and the course of action or the deter-
establishing deterioration is available. mination of deterioration allowance must be mu-
tually agreed upon between the parties involved
(d) Correct operation and good water chemistry practices
in the test. Examples of detrimental incidents are:
notwithstanding, conditions beyond the operator's control may
cause a greater heat rate deterioration than predicted by this curve.
( I ) existence of any turbine water induction
incidents
(2) unusual shaft vibration and balance moves
FIG. 3.3 BASE FACTOR, % (3) abnormal conductivity in the condenser
hotwell
( 4 ) excessive boiler water silica content
that the low pressure section deterioration was (5) presence of large excursionsin throttle and
one-half of the intermediate pressure section de- reheat temperatures
terioration. Thevolumetric flow and size indicators (6) evidence of boiler tube exfoliation
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
1 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT
UNCERTAINTY ANSVASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

SECTION 4 - INSTRUMENTSANDMETHODS OF
MEASUREMENT

4.01 Paragraph 4.01 of the Code recognizes that trical system of N conductors, N - 1 metering ele-
special agreementsmay b e needed. When it is ments are required to measure the theoretically
agreed todeviate from Code requirements, this Re-
true power or energy of system. the (This assumes
port provides the ideal instruments and instrument transformers.)It
basis for evaluating the influence
of such special agreements and establishing the is evident, then, that the connection of the gen-
erating system governs the selection of the me-
resultant loss of accuracy. The partiesto a test must
realize that the loss in accuracy will cause an in-tering system.
crease in the uncertaintyin the test results, and this Connectionsforthree-phasegenerating sys-
must be recognizedin the interpretation of the re- tems can be divided into two general categorieg-
sults. three-phase, three-wire connections with no neu-
tral return to thegeneratingsourceandthree-
4.02 The general instrumentation and location phase, four-wire connections with the fourth wire
requirements outlined in Par. 4.03 of the Code acting as a neutral current return pathto the gen-
should be followed, but variations in type may be erator.
used. The alternatives are discussed in the appro- To aidin the identification of the generating sys-
priate Sections of this Report. temconnection,thefollowingdiscussionde-
scribes someof the different types of three-phase,
three-wire and three-phase, four-wire generator
MEASUREMENT OF THREE-PHASE AC
connections that are used.
ELECTRICAL OUTPUT
(a) The most common three-phase, three-wire
4.03 General Contents. The accuracy of three- system consists of a wye connected generator with
phase power or energy measurement depends on a high impedance neutral grounding device. The
the proper application of metering systems (either generator i s connecteddirectly to a generator
wattmeters or watthour meters) and the accuracy transformerwith adelta primarywinding. Load dis-
of all the devices used in the measurement. This tribution is madeon thesecondary, grounded wye
Section discusses the following: side of the transformer [see Fig. 4.l(a)]. Load un.
(a) types of generating system connections, ap- balances on the load distribution side of the gen-
plicable metering methods and uncertainties; erator transformer are seen as neutral current in
(b) alternativemeteringmethodsanduncer- the grounded wye connection. However, on the
tainties; generator side of the transformer, the neutral cur-
(c) meter constant and reading uncertainties; rent i s effectively filteredout due to the delta wind-
(d) instrument transformers and their metering ing, and a neutral conductor is not required.
uncertainties; An ungrounded wye generator is less common
(e) uncalibratedstationmetersandtheirme- than thehigh impedancegrounded wyegenerator,
tering uncertainties; but when used with a delta-wye grounded trans-
(f) overall uncertainty of power measurement. former, it i s alsoan exampleof athree-phase, three-
wire generator connection [see Fig. 4.l(a)].
4.04 Types of Generation System Connections A final example of a three-phase, three-wire gen-
and Applicable Metering Methods andUncertain- eration connection is the delta connected gener-
ties. Blondel‘s Theorem for the measurement of ator. The delta connected generator has no neutral
electrical power or energy states that in an elec- connection to facilitatea neutral conductor; hence,

11

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSUASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD INPERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

itcanonlybeconnected inathree-wireconnection not thecase, but in practice the voltage at the gen-
[see Fig. 4.l(b)]. erator terminais can be assumed to be balanced
( b ) Three-phase, four-wire generator connec- within 0.5% with a load power factor of 0.85 (la@
tions can be made only witha wye connected gen- or better.These conditions lead to a maximum un-
erator with the generator neutraleithersolidly certaintyof about0.5% attributable to the metering
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

grounded or, more typically, grounded throughan method.


impedance. Load distribution is madeat generator (b) Anotheralternativemetering system that
voltage rather than beingseparated from thegen- may be found in use on some three-phase, four-
erator by a delta-wye generator transformer. This wire systems is the two-element(stator) meter uti-
typeofconnection hasaseparatefourthconductor lizing two potential coils andtwo currentcoils, but
that directly connects the generator neutral (or receiving currentinput from three, rather than two
neutral grounding device) with the neutral of the current transformers[see Fig. 4.3(b)]. The third cur-
connected loads [see Fig. 4.l(c)]. rent transformer is connected to subtract its cur-
(c) For the generating system connections de- rent fromthat fedinto the two current coils by the
scribed in the preceding paragraphs, theoretically other two currenttransformers. The net effect is a
accurate metering (¡.e., no uncertainty introduced metering system that is electrically equivalent to
due to themetering methods) will be provided un- the 2X-element (stator) system described in (a)
der all conditions of load power factor and un- above. The maximum expected uncertainty in ap-
balance by the properapplication of thefollowing plyingthis metering methodon athree-phase,four-
metering systems (also see Table 4.1 for metering wire generator connection is the same as for the
method uncertainties summary): 2%-element (stator) system.
(7) three-phase, three-wire generator connec- (c) The application of a two-element (stator) de-
tions - two single element (stator) meters or one vice to meter a three-phase, four-wire generator
two-element (stator) polyphase meter; connection i s inappropriate if only two current
(2) three-phase, four-wire generator connec- transformers are used. Under certain conditions
tions - three single element (stator) meters or one (balanced phases), this meteringarrangement may
three-element (stator) polyphase meter. be theoretically accurate, but under certain con-
ditions where neutral currentis present, the two-
element (stator) method becomes very inaccurate
4.05 Alternative Metering Methods and
depending upon the amount of neutral current
Uncertainties
flowing and the generator load. In practical ap-
(a) Not all existing three-phase, four-wire gen- plications, the uncertainty in metering with the
erator installations have enough instrumenttrans- aforementioned system will be on the order of5%.
formers to provide metering in accordance with (cf) Alternative metering method uncertainties
Blondel's Theorem. Typically, for economic rea- are summarized in Table 4.1.
sons, a potential transformer is omitted and power (e) The number of current transformers and po-
and energy measurements are made with what is tential transformers required for each metering
known as a 2X-element (stator) meter utilizing method is summarized in Table 4.1. This infor-
threecurrent coils, but only two potential coils
[see mation is necessary in the uncertainty calculations
Fig. 4.3(a)]. Under most conditions, the 2X-element described in Section 5.
meter gives a theoreticallyaccurate measurement
of power or energy. If, however, the phasevoltages
4.06 Meter Constant and ReadingUncertainties
become unbalanced, the metered quantity is no
longer theoretically accurate and is further af- (a) Aside fromthe uncertaintiesintroduced
fected by power factor and phase current unbal- when a meteringsystem doesnot meet the fullre-
ance. quirements of Blondel's Theorem, such as the 2%-
Figure4.2 givesa graphical representation of the element meter applied to a three-phase, four-wire
error introducedinto the reading of a 2X-element system, all meters have additional uncertainties
(stator) device over a broad range of voltage and due to the inherent inaccuracies of the instru-
current unbalance at various load power factors. ments themselves. The uncertainties for typical
This graph, however, assumes that instrumenta- portable test andswitchboard wattmeters and
tion is available to measure the unbalance in the watthour meters are shown in Tables 4.2 and 4.3.
voltage and current. Unfortunately, this is usually (b) Reading error,uncertainties are included in
12

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OFMEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

Generator
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

transformer

Generator

System loads

(a) Wye Generator - 3-Phase, %Wire

lb) Delta Generator - 3-Phase. %Wire


I System loads

Solid or impedance

4th wire (neutral)

(c) Wya Generator - &Phase. +Wire

FIG. 4.1 GENERATOR CONNECTION TYPES

13

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTSOF STEAM TURBINES

+B

+6

+4
0.5 PF lag

0.6
L +2
E 0.7
W
c
C 0.8
? O 0.9
n
b
4-

-2 1 .O PF lag

0.9

-4 0.8
0.7

-6 0.6

0.5 PF lag

-a
O 2 4 6 8 10

Percent Unbalance - Voltage and Current in Line 1

Maximum deviation from average


% Unbalance = x 100
Average

GENERAL NOTES:
(a) This figure is reproduced with permission from the Electrical Metermen's Handbook, Seventh
Edition, by the Edison Electric Institute, 1965.
(b) See Fig. 4.3(al for location ofZ coils referenced in the legend on theabove curve.

FIG. 4.2 ERRORCURVESFOREQUALVOLTAGEANDCURRENTUNBALANCE IN ONEPHASEANDFOR


THREEPOSSIBLELOCATIONSOF Z COILFOR 2% STATORWATTHOUR METERS

14
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

Generator 3
2
1

(a) 2-1/2 Stator Watthour Meter With2 Coil in Line2

J I

(b) 2 Stator Watthour Meter With3 Current Transformers

FIG. 4.3 WATTHOURMETERCONNECTIONS

15

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD.ASME PTC b REPORT-ENGL L985 m 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 ObObSBL 2 S L m

ANSVASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAMTURBINES

TABLE 4.1
NUMBEROFCURRENTTRANSFORMERS (CT’S) ANDPOTENTIALTRANSFORMERS (PT’S)
REQUIREDFOREACHMETERINGMETHODANDMETERINGMETHODUNCERTAINTIESSUMMARY

No. of CT’s & PT’s Required


~~

Each Single
Polyphase
Element
Meter Meters Metering
Method
Item Connections
Generator Metering Methods CT’s PT’s CT’s PT‘S Uncertainty

Three-phase,
(a) three-wire measured
Power by two single-element 1 1 2 2 Zero
generator connections, (stator) meters or one two-element (stator)
Figs. 4.l(a) and 4.l(b) polyphase meter
(b) Three-phase, four-wire Power measured by three single-element 1 1 3 3 Zero
generator connections, (stator) meters or one three-element (stator)
Fig. 4.l(c) polyphase meter
Three-phase,
(c) four-wire Power
measured by one 2X-element (stator) NA
NA 3 2 f 0.5%
generator connections, polyphase meter
Fig. 4.l(c)
(d) Three-phase, four-wire Power measured by one two-element (stator) NA
NA 3 2 f 0.5%
generator connections, polyphase meter utilizing threecurrent
Fig. 4.l(c) transformers and two potential
transformers, Fig. 4.3(b)
Three-phase,
(e) four-wire measured
Power by two single-element 1 1 2 2 5%
generator connections, (stator) meters or one two-element (stator) Not
Fig. 4.l(c) polyphase meter utilizing two current recom-
transformers and two potential transformers mended

TABLE 4.2
WATTMETERUNCERTAINTIES

Item Wattmeter Uncertainty

(a) Meeting Code requirements *0.20% of reading


(b) High accuracy watts transducers with comparable +0.20% of reading
accuracy high resolution digital readout
(C) Portable single-element wattmeter, calibrated before
test
0.25% accuracy class [Note (l)] &0.25% of full-scale value
0.50% accuracy class [Note (I)] *0.50% of full-scale value
1.0% accuracy class [Note (I)] * 1.0% of full-scale value
(d) Switchboard type, 1- and 2-element wattmeters,
calibrated before test
1.0% accuracy
class [Note (I)] *
1.0% of full-scale value
(e) Uncalibrated wattmeters May be 5%, not
recommended for tests
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

NOTE:
(1) From ANSI C39.1-1981.

16

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 D 0 7 5 7 b 7 U DbOb782 L78 D

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 4.3
WATTHOUR METER UNCERTAINTIES
Item Uncertainty Watthour Meter

(a) Meeting Code requirements *0.15% of reading


(b) Electronic watthour meters with high accuracy digital &0.15% three phase
readout f 0 . 2 0 % single phase
(C) Portable three-phase watthour meter in temperature
controlled enclosure without mechanical register,
calibrated before test
Three-phase calibration [Note (I)] f 0.25%
Single-phase calibration [Note (I)] f 0.50%
Switchboard three-phase watthour meter with
mechanical register, calibrated before test
Three-phase calibration [Note (I)] f 0.50%
Single-phase calibration [Note (I)] f 1 .OO%
(e) Uncalibrated watthour meters May be f 5 % , not
recommended for
tests

GENERAL NOTE: Accuracy class designations are not established for watthour meters as they are
for wattmeters and instrument transformers.
NOTE:
(1) From ANSI C12-1975 and ANSI C12.10-1978.

TABLE 4.4
POTENTIAL TRANSFORMER UNCERTAINTIES

Uncertainty Item
Transformers Current

(a) Meeting Code requirements f 0.10%


(b)
Type calibration curve available, burden volt-amperes and -+ 0 . 2 % for 1.00 pf
power factor available f 0.3% for 0.85 pf
(C) Uncalibrated metering transformer with known burdens
[Note (I)]0.6% to 1.0% lagging power factor of metered
load, 90% to 110% rated voltage and metering class as
follows:
0.3% f 0.3% [Note (2)]
0.6% f 0.6% [Note (2)]
1.2% f 1.2% [Note (2)]
(d) Uncalibrated metering transformer with
unknown burdens f 1.5%
but not overloaded; 0.6% to 1.0% lagging power factor of
metered load, 90% to 110% rated voltages, 0.3 metering
class

GENERAL NOTE: Uncertainties are based on the assumption that the burden is the highest per-
missible value for the transformer without overload.
NOTES:
(I) Known burdens include check on wiring and contact resistance for the transformer Wiring.
(2) From ANSI C57.13-1978.

17

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~~ ~~ ~
~~

STD.ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL 2 7 8 5 W 0759b70 OhOb783 O 2 4 W

ANSVASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION


MEASUREMENT
OF UNCERTAINTY
ANAMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTSOF STEAM TURBINES

the uncertainties described for wattmeters. For formers must be determined and this data used for
these meters, the erroris a function of the change reference to transformer calibration curves. It is
in register reading magnitudeduring the test. Gen- sufficientto usethemanufacturer’s published data
erally, it i s possible to read the meter with an error to determine the burden of each station instru-
not exceeding one unit of themeter scale. For ex- ment and each test instrument connected to the
ample, if thechange in register reading i s 100 units, instrument transformers. Since the voltage regu-
the uncertainty in reading is one unit or1%. Read- lator burden i s variable, i t s removal from service
ing error can be reduced by extending the test during thetestisdesirable. I f this is impossible, the
period or by using the register based on smaller limits of burdenvariation due to regulator action
registration units. To obtain accurate readings it must be estimated. The resistance of connecting
frequently becomes necessary to count the turns wiring and fuses is best determined by actual mea-
of thewatthourmeter disc (or measure the time for surement.
a specified number of disc revolutions) to achieve The Code requires the calibration of potential
acceptable sensitivity in the reading process. It is and current transformers prior to the test. De-
usuallydesirabletoplanthetestsothatthereading pending on the test accuracy desired, the use of
error for the watthour meters is one order ofmag- calibrated transformers may not benecessary. Type
nitude smaller than the largest uncertainty intro- calibration curves forcurrent transformers are
duced by theinstrument transformers orthe generally satisfactory, and calibrationof individual
watthour meter. transformers usually is justified only for Code tests.
Current transformer cores may be permanently
4.07 Instrument Transformers and Uncertainties. magnetized by inadvertent operation with open
Instrument transformers are almost universallyap- secondary circuit, resultingin a change in theratio
plied to reduce electric-system voltage and current and phase-angle characteristics. If magnetization
levels to values appropriate for metering equip- is suspected, it should be removed by procedures
ment. Errors in power measurement are intro- described in Ref. (56) of Appendix III under “Pre-
ducedby the instrument transformers through caution in the Use of Instrument Transformers.’’
transformer ratio variations, and phase displace- Current transformers used for protective relay-
ments between primary andsecondary voltages or ing should not be used for tests. Theuncertainties
currents. for typical instrument transformers used for gen-
Both of these effects are governed by the fol- erator power output measurement are shown in
lowing operatingconditions: Tables 4.4 and 4.5.
( a ) excitingcurrent oftheinstrument trans-
former; 4.08 Uncalibrated StationMeters. Uncalibrated
(b) percentage of rated voltage or current; station metering installations may haveuncertain-
(c) power factor of the electric system load; ties substantially greater than those instruments
(d) impedance (usuallycalled burden)of thede- and transformers just described. Afrequent source
vices connected to thesecondary windings of the of error i s high resistance in potential transformer
instrument transformers. circuits, resulting in lower thanacutal power read-
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

The percentage of rated voltage or current and ings. High resistance may be in the fuses or wire
the power factor of the system load can be deter- terminations and can be readily detected by mea-
mined during tests by reference either to thesta- surements prior totest. Errors in uncalibrated sta-
tion instruments or totest instruments. While the tion metering installationsmay be as much as 5%;
Code recommends the use of test instruments for therefore, these installations are not recom-
voltage and current measurements, the readings mended for test.
of station instruments are usually of sufficient ac-
curacy for the purposes described here, 4.09 Overall Uncertainty of Power Measure-
The Code permits no burden on the potential ment. Measurements of electric power when using
transformers other than the test instruments and wattmeters should be conducted in accordance
their leads. Since separate test transformers fre- with instructions given in PTC 19.6-1955, Par. 5.85.
quently are unavailable, it may be necessary to If watthour meters are used,the instructions given
connect the test instruments to the potential and in Par. 6.70 will apply. A typical instrument con-
current transformers serving the station instru- nection diagram is shown in Fig. 4.4 of this Report.
ments. The resulting total burdens on the trans- The overall uncertainty of the power measure-

18

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D D A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 m 0 7 5 7 b 7 0 Db06984 Tb0

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSUASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 4.5
CURRENT TRANSFORMER UNCERTAINTIES

Item Current Transformers Uncertainty

requirements Code
(a) Meeting & 0.05%
Type
calibration
(b) curve available, burden
volt-amperes
and 2 0.10%
power factor available
(C) Uncalibrated
metering
transformers with
unknown burdens
but not overloaded, 0.6% to 1.0% lagging power factor of
metered load, and meteringaccuracy classes as follows at
100% rated current of transformer:
0.3% accuracy class f 0.3% [Note (l)]
0.6%accuracy class 20.6% [Note (I)]
1.2% accuracy class & 1.2% [Note (l)]
At 10% rated current of transformer:
0.3% accuracy class 0.6% [Note (I)]
0.6% accuracy class 1.2% [Note (l)]
1.2% accuracy class +2.4% [Note (l)]

GENERAL NOTE: Uncertainties are based on the assumption that the burden is the highest per-
missible value for the transformer without overload.
NOTE:
( 1 ) From ANSI C57.13-1978.

ment should be calculated as shown in Section 5 where


of this Report. P = power, watts
angular velocity, radianslsec
W=
torque, newton-meters
T=
MEASUREMENT OF MECHANICAL OUTPUT Power expressed in customary units
4.10 GeneraLThis Section provides guidance for
27rn T
the measurement of the transmitted power from p=-
mechanicaldrive steam turbines. The driven 550
equipment includes power absorption equipment
thatsometimesdoes notdirectlylenditselfto where
highly accurate performance measurements. P = power, horsepower
Drivenmachineryofthistypeincludes fans, n = rotational speed, revolutions/sec
pumps,andcompressors.Electricalgeneration T = torque, foot-pounds
equipment has been covered in Pars. 4.03 through
4.09.
Power can be defined as the time rate of doing
4.1 1 Methods of Mechanical Power
work. The power being transmitted and the an-
Measurement
gular velocityare both assumed to be constantwith
time; that is, thereare no transientsin either torque (a) DirectMethods Suitable
for
Measuring
o r angular velocitywithinthetimeinterval re- Steam Turbine Shaft Power Output
quired for the measurement. (7) Reaction Torque Measuring Systems
The direct method for measuring power, utiliz- (a) Cradleddynamometers
ing a dynamometer or a torque meter, involves (7) eddy current types
determination of the variables in the following (2) waterbrake types
equation. (3) electric generators
(6) Uncradled dynamometers
Power expressed i n SI units (7) movable table type
(2) flanged reaction type
P = Tw (2) Transmission Torque Measuring Systems

19

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSIIASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAMTURBINES

t
Generator

3Ph. 1
Ph. 2

Transformer secondaries may be


grounded at secondary terminals
or ground connection on table.

WM u
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

VM - Voltmeter
AM - Ammeter
WM - Wattmeter
C T - Current transformer
PT -. Potential transformer
m - Polarity
mark

FIG. 4.4 TYPICAL CONNECTIONS FOR MEASURING ELECTRICALPOWER OUTPUT BY THETHREE-WATTMETER


METHOD

20

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L 1 9 8 5 M 0757b70 ObOb98b 833 M

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF. MEASUREMENT


UNCERTAINTY
ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD

(a) Shaft torque measurement systems calibration at operating temperature i s preferred


(7) surface strain gage systems when possible.
(2) slip rings (contacting) (b) Indirect Methods of Mechanical Power Mea-
(3) rotating transformer (noncontacting) surements, Energy Balance. The power measure-
(b) Torsional variable
differentialtrans- ments derived from tests on the driven equipment
former, magnetic type (noncontacting) can b e used in the calculations for field tests on
(c) Angular displacement systems mechanical drive turbines. An example is found in
(7) mechanical ANSVASME PTC 6A-1982, Section lx. Examples of
(2) electrical driven equipment in this category include cen-
(3) optical trifugalpumps, fans, compressors,and exhaus-
Appendix III, Ref. (57) provides information on ters. ASME PTC8.2-1965(R1985) forcentrifugal
power measurements using reaction torquemea- pumps, ASME PTC 10-1965 (R1985) for compressors
suring systems listed under (a)(l)above. These are and exhausters, and ANSUASME PTC 11-1984 for
best utilized for factory tests. Reference (57) also fans should be consulted when planning field tests
containsinformationonshafttorquemeasure- on mechanical drive turbines powering such de-
ments by means of transmission torque measuring vices.
systems listed under (a)(2) above. These are better A further discussion on measurements for me-
adapted and moreeconomical for useon field tests. chanical output of steam turbines driving boiler
Transmission dynamometers (shaft-torque me- feed pumps insteam turbine cyclesi s given in Par.
ter) generally consist of a metal shaft to which a 4.13.
signal sensor is attached. This shaftis inserted be- (c) Advantages and Disadvantages. Advantages
tween the mechanical driver iand t s load. When the and disadvantages of each of the above shaft power
shaft is twisted by loading, the signal sensor pro- measuring methods are summarized in Table 4.6.
vides anoutput voltage directly proportional to the
applied load. Signal sensors are generally, but not 4.12 Testing Uncertainties.Table 4.7 summarizes
necessarily, limited to strain gages or other devices typical uncertainties for the various shaft power
that measure angular deflection by magnetic fields.measurement methods described in AppendixIII,
Shaft torque measuring systems generally utilize Ref. (57). These can b e used as a guide for theac-
the shear modulus of the test section along with curacy of the instrumentation required for.thevar-
a twist measurement to establish the transmitted ious measuring methods.
torque.
The shear modulus will vary from one type of 4.1 3 Measurements of Mechanical Power Output
metal to another. However, there usuallyi s no de- to Drive a Feedwater Pump by Energy Balance. The
tectable difference in modulus due to shaft di- output of a nonextracting mechanical drive tur-
ameter, chemical composition variations for any bine supplying power to a feedwater p u m p can be
one alloy, physical properties, methods of manu- determined by applying either of the two proce-
facture, or slight variations in heattreatment. dures outlined in Code Par. 4.09. The first proce-
Paragraph 104, Ref. (44) of Appendix III discusses dureconsistsof balancingthe heatand flowaround
ultrasonic means of determining the shear mod- the driven apparatus and solving for power input.
ulus. This involves, as a primary measurement, the tem-
The uncertainty in shear modulus of shafting perature risein the feedwaterflowirag through the
with known chemicalcompositioncanvaryby pump. The second procedure involves measuring
+2.0%; therefore, calibration i s requiredfor the pump suction and discharge pressure, using
greater accuracy. The accuracy of the calibration an assumed p u m p efficiency in the appropriate
measurement is on the order of +0.50%. power equation. The appropriate equations for
Although some types of shaft torque systems are both procedures are included in the Code. An-
temperature compensated, the temperature effect other sourceofguidance in theheatbalance
on elastic properties of the stressed element must method of power measurement i s found in ASME
be considered when temperature compensation is PTC 19.7-1980 (R1983).
not included. Theshear modulus of most low alloy The test of a drive turbine is best coordinated
carbon steels decreasesabout 1.5% per IOOOF (2.7% with that of the main unit, since much ofthe data
per 100°C) increase in temperature. These thermal required for the drive turbineis also required for
sensitivity rates are not precisely established and the mainunit. The instrumentation used for pump
21

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D . ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 '0759b70 ObOb787 77T W

ANSVASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAMTURBINES

TABLE 4.6
SUMMARY - ADVANTAGESA N D DISADVANTAGES OF DIFFERENT TORQUEOR
POWERMEASURING DEVICES

Disadvantages
Method Advantages

Reaction Systems
Cradled dynamometer Highly accurate; calibration Expensive; not readily
performed in place transportable; size and
weight requirements;
trunnion bearing error at
low torque; water and
electrical line interference
Uncradled dynamometer No trunnion bearing inherent Complex support structures
friction and hysteresis required for large
losses; portable machines; metal elastic
characteristics vary with
temperature
Transmission Systems
Shaft torque Relatively low cost; relatively Metal elastic characteristics
good accuracy; good vary with temperature,
frequency response; percent error increases with
maximum load flexibility decreasing load for given
system
Angular displacement Small in physical size; Difficult calibration
adaptable to removable procedures required,
pieces such as spacer usually cannot be done in
couplings place; metal elastic
characteristics vary with
temperature
Energy Balance Can be performed when Less accurate than direct
direct methods are not methods; large amount of
possible or practical data; uncertainty of fluid
thermodynamic properties

measurements should be selected to produce the shaft seal leakoff flows, and any other outgoing
desired test uncertainty. Of critical importance is pump flows, such as desuperheating water, when
the instrumentation used to measure the temper- these do not leave at pump discharge enthalpy.
ature rise in the feedwater as this rise is usually of Pressures and temperatures of these miscella-
small magnitude. Multiple measurementswith cal- neous flows must be measured for enthalpy de-
ibrated multijunction thermocouples, installed in termination.
properly designed adequately insulated thermo- Data collection for a drive turbine test should
couple wells, are necessary. The feedwater flow spanatwohourperiod,orthedurationofthecoin-
passing through the pump should be measured cident test on themain unit.The required duration
with a calibrated flow section. For multiple pumps for an independently conducted driveturbine test
operating in parallel, total flow may haveto be ap- may be determined by consulting a graph similar
portioned in accordance with therelative values of to Fig. 3.1 of theCode. The reader should note that
nozzle pressure drop through therespective min- the 0.05% effect shown in Fig. 3.1 may be too re-
imum-flow monitoringdevices. strictive for a drive
turbine test and that values for
When pump power is calculated using an as- K or S may have to be derived for each test. Data
sumed or' previously determined efficiency, suc- averages and scatter, combined with the number
tion and discharge pressures must be measured of instruments and the number of locations for
with deadweight gages or equally accurate instru- each measurement must beused to arrive at a test
ments. uncertaintyvalue. Reference(24) of Appendix III is
The heat balance about the pumpalso requires a goodsource for making the required uncertainty
measurements of shaft sealing injection flows, calculation.
22
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 0757b70 O b D b 7 8 8 b o b 9

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

TABLE 4.7 Table 4.8 summarizes measurement uncertain-


SUMMARY OF TYPICALUNCERTAINTYFOR ties for testing of boiler feed pump drive turbines.
DIFFERENT SHAFT POWERMEASUREMENT
METHODS
4.14 Measurement of RotarySpeed. Speed may
Method
Uncertainty for 2 h Test be defined as the time rate of change of position
Reaction Torque Systems of a body without regard todirection.Rotary speed
Cradled +0.1% to k0.5% and torquearethetwovariables requiredfordirect
dynamometers measurement of mechanical power output. The re-
Uncradled fO.5% t o fI.O%
torque
for lations of speed and torque with powerare given
dynamometers
i n Par. 4.10. The accuracy of the speed measure-
Shaft Torque ment is as important as the torque measurement
Measurement for an accurate power measurement. Some power
Surface strain systems, k 1.0% for
torque measuring devices have self-contained rotary
shaft calibrated speed and torque measuring instruments thatare
Angular displacement
combined within themechanism and visually dis-
systems, shaft
calibrated play or print the measured shaft power. Typical
mechanical
Depends on design
and methodsformeasuringrotary speed and esti-
application mated uncertainties are given i n Table 4.9.
electrical f 1.0% A pulse generator and pickup with a crystal-
optical Low
buterror,
intrinsic
controlledtime base counterwillprovide a
subject to large error from
environmental sources measurement ofminimumuncertaintyand is rec-
No shaft calibration f 3.0% for
torque ommended for
conducting Code
a test. The pulse
generator should have a minimum of60 teeth pro-
Balance
Energy Methods viding pulses,
turn
which
in are sensed
non-
by
Open cycle systems Depends on uncertainty
contacting magnetic or eddy currenttransducers.
analysis
Closed cycle systems Depends on uncertainty The digital speed measuring device will measure
analysis

TABLE 4.8
MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTIES FOR TESTING O F BOILER FEED PUMPDRIVE
TURBINES

Quality and
Measurement Instrument Grade Uncertainty

Calibrated
suction
section
Pump
flow
Calibrated
flow f 0.2%
Feedwater temperatureMultijunction
rise thermocouples
Calibrated +_O.IoF
Pump suction
temperature
Thermocouple and
digital
Calibrated
voltmeter f l.O°F
pressure
Deadweight
suction
Pump gage ... f 0.1 %
discharge
pressure
Pump
Deadweight gage ... f 0.1 %
Pump shaft seal leakoffflowOrificeflowsectionand
Calibrated manometer +1.0%
Pump shaft seal injection
Orifice
flow
section
and
flow Calibrated manometer * 1.0%
Pump shaft speed Stroboscope ... * 1.0%
Desuperheating water flowOrificeflow section and
manometer ... * 1.0%
Temperatures
Thermocouple
digital
of and
Calibrated
voltmeter flows
miscellaneous f l.O°F
Pressures
miscellaneous
of Bourdon gage Station f 2.0 to 5.0%
flows
Pump
efficiency From pump manufacturer Not available Not available

23
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTSOF STEAM TURBINES

TABLE 4.9
MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY - TYPICALROTARYSPEED INSTRUMENTATION

Speed Instrument and Type Method Uncertainty

Frequency Sensitive
Electronic Shaft mounted 60 tooth gear, magnetic or eddy f 1 pulse count
current pickup; pulse counter, crystal time
base, digital display
Mechanical Vibrating reed tachometer mounted on frame *1.00% to *2.00%
of machine, nonrecording
Tachometer
Electric generator Shaft mounted AC or DC generator, with * 1.00% to f 2.00%
output voltage proportional tospeed,
connected to an indicator
Eddy current Test rotor connected to three-phase generator f 1.00% to f 2.00%
and connected to three-phase sync motor
which drives the tachometer
Centrifugal Flyball governor built into hand-held f 1.50% to f 3.00%
tachometer
Counters
Accumulators Digital display connected to pickup obtaining f 1 count
signal from shaft mounted 60 tooth gear
Timepieces
Electronic Crystal time base with digital display and gate *0.005% to *0.010%
time of 1 sec to 5 sec
Electric Time base using an analog clock locked into AC *0.10% to *0.20%
supply
Other
Stroboscope Rotating reference mark on shaft illuminated by f 0.50% to f 1.00%
periodic light flashes
Photocell Light reflective mark on shaft, reflecting a light f0.50% to *1.00%
source to the photocell, then to meter

the speed by summing the number of pulses of the discussion, methods, and applications relative to
input signal for a preciselyknown time period. The speed measurement.
rotary speed accuracy should include the crystal Rotaryspeedmeasurements mustbecoordi-
time base uncertainty (on the order of f 0.0075%), nated with torquemeasurements toobtain thetest
and also the uncertainty of the count. Since frac- power. The frequency of calibration, number of
tional counts are not included, the count uncer- observations, and other similar items should ac-
tainty is expressed as: cord with the test objectivesoutlined in the Code.
All measuring apparatusmust becalibrated before
and after a test in accordance with Code require-
1
* count time (sec) X number of teethlrev.
ments.
The measurement uncertainty for typical rotary
speed instrumentation is presented in Table 4.9.
For a 60 tooth pulse generatorwith the counter
set on a one second time base, the uncertaintybe- 4.15 Measurement of Primary Flow. Since the
comes publication of ANSUASMEPTC6R-1969(R1985),
much additional data on flow measurements, using
1
flow nozzles and orifices.permanently installedin
' 1 sec X 60 teethlrev.
= ~ 0 . 0 1 6 7d s = & 1 rpm straight pipe runs in steam turbine installations,
has become available. This expanded database of
both published and unpublished datarepresents
Other types ofspeed measuring devices canbe industry's experience t o date. From the analysis of
found inASMEPTC19.13-1961. Itincludesageneral this data, the method of estimating flow uncer-
24

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~~~ ~ ~~~~

S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 0759b70 ObOb790


2b4 m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT


UNCERTAINTY
ANSVASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

tainties described in this Section was developed. Item C. The device was in service between
The material given in this Section i s based primarily
time of calibration andtest and its condition may
on comparison of flowsmeasured with Code flow havechanged, although therei s no evidence of de-
sections (after compensation for heat and water terioration.
balanceflows) withcorrespondingflows mea- Item D. The flow section was installed after
sured with flow sections that did not meet Code initial system flushing. It was i n service before the
requirementsand were installed in same the steam test and has not been inspected since installation.
turbine cycle arrangement. The primary intent of Thegiven values represent possibledeposit
this Section, therefore, is to provide a means of de- buildup or roughening ofsurfaces during service
riving the estimated additional expecteduncer- before the test.
tainty in flowmeasurements for steam turbine tests item E. The flow section was calibrated,
when flow sections that do not meet Code re- thenpermanently installed, andnotinspected
quirements are used and the installation config- thereafter. For liquid measurement, the assigned

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
urations aresimilar to those typically found in values represent theeffectof possibledamagedur-
power plants. ing initial flushing or from deposits that accumu-
late during operation. For steam measurement, the
4.16 Many factors determine theaccurate mea- values include the additional effect of an extrap-
surement of primary flow as described in theCode, olated curve, and some damage from initial blow-
Pars. 4.19 through 4.47.The more importantfactors ing of thesteam line, cleaning out welding beads,
affecting absolute accuracy i n this measurement and other contamination. These values increase
are given in Tables 4.10 and 4.11 and Figs. 4.5 with prolonged service if there is scaling, deposit
through 4.9 in this Report. Table 4.10 lists the es- accumulation, or erosion. For measuring steam
timated uncertainty in flow under various circum- flow, usual practice employs a pipe-wall tap noz-
stances when all flow section configuration details zle.
meet the Code requirements. Figures 4.5 through (2) Group 2 in Table 4.10 applies to uncali-
4.9 pertain to the flow section configuration de-
brated flowsections.
tails, and thecurves on thefigures indicate the ex-
Item F. An inspection immediately before
pected uncertainties for selected deviations from
and after the test includes checking for correct di-
the Code flow section configuration. A flow sec-
ameter, damage due to passing debris, and change
tion’s estimated overall uncertainty is calculated
in diameter dueto deposit buildup.For throat tap
by taking thesquare root of the summation of the
nozzles, the inspection includesa very closescru-
squares of the applicable percentage from Table
tiny of the throat taps. They should be sharp and
4.10, and the applicable percentages to the flow
free of burrs.
section from Figs. 4.5 through 4.9. In Table 4.10,
uncertainties are tabulatedinpercentforboth Item G. If not inspected after test, the un-
water andsteam flow measurement. For water flow certainty from possible damage and deposit
measurement, the uncertainties shown are based buildup i s increased.
o n flow coefficientsonly. For steam flow mea- Item H. This measuring section will be in
surements, the uncertainties are for differential place during the initial flushing and blowing of the
pressure to inletpressure ratiosof 0.10 or less, and pipeand initial operation. Considerabledamage in
include both flow coefficient and expansion factor. the formof nicks andscratches is possible andde-
(a) Comments on the items Table4.10
in follow. positbuildup i s common,thusincreasingthe
(7) Group 1 items in Table 4.70 apply when a uncertainty of the flow-measuring device. For ex-
flow section iscalibrated. ample, a piece ofwelding rodacross a nozzle may
Item A. Calibration meets Coderequire- produce a 10% error. There should be a certificate
ments. Application of
uncertainties may be of inspection stating that the diameter
was correct,
required for the instrumentation detailed pres- for the unit was clean, the taps were straight, and the
sure measurement i n Pars. 4.22 through 4.27 and installation, i n general, complied with ASME PTC
for temperature measurementi n Pars. 4.29 and 4.30 19.5-1972, Fluid Meters, Part II, when originally in-
of this Report. stalled.
item B. Calibrated, but the shape of the Item i. The absence of the minimum in-
curve and numericalvalue specified i n Par. 4.31 of spection of Item H precludes few errors. For ex-
the Code do notmeet requirements. ample, a beveled orifice installed backwards will
25

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M EP T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 D 0757b70 ObOb771 LTO m

ANSVASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OFMEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

TABLE 4.10
BASE UNCERTAINTIES OF PRIMARY FLOW MEASUREMENT
-

T Liquid T Superheated Steam (at Least2 5 O


Superheat)

Flow Nozzle T 7 Flow Nozzle

Throat Pipe Wall Throat Pipe Wall


Item Base Uncertainty, U,,% Tap Tap Orifice Tap Tap Orifice

Group 1 - Calibrated Flow Sections


Meeting Code requirements 0.15 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.35 0.45
[Note (3)l [Note (4)l [Note (4)1 [Note ( 4 1 [Note (4)l [Note W1
Calibrated immediately before test and 0.25 0.50 0.60 0.50 0.75 1.10
inspected after test, coefficient curve
extrapolated
Calibrated before installation and 0.35 0.60 0.80 0.70 1 .O5 1.65
inspected before and after test assuring
no visible or measurable changes in the
flow element
Calibrated before permanent installation 1.25 1.25 1.55 1.60 1.70 2.30
and installed after initial flushing [Note
(V1
Calibrated before permanent installation 2.50 2.50 3.00 2.75 2.80 3.70
[Notes (1) and (211

Group 2 - Uncalibrated Flow Sections


Inspected immediately before and after 0.80 2.00 1.o0 1.20 2.50 2.00
test
Inspected immediately before test 1.15 2.50 2.50 1.50 3.00 3.00
Inspected before permanent installation 2.60 3.20 3.20 3.00 3.70 4.20
[Notes (1) and (2)]
No inspection and permanent installation See Par. 4.16(a) (l),Item I

GENERAL NOTE: Overall uncertainty of flow sections:


Withno flow straightener = \/(U8)’ + + (U,)’+ (U,,,)’
With a flow straightener = J(UB)’ (U,)’ (ULs,)’ (ULs2)* + + + +
Where U, is from this table, ULNS
is from Fig. 4.5, U, is from Fig. 4.6, ULs,is from Fig. 4.7, ULsZis from Fig. 4.8, and UDS,is from Fig.
4.9.
NOTES:
(1) Good water chemistry, no after test inspection, less than six months in service (see Par. 4.17).
(2) Reasonable assurancethat minimal damage was caused to flow element during initial flushing.
(3) 0.15% pertains to flow sections located in the lower temperature part of the cycle. The 0.15% may increase to 0.25% when the
flow section is located in the higher temperature part of the cycle, such as in the boiler feedwater line downstream of the top
heater.
(4) Information relative to theconstruction, calibration, and installation of other flow-measuring devices is described in ASME PTC
19.5-1972.Although these devices are not recommended for the measurement of primaryflow, they may be used if they conform
to the general requirements of Par. 4.22 of the Code with the followingexceptions:
(a) For the requirement of Par. 4.22(a) of the Code, the 0 ratio shall be limited tothe range 0.25 to 0.50 for wall tap nozzles and
venturis and 0.30 to 0.60 for orifices.
(b) For the requirement of Par. 4.22(d) of theCode, the appropriate reference coefficient for the actual device given in PTC 19.5
shall be used. The parties to a test should become familiar with the contents of PTC 19.5 regarding these devices.

26

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD.ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1785 m 0759b70 ObOb972 O37 9

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 4.11
MINIMUM STRAIGHTLENGTH O F UPSTREAMPIPEFORORIFICE PLATES A N D F L O W NOZZLE F L O W
SECTIONS W I T H NO F L O W STRAIGHTENERS
[Minimum Straight Lengths of Pipe Required BetweenVarious Fittings Locatedat Inlet and Outlet
of the Primary Device, and Device Itself (based oninformationin ASME MFC-3M-1985 and ASME
PTC 19.5-1972).]
r
O n lnlet Side of Primary Device T
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6 Column 7
Two 90 deg.
Ells in Same
Plane,
Single 90 deg. Separated by
Bend or Tee 10 Diameters Two 90 deg.
(Flow From Two 90 deg. of Straight Ells Not in Valve or On Outlet
Diameter One Branch Ells in Same Pipe Same Plane Reducers and Regulator Side (For All
Ratio Only) Plane [Note (1)l [Note 12)l Expanders [Note (3)l Inlets)

0.10 6 8.5 6 14 6 16.5 2.5


--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

0.15 6 8.5 6 14 6 17 2.5


0.20 6 8.5 6 14.5 6 18 2.5
0.25 6 8.5 6 15.5 6 18.5 3
0.30 6 8.5 6 16 6 19.5 3

0.35 6 8.5 6 17 6 20.5 3


0.40 6 8.5 6 18 6 22 3.5
0.45 6.5 9 6.5 19.5 6.5 23.5 3.5
0.50 7 10 7.5 21 7 25 3.5
0.55 8 11.5 8.5 22.5 8 27 3.5
0.60 9.5 14 9.5 25 9.5 30 4
0.65 11.5 16 11 29.5 11.5 34 4
0.70 14 19 12 31 14 39 4
O. 75 16.5 21.5 13.5 35 16.5 44 4.5
-
GENERAL NOTES:
(a) All straight lengths are expressed as multiples of pipe diameterD a n d are measured from the upstream end
of the inlet section.
(b) The radius of curvature of a bend or elbow shall not be less than 0.75 times the pipe diameter D.

NOTES:
(1) If this length i s less than 10 diameters, Column 2 shall apply.
(2) If the two ells in Column4 are closely preceded by a third ell notin the same plane as the second ell, the piping requirements
shown by Column 4 should be doubled.
(3) The valve or regulator in Column6 restricts the flow; however, awide open gate valve or plug valve may be considered as not
creating any serious disturbance, and itmay be located according to the requirements of the fitting preceding it,as permitted
in Column 1, 2, 3, or 4.

produce a very large error. Hence, no numerical ties of over20%may result. For flow measurements
uncertainty value for Item I is tabulated. where severe upstream disturbances may occur,
(b) Comments on thecurves in Figs. 4.5 through the use of a multiplate-type flow straightener pre-
4.9 follow. Figure 4.5 is applicable to flowsections ceding the flow section i s recommended.
containing no flow straighteners. Locating flow Figure 4.5 used with Table 4.11, Columns 1
sections with no flow straighteners where severe through 6, estimates the flow section uncertainty
upstream swirl disturbances may be encountered for the straight length of pipe preceding the pri-
should be avoided. Examplesof such locatims are: mary flow element.
(7) near pump discharge; Figure 4.6 is applicable to flowsections with and
(2) after and nearpartially open control valves; without flow straighteners. The curves on the fig-
( 3 ) preceded by two or more elbows in dif- ure give the additional uncertainty for calibrated
ferent planes with no run between the elbows. and uncalibrated flow sections when the P ratio i s
In some instances,if a flow section without a flow greater than that recommended by the Code.
straightener is used in these locations, uncertain- Figures4.7 and 4.8 are for flowsections with flow
27

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD*ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 D 0759b70 ObOb993 T73 m

ANSUASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

2.5

S?
6
3
3
2.0
z
c.
.-
C
m
E
V
1.5

1.0 1 1 -
1 .o 1.5 2.0
Ratio Straight Upstream Length
Length From Table 4.1 1

GENERAL NOTE: Curves are for flow section arrangements where


only moderate upstream disturbances are expected (see Par. 4.16).

FIG. 4.5 MINIMUM STRAIGHTRUNOFUPSTREAM PIPE AFTER FLOWDISTURBANCE,NOFLOW


STRAIGHTENER

2.0

c
i
.c 1.0
c
o
c"
3

O
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
5, Ratio

FIG. 4.6 ß RATIO EFFECT

28

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD.ASME P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 W 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 ObOb994 70T

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATIONOFMEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSItASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985


INPERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

3.0
8.
F

v,
2.0
1
c
.-m
C
c
al
c" 1.0
3

I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U l I l I I I I l
O t I I I ' I I ' I I ' W I I I ' I ' I
O 4 8 12 16 20 24

Number of Diameters Straight Pipe Between Primary Element


and Flow Straightener

FIG. 4.7 EFFECTOFNUMBEROFDIAMETERS OF STRAIGHTPIPEAFTERFLOWSTRAIGHTENER

2.0

1 .o

Number of Sections in Flow Straightener With


Length = 2 Pipe Diameters

FIG. 4.8 EFFECTOFNUMBER OF SECTIONS IN FLOWSTRAIGHTENER

1.5
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

S For sections with or without flow straighteners


i
8 1.0
s
i
4-
.-C
? 0.5
o
3

I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 l : : ' ' I l

0.8 0.9 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0


Straight Downstream Length
Ratio
Length From Column 7,Table 4.1 1

FIG. 4.9 EFFECT


OF DOWNSTREAM PIPE LENGTH

29

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~~ ~ ~

S T D * A S H E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 m 0757b70 D b O b 7 7 5 m

ANSUASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT
UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTSOF STEAM TURBINES

straighteners. These curves give estimated uncer- nozzle is installed in a boiler feedwater line. The
tainties forthe upstream length between the flow section is not calibrated and the flow nozzle
straightener and flow element are thatshorter than was inspected before permanent installation.The
the 1 6 0 specified bythe Code andwhenthe flow nozzle P ratio is 0.65 and the flowsection has
straightener has less than the Code specified 50 no flow straightener. The pipe inside diameter D
section 2 0 long straightener. For multiplate flow i s 8.5 in. There is a single 90 deg. bend preceding
straighteners with a large number of small holes, the flowsection. The flow section upstream length
ULszin Fig. 4.8 is equal to 0.0. The curves on the is 107 in. The straight length of pipe downstream
figures applywhen the lengthof straight pipe of the flow nozzle is 50 in. The upstream length ex-
ahead of the flow straightener is at least 2 pipe pressed in pipe diameters i s 107/8.5 = 12.6. Table
diameters and the straight length of pipe down- 4.11, Column 1, indicates that for = 0.65, the re-
stream oftheflow element is atleast 4pipe quired minimum straight length of pipe between
diameters. In locationswhere flow profiles mayen- the upstream elbow and the flow nozzle inlet face
counter severe separation, such as when the flow should be atleast 11.5 pipe diameters. The up-
section i s installed in a branch leg ofa tee, use of stream length ratio to be used to enter Fig. 4.5 is
tubular flow straighteners can cause large errors therefore 12.6h1.5 = 1.1, resulting in a UINSvalue
in measurements. Such locations should be of & 1.8%. The downstream length, expressed in
avoided. Otherwise, use of a
multiplate-type pipe diameters, is 5018.5 = 5.9. Table 4.11, Column
straightener is recommended. 7, indicates a minimum requirement of 4 pipe di-
Figure 4.9 applies to flow sections with and with- ameters. The downstream length ratio to be used
out flowstraighteners. This figure, used with Table to enter Fig.4.9 is therefore 5.914 = 1.5, resulting
4.11, Column 7, estimates the flow section uncer- in a UDsLvalue of *0.3%.
tainty due the to straight pipe length following the
primary flow element. (7) From Table4.10, Item H for Usapplies and
is +3.2%.
4.17 Flow SectionsThatCannotBeInspected (2) From Fig.4.6, U, at ß = 0.65 and the un-
After Installation. Table4.10, Items D, E, and H are calibrated curve = &0.5%.
for sections containing flow elements permanently The combined uncertainty becomes:
welded in the pipe withoutinspection ports. This
makes it difficult toinspect the flowelement after +
d(1.8)* (0.3)2 + (3.2)2 + (0.5)2= +3.7%
the flow section is assembled. It is subsequently (6) For the same flow nozzle calibrated before
impossible to establish whether the flowelements permanent installation, and assembled in a flow
are free of deposits or if damage has occurred since section with a 30 tube flowstraightener assembled
assembly. In general, initial surface deposits and 12 pipe diameters upstream of the flow element,
scratches on flow nozzles and damage to orifices the uncertainties become:
in the form of distortion or nicks to thesharp edge
have an immediate effect on the flowcoefficient; (7) From Table 4.10, Item E for Usapplies and
thereafter, if further deposits or damageoccur, the is &2.5%.
change in coefficient with time is probably much (2) ‘From Fig. 4.6, U, at B = 0.65 and calibrated
reduced. For noninspectable flow sections in ser- = 20.3%.
vice for more than6 months, the base uncertainty (3) From Fig.4.7, ULs,at 12 and 0 = 0.65 =
is likely to change much less with time than in- &0.6%.
dicated for the initial 6 monthsin Table4.10. When (4) From Fig. 4.8, ULszat 30 and 0 = 0.65 =
the base uncertainties for these flow sections with f 0.4%.
morethan 6 months in service must beestablished, ( 5 ) From Fig. 4.9, UDsLat 1.5 = *0.3%
mutual agreement between the parties to thetest
must be reached after considering the plant’s water The combined uncertainty becomes:
chemistry and maintenance history.
J(2.5)* + (0.3)* + (0.6)’ + (0.4)2 + (0.q2 = +2.6%
4.18 Theprocedurefordeterminingthetotalex-
pected uncertainty using the tables and figures is 4.19 Measurements Using RadioactiveTracers.
shown in the following examples. Theuncertainty in flowsorqualities measuredwith
(a) Aflowsectioncontaininga pipe-wall tapflow radioactivetracers i s dependent on the
uncertainty

30
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E PTC b REPORT-ENGL L985 m D757b70 ObOb99b 7 8 2 m
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 4.12
RADIOACTIVE TRACER UNCERTAINTIES
~~

Combined Uncertainty for


Quality and Grade
Measurement Instrument Quality and Grade Instruments Indicated

Counting Two precision calibrated detectors, +0.3% Throttle quality 0.01%

Extraction quality 0.2%


Injection rate Instrument quality positive displacement ,

minipump, *0.3% Heater leakages 0.05% of


Calibrated analytical balance scale (0.1% throttle flow
accuracy class), f 0.4%
Flow 0.75%

Counting One precision calibrated detector, -10.6% Throttle-quality &0.1%

Extraction quality +0.5%


Injection rate Medium accuracy positive displacement
minipump, +1.0% Heater leakage f 0.1% of
Calibrated medium accuracy balance throttle flow
scale (0.14% accuracy class), -11.2%
Flow f 1.75%

in the individual measurements that are made. curatepositivedisplacementmeteringpumps


These measurements are counting, injection rate, should be used and the tracer injected should be
background, and other similar measurements. This measured. The most reliable method is to contin-
Section discusses these uncertainties and their ef- uallyweigh the injection containers and record the
fects on the final computations. weight loss every five minutes.I f injection ratesare
The radiation that is emitted from the tracer is not constant, an error will be introduced.
a random decay and followsa Poisson distribution. Radiation background is also a possible source
The uncertainty i s dependent on the size of the of error. There are two types of background which
sample. About IO4counts arenecessary to achieve must be considered. The first is natural radiation
1% uncertainty. To decrease this uncertainty to in the atmosphere. This normally requires about
0.1%, IO6 counts are necessary, and counting time a 1%correction and the resulting uncertainty i s
is increased by a factor of 100. All counting for a about 0.5%. The second is radiation in the cycle
test must be completed within a finite time inter- due to thetracer. This can range from 0% t o 10%
val. This i s governed either by test timing or by the depending on reactor carryover, demineralizers,
Ir: either case, a counting un- and other similar sources. The latter uncertainties
half-life of the tracer.
certainty of 0.104 is generally not possible. are usually larger than those dueto natural radia-
Another source of uncertainty stems from the tion.
preparation of standards. Because of the high ac- Listed below are Code test expected uncertain-
tivityoftheinjection solution, itcannot becounted ties:
directly and must be diluted with demineralized ( a ) Standards - +0.5%
water to form a countable standard. isIt extremely (b) Counting - &1.0%
important that this dilution be done accurately, (c) Injection rate - +1.0%
since a 1% error in the dilution will resultin a 1% (cf) Natural background - +0.5%
error in the final result. Normally, four standards (e) Cycle background -- *1.0%
are prepared and counted. Experience shows that These uncertainties can be used to estimate the
a 1% spread from maximum to minimum can be overall uncertainty in tracer measured water flows
expected. The uncertainty produced i s on the or- and steam qualities. Water flows based on these
der of 0.5%. values have a 2% uncertainty, and steam qualities
Tracer injection rate also has a direct effect on have less than 0.5% uncertainty.
final results and must be carefully watched. Ac- It is possibleto reducethese uncertainties sev-
in

31

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ANSUASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

eral ways. Counting errors can be reduced signif- certainity at a reasonable cost. Uncertainties re-
icantly by increasingthe counting timeby a factor sulting from use of nonradioactivetracer materials
of 100 or by utilizing two detectors. Injection rate must be agreedto by the parties to the test based
can be more precisely controlled using an instru- on information available at the time.
ment-qualitypositivedisplacementminipump.The
pump can be fed from acontainer mounted on an 4.21 Steam Quality MeasurementsUsingThrot-
analytical balance calibrated to 0.02%. If, in addi- tling Calorimeters. Throttling calorimeters operate
tion, the balance is read to kO.1 grams at five on the principle that the initialand final enthalpies
minute intervals measured to *0.2 seconds, the are equal when steampasses through an orifice
uncertainty can be further reduced. from a higher to a lower pressure, providing there
Preparation of more standards will reduce the is no heat loss and the initialand final kinetic ener-
uncertainty in this area, and two or three mea- gies are negligible.
surementsof backgroundwill almost eliminate the Steam samples should be taken in accordance
uncertainty. with ASTM D 1066, or as described in ASME PTC
With theabove techniques, water flowscan be 19.11-1970.
measured to better than 1% using tracers. The calorimeter alone, with properly calibrated
instruments, is capable of an uncertaintyof k 0.2%;
4.20 MeasurementsUsing
Nonradioactive however, a statement of overall uncertainty is not
TracersThe sampling technique of nonradioactive valid because of the uncertainties involved in the
tracers hasseveraladvantages that make this sampling technique. Throttling calorimeters have
method more adaptablefor use at nonnuclear in- a limited range of use which varies with pressure
stallations, where the licensing and personnel re- (see ASME PTC 19.11-1970).
quired for using radioactive tracers may not be
available. 4.22 Measurement of Pressure. The instruments
However, uncertainties from the following to be used for measuring the various fluid pres-
sources can be introduced and might be expected sures in the cycle arelisted in Code Par. 4.64. The
during a Code test: typesof instruments used for measuring pressures
(a) preparation ofstandards; at various locations, such as at the throttle, first
(b) variation in injection rate; stage, extraction stages, feedwater heaters, and ex-
(c) contamination of samples; haust, are discussed in the following paragraphs.
( d ) sampling and analysis.
Experience to date is based on limited fieldtests 4.23 The quality and grade of the test instru-
using a sodium tracerwhich yielded promising re- ments should be coordinated. For example, if pri-
sults. The sampling techniques were generallyin mary flow is measured as in Item H of Table 4.10,
accordancewith ASTM D 1428-64, Method B, mod- whether pressureis measured byBourdon gageor
ified to allow a larger number of samples during deadweight gage will make little difference in the
a two hour test period. uncertainty of the result. Improvement in the
Other limited testing indicates that steamen- method of flow measurement would be necessary
thalpies can be determined within 0.01 Btullbm, before highly accuratepressuremeasuring de-
which would have a negligible effect on test re- vices would be justified.
sults. However, such accuracy most probably will
require raising the level of sodium in the system 4.24 The uncertainties for different types and
to one possibly objectionable to manufacturers of calibrations of deadweight gages are addressedin
some major systemcomponents. Accordingly,the Table 4.14.
allowable sodium level in each individual system
must be established and coordinated with other 4.25 The uncertainties for different types of ma-
test requirements. nometers are addressedin Table 4.13.
Because of the potentially detrimental effects of
raising the system sodium level, studies are un- 4.26 Transducersand their applications are
derway to identify a more desirable tracer material. mentioned in Code Par. 4.83. High quality trans-
This material, alongwith a suitable tracer detection ducers properly installed in controlled tempera-
technique and associated instrumentation, must ture environments and used with high resolution
be practicable and must provide the desired un- digital readouts canyield low uncertainties, butthe
32

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCETESTSOF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

TABLE 4.13
MANOMETERUNCERTAINTIES

Instrument Quality and Grade Uncertainty

Test manometer 7/16 in. diameter or larger, precision-bored; k0.02 in.


compensated-scale, with optical or servo-follower
reading aid

Test manometer
Precision-bored, compensated-scale, without
reading k0.05 in.
aid

Station manometer
Commercial
compensated scale, without reading
aid kO.10 in.

GENERAL NOTES:
(a) For additional information, see ANSVASME PTC 19.2-1986 and, in particular, note the capillary
error in small bore tubing.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

(b) When manometersare used to measure turbine exhaust pressures, the spatial uncertainty from
Table 4.17 also applies.

TABLE 4.14
DEADWEIGHTGAGEUNCERTAINTIES
Area Ratio Quality and Grade Uncertainty

IO: 1 Laboratory calibrated kO.IO% of reading

Uncalibrated f 0.10%
rated of capacity

1OO:l Laboratory calibrated +0.10% of rated capacity

Uncalibrated f 0.25% of rated capacity


~ ~~

GENERAL NOTE: For additional information, see ANWASME PTC 19.2-1986.

initial and continued precision ofthis equipment haust annulus or from any major flow restriction,
should be demonstrated by frequent in-placecal- is recommended for measurement of the exhaust
ibration or by use in parallel with suitable preci- pressure. Normally,the probes should beadjacent
sion equipment. If transducers are installed im- to the plane of the last stage blading and closeto
properly o r are in service for long periods without the turbine exhaust flange. The station vacuum
calibration, the uncertaintywill be indeterminate. gage connection i s seldom located to comply with
Transducers and the uncertainties for different this requirement, andi s generally placedin thecas-
measuring systems and calibrations are addressed ing wall. If such a connection i s used, the uncer-
in Table 4.16. tainty is & 0.5 in. Hg. The uncertainties for different
numbers of probes for exhaust pressure measure-
4.27 The uncertainties for different types and ment are addressed in Table 4.17.
calibrations of Bourdon gages areaddressed in
Table 4.15. 4.29 TemperatureMeasurement. Refer to the
Code, Par. 4.100. For acode performancetest, only
4.28 Exhaust pressuremeasurementandthe calibrated integral cold-junction thermocouples or
factors affecting measurement uncertaintyare pre- platinum resistance temperature detectors with
sented in the Code,Pars. 4.92 through 4.98. A min- calibrated leads are recommended for tempera-
imum of two basket-type probes for each exhaust tures with the greatest influence on test results.
annulus, located 1ft away from the wall of the ex- Examples of influential temperatures are throttle

33

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSVASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

TABLE 4.15
BOURDON GAGE UNCERTAINTIES

lnstrumenl Grade Quality and Uncertainty

10 in. test gage Laboratory, 24 in. scale length calibrated in place and *0.5%
temperature compensated of full scale

8 in. station gage Commercial, 16 in. scale length, calibrated in place * 1.0%
conditions
operating
under of full scale

Station gage Commercial, uncalibrated Indeterminate

GENERAL NOTE: For additional information, see ANSUASME PTC 19.2-1986.

TABLE 4.16
TRANSDUCERUNCERTAINTIES
~~

Use Quality and Grade Uncertainty

Primary flowdifferential Quartz element or equivalent, output *0.005% of full scale


pressure transducer readinghigh
on impedance * 0.01 % of reading
for test [Note (I)] integrating voltmeter, laboratory
calibrated

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
~~ ~ ~~

Secondary flow Medium accuracy laboratory calibrated *0.25% of full scale


differential pressure
transducer for test
[Note (V1

Transducer for gage Medium accuracy laboratory calibrated +0.10% of full scale
pressure or absolute
pressure for test [Note
(I)]

Transducers for absolute Deadweight tester calibrated *0.25% to 0.50% of


gage or differential full scale
pressures for station
use

GENERAL NOTE:Transducer uncertainties can be reduced by placement in a temperaturecontrolled


enclosure or by in-place calibrations at the test enviroment temperature.
NOTE:
(1) Zero and span checked before and after each test with transfer standard having an accuracy
certified to 0.03%.

and reheatsteam temperatures, final feed tem- accuracy, or a high resolution bridge of0.03%ac-
perature, primary flow element fluid temperature, curacy, or an equivalent digital microvolt meter
and, when primary flow is calculated by heat bal- should be used as applicable.
ance, temperatures aroundall heaters down- For extensive treatment of thermocouples, refer
stream of the flow measuring section. For these to ANSVASME PTC-19.3-1974 (R1985), Chapter 3.
temperatures, thecode-recommended measuring For a test that deviates from the Code, uncer-
instruments should be used with thetemperature taintyof thetemperature measurements should be
element. A high resolution potentiometerof 0.03% consistent with the overall expected uncertainty of

34

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C h R E P O R T - E N G L L985 0757h70 Ob07000 B O 1 m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSVASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

TABLE 4.17
NUMBER OF EXHAUST PRESSURE PROBES

Exhaust JointArea

Less Than Spatial


Number of Probes 32 sq ft 64 sq h 128 sq ft Uncertainty

Code by Required 2 4 8 f0.08 in. Hg


Used 1 1 2 *0.1 in. Hg
[Note (V1 [Note (V1 [Note (V1
Used - - 1 f 0 . 2 in. Hg
[Note (I)]

NOTE:
(1) Probe location is at a point whose accuracy has been demonstrated as an average of exhaust
pressures in accordance with the Code, Par. 4.93. If not so located, the uncertainty may be as
high as f0.5 in. Hg.

TABLE 4.18
THERMOCOUPLE A N D RESISTANCE THERMOMETERUNCERTAINTIES

Instrument Uncertainty
Grade
Quality and

Test thermocouple Continuous leads, calibrated


before
andafter test in fl.O°F
accordance with Par. 4.106 of the Code and used with
50.03% potentiometer or equivalent micro-
voltmeters
Test resistance Calibratedbeforeand after test in accordance with Par. f l.O°F
thermometer 4.106 of the Code and used with f0.03% bridge
Test thermocouple Continuous leads, calibrated against secondary f2.0°F
standard and used with &0.05% potentiometer
Test thermocouple Separate test leads of best grade
wire,
calibrated f 3.OoF
against secondary standard and used with f 0.05%
potentiometer or equivalent digital thermometer
Thermocouple Assembled from
standard
grade
wire,
not
calibrated 5 7.0"F
and used with 50.20% potentiometer or equivalent
digital thermometer
Station recording Assembled from standardlead wire, notcalibratedand 510.0°F
thermocouple used with +0.30% station recording potentiometer

the test. The quality.and grade of thevarious test and the reading instrument. Potentiometers are
instruments should be coordinated. For example, available as follows (values are percentages of
if primary flow i s measured as in Item H of Table readings):
4.10, it will make little difference whether the tem- Limits of
perature is measuredby Uncertainty
commercialthermo- Instrument
couple or laboratory thermocouple. Precision
laboratory
potentiometer 0.01 % *
Tables 4.18 and 4.19 include thegeneral typesof Precision
potentiometer
portable f 0.03%
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

potentiometer
Industrial f 0.20%
instruments used for measuring the temperature
Recording potentiometerfor
switchboard
a 5 0.30%
of the fluid at various locations in the cycle, such
as throttle, extractionstages, heaters, and exhaust. When a digital indicating instrumentis used, the
For thermocouples, the uncertainty of the mea- accuracyand resolution of the instrument must be
surement depends upon the combination of the consistent with the expected uncertainty of the
thermocouple, the wiring, thereference junction, thermocouple element.
35

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1785 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob07001 7118 D

ANSllASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

TABLE 4.19
LIQUID-IN-CLASS THERMOMETER UNCERTAINTIES
Instrument Quality and Grade . Uncertainty

Glass stem thermometer Etched-stem laboratory type


to 3W0F f 0.5OF
to 60OoF f 2.0°F

Glass
stem thermometer Industrial type, calibrated
to 3OOoF f 2.0°F
to 6OOOF k 3.0°F

Station thermometer Industrial type, not calibrated


to 3OO0F k 5.OoF
to M O O F f 10.O°F

GENERAL NOTE: See ANSVASME PTC 19.3-1974 (R1985), Table 5.4, page 49 and Par. 4.29.

For temperaturemeasurement systems using where


separate test leads, precautions must be taken to K = correction, O F
ensure that the connecting wire terminals at the D = length of emergent stem expressed in O F
thermocouple are clean and tight. on the thermometer stem
For calibration purposes, a secondary-standard t, = temperature indicated by the thermome-
thermocouple is onewhosecalibration is traceable ter, O F
to the National Bureau of Standards using a pre- f2 = mean temperature of the exposed emer-
cision potentiometer, or one calibrated in accor- gent stem, O F . Values of t2 are measured
dance with theCode, Par. 4.106. The time elapsed using an auxiliary thermometer mounted

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
since calibration of this standard should not ex- on the emergent stem.
ceed 12 months.
NOTE: Inasmuch as tl is not the true temperature of the bulb
of the immersed thermometer, the correction K is only ap-
4.30 For liquid-in-glassthermometers, an emer- proximate upon substitution in the above equation. If a new
gent-stem correction must be added algebraically substitution in the equation is made using tl + K as the new
value for tl, the new correction K will be more nearly correct.
to the indicated temperature. For a total immersion Further recalculation with tl, corrected for the new value of K,
mercury-in-glass thermometer,the correction can will result in a more correct value for K. Seldom are more than
be calculated from the following equation: two recalculations necessary and then only for high temper-
atures and long emergent stems. Referto ANSVASME PTC 19.3-
1974(R1985), Chapter 5, Par.48, for sample calculations of emer-
K = o.oooo9 D (r, - rz) gent-stem corrections.

36

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 D 0757b70 Ob07002 b 8 4 m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

SECTION 5 COMPUTATION OF RESULTS

5.01 The uncertainty of an overall result is de- and space using a limited number of readings and
pendent upon the collective influence of the com-sampling points. Procedures for determining the
ponent uncertaintiesof the testdata. Sincevarious magnitude of each of these uncertainties are de-
combinations of measurements will be required scribed in items (a), (b), and (c) below. In item (d),
for anytest,a method i s given for determining how the contributions from each source of uncertainty
individualtestdatauncertaintiesmaybecom- on a particular parameter are combined into an
bined intoanoveralluncertaintyfortheresult.This overall measurement uncertainty.
can be done in four steps. (a) Usually, the most significant source of un-
First, the uncertainty of each measured para- certainty is that of the measuring device. Values of
meter (throttle temperature, pressure, and other uncertainty for the various instruments used were
similar items) must be determined by considering given in the previous Section. However, it should
the contribution of the three sources of uncer- be noted that if thevalue a parameter
of isobtained
tainty discussed in Par. 5.02. by averaging the readings of several instruments
Second, some variables that affect heat rate are of the same kind andgrade, then the effect of the
calculated fromseveral measured parameters. The uncertainty in the averaged reading ofa measure-
determination of the uncertainty of these calcu- ment is reduced byafactor equal to the square root
lated variables must be based on the uncertainty of the number of duplicate instrumentsused:
of each of the measured parameters from which
they are calculated and the effecteach of the pa- u, = u;/&
rameters has o n the variable. The second step is
discussed in Par. 5.03. where
Third, the effect each variable has on the final
test result (so-called influence factors) must be de- U,= uncertainty in the average value of the
termined as discussed in Par. 5.04. Three methods measurement due to uncertainty of each
for obtaining influence factors are recommended: instrument used
the use of a generally applicable table (Par. 5.06), U; = basic uncertainty of the instrument given
the use of a computer to perform a perturbation in Section 4
analysis (Par. 5.07), and analytical differentiation M = number of duplicate instruments used in
(Par. 5.08). obtaining the average
Fourth, the uncertainties of each variable are For example, if throttle temperature i s measured
combined to determine the overall uncertainty for by averaging the readings of three test thermo-
the test results as explained in Par. 5.05. couples with separate test leads:
A numerical example of the methods discussed
i s given in Pars, 5.09 and 5.10 and in Appendix I.
U; = k3.0°F (Table 4.18)
5.02 Uncertainty of Individual Measurements.
First, the uncertainty of the individual measure-
ments must be determined. In general, the un- U, = 3.0/& = f 1.73OF
certainty of a measurement is the combination of
uncertainties fromas many as three sources. These
are instrument uncertainty due to the measuring It is emphasized that averaging the readings of
deviceitselfandsamplinguncertaintiesintro- several instruments to reduce uncertainty is valid
duced by measuring parameters that varywith time so that
only if the errors are randomly distributed
37

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

high readings tend to offset low readings. Gen- determining the number of readings required to
erally, instrumenterrors are composed of two minimize the time variability effect on the com-
components, namely a random component anda bined uncertaintyof theresult. However, if this re-
systematic component. The random component quirement cannot be satisfied, the effect of this
may be due toscale readability (or precision) and source of uncertainty must beaccounted for sep-
nonrepeatability ofresponse. The systematic com- arately, basedon thenumber ofreadings available
ponent may be dueto driftin calibration and non- (see Par. 3.05).Themethod presented in this Report
linear response. This is a fixed bias causing errors utilizes statistical methods to estimate data varia-
which produce consistently high or low readings. bility.Thevariabilityestimateis then translated into
In a well-designed instrument, the random com- an uncertainty by consideringthe assumed distri-
ponent is small and can be further reduced by using bution of thedata andthe desired confidence level.
multiple instruments and, when readabilityhas an There are two statistical methods for estimating
effect, by multiple readings of the same instru- variability, each with i t s own distribution.The pre-
ments. In uncertainty analysis, the systematic com- ferred method utilizes the standard deviation es-
ponent is usually treated as random since i t s timator and requires at least 10 readings:
direction, highor low, is unknown. (If thedirection
were known, its effects could be eliminated by cor-
recting thereading.) However, the systematic com-
ponent will not always be reduced by the use of
S =
.\i c
i=l
'.
(X; - S / ( N - 1)

multiple instruments. For example, if twoBourdon


where
gages are usedto measure the same pressure, non-
linearity in responseover the scale rangewill cause S = standard deviation estimation
similar errors in both gages; if the gages are not X-i = individual reading
temperature-compensated, then calibration drift X = average of all readings
errors will also exist. Similarly, all thermocouples N = number of readings
calibrated in the laboratory usinga secondary stan- The variability in the average reading is given by
dard will contain the same calibration bias as the SIJÑ and the uncertainty intervali s constructed by
secondary standard.In each of these cases, factors multiplying this term by theappropriate value of
such as design characteristics and calibration ac- the Student's t-distribution. The t-distribution for
curacy introduce errors that will not be reduced by a 95% confidence level (cocsistent with the def-
the use of multipleinstruments. Hence, judgment inition of uncertainty throughout this Report) i s
must be used when determining the uncertainty shown in Table 5.1, Column (a) as a function ofde-
in averaged readings., grees of freedom (defined as the number of read-
(b) The magnitude of test parameters may vary ings minus I).
over time. The magnitude and frequency of the Thus:
variations will depend on the nature of the mea-
sured parameter and the manner in which thetest u, = t, W Ñ )
is conducted. The variations may be at relatively
high frequency, such as pressure pulsations due where
to flowinstabilities, or slow oscillations caused by U,= uncertainty in average value of the read-
hunting of an under-damped automatic control ings due to time variability
system. Although the accuracy of the measure- t, = value of t-distribution for 95% confidence
ment at the instant of readingis not affected by the and Y degrees of freedom
variations, they will introduce another source of Y = degrees of freedom = N - 1
uncertainty into the finaltest result.This is because If duplicate readings are taken on several in-
the measurements of many parameters must be struments which are then averaged into a single
combined to obtain the final result and all the re- value, the uncertainty is:
quired readings cannot be taken simultaneously.
For example,throttle enthalpy i s determined from u, = t, ;/m
measured pressure and temperature. If these two
parameters vary with timeand are not read simul- where
-
taneously, throttle enthalpy witi be affected by the S = the average of the S values computed from
variability. Paragraph 3.05 provides a method for the readings of each instrument
38 --``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 9 0757b70 Ob07004 4 5 7 9

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

TABLE 5.1
VALUESOFTHESTUDENT'S t- ANDSUBSTITUTE t-
DISTRIBUTIONSFOR A 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL

Column (a) Column


(b)
where Student's t- Substitute t-
M = number of instruments Degrees of Freedom, v distribution
distribution
v = M(N - I ) ...
1 12.706
As an example, consider a throttle temperature 6.353 2 4.303
obtained by averaging the combined 10 readings 1.304 3 3.182
from each of .717
three thermocouples. 2.776 4
5 2.571 .507
,399 2.447 6
THROTTLE TEMPERATURE, O F
.333 2.365 7
Thermo-
Thermo-
Thermo-
.288 8 2.306
Reading No. couple 1 couple 2 couple 3
.255 ~~
2.262 9
901.0 1 901.5 900.5 10 2.228 .230
2 900.0 900.5 899.5 11 2.201 .210
898.0 3 897.5 896.52.179 12 .I 94
897.0 4 895.5 895.5 13 2.160 .I81
896.0 5 894.5 895.0 14 2.145 .I70
899.0 6 898.5 898.0 15 2.131 .I60
7 903.0 903.5 902.5 20 2.086 ,126
904.0 8 902.5
2.060 903.0 25 ...
9 902.0 901.5
2.042 901.O 30 ...
10 903.5
905.0 904.5 ...
2.021 40
Average, T,,
899.5 900.0 900.5
60 2.000 ...
Standard Deviation 120 1.980 ...
Estimator, S,
3.127 3.375 - 3.028 (Y 1.960 ...
-
Overall Average T,, = (7, + 'T, + fJ/3 = 900.0°F
Average S, 7 = J(3.028' 3.375* + + 3.127*)/3 = 3.180
Degrees of freedom, Y = M(N - 1) = 3 (IO - 1) = 27
t-distribution, t2, = 2.052 where

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
-
The uncertainty due to variability with time i s U, = 2.052 X
R = average of the ranges of each instrument
3 . 1 8 0 / m = k1.2OF

Another method of estimating variability i s less R& i=l

accurate but can be used with a small number of


readings (fewer than IO). This method utilizes the
( c ) In some cases, the measured valueof thepa-
range of the sample, which i s defined as the dif-
rameter varies with the location. Turbine exhaust
ference betweenthe largest and smallest readings,
pressure for a condensing turbine i s an example.
and a Substitute t-distribution, shown
i n Table 5.1,
Since it i s impractical t o measure at a very large
Column (b):
number of points, a computed average based on
a limited number of measurements must be ac-
U, = t: R cepted. Hence, a third uncertainty source results
from the variability over space. If weassume these
where variations are randomly distributed, the magni-
t; = vaiue of substitute t-distribution for de- tude of this uncertainty source can be calculated
grees of freedom using the procedures described above for varia-
R = range (largest minus smallest reading) tion withtime. In thiscase, the standard deviation
v = degrees of freedom estimator should be used if more than10 measur-
Similarly, if theaverage of several instruments i s ing locations areavailable; and therange estimate
used: used for fewer than10 locations. For example, as-
sume pressure is measured by fourstatic pressure
probes in the exhaust annulus ofa condensing tur-
u, = th E l f i bine. Readings, from precision-bored,compen-
39

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT
UNCERTAINTY
A N AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

sated-scale mercury manometers without reading (d) Once the uncertaintycontributionsfrom


aids, are as follows: each source have been determined, they can be
combinedinto an overall measurement uncer-
Probe Location Exhaust Pressure, in. Hg
tainty for each parameter. Since instrument un-
1 1.50 certainty and spatial variability were assumed as
2 1.43 independent of time, the overall uncertainty of a
3 1.55 parameter P equals the square root of the sum of
4 1.47
the squares:
Range, R = 1.55 - 1.43 = 0.12
Number of locations, L = 4 up= JuZ, + (U;,or
Substitute &distribution, tí = 0.717
where
The uncertainty in the average due to the vari-
ability with space is: Up = overall uncertainty in parameter P
UPt, Up,,Ups= uncertainty due to variability with
time, instrumentation, and space,
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

respectively
U, = ti R
For the example of throttle temperature:
= 0.717 x 0.12 in. Hg

U, = k0.09 in. Hg
Ur =1 - = 4(1.2)2+ (1.7)2

UT = *2.I0F
However, since a different instrumentis usually
used at each location, some of the variability ap-
5.03 Uncertainty of Calculated Variables.The
parently due to location will in fact be due to in-
combined uncertainty of variables calculated from
strument uncertainty. Therefore, unless multiple
the measurement of several parameters (such as
instruments are used at each location, the instru-
those required to calculate flow and power)is de-
mentuncertaintyand the spatial uncertainty
termined by summing the component uncertain-
should becompared and only thelarger of the two
ties of each parameter, using the square root of the
used to determine the overall measurement un-
sum of squares method. The component uncer-
certainty. In the example of throttle temperature,
tainties are calculated by multiplying the overall
if the three thermocouples were installed in the
uncertainty of each parameter .by the effect of a
same plane perpendicularto thecenter line of the
change in that parameter on the variable (sensitiv-
pipe, a maximum observed spacevariability (range)
ity). If /? is a variable calculated from themeasure-
of l.O°F could be noted for threespatial locations:
..
ment of K parameters, P,, P?, . Pk then:

U, = ti R

= 1.304 x l.O°F
where
U, = k1.3OF U R = uncertainty in calculated variable R
aR - sensitivity of R to a change in P (influence
"

factor)
The uncertainty due to the instrumentation, U/,
was computed as f 1.7OF. Since U / > U,, only the Up;= overall uncertainty in measured parameter
instrument uncertainty is combined with the time due to instrumentation, spatial, and time
uncertainty to obtain the overall uncertainty. For variability
the exhaust pressure example, however, the spa-
tial uncertainty is larger than the instrument un- 5.04 Effect of Uncertainty in Each Variable on the
certainty (Table 4.13); hence, only U, would be Overall Test Result. Due to thenature ofsteam tur-
used. bine performance, certain test variables such as

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D m A S M E PTC b REPORT-ENGL

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSUASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 5.2
EFFECT ON HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY OF SELECTEDPARAMETERS

E f f e c t on Corrected
Parameter Heat Rate Uncertainty

Throttle temperature +0.07% per O F


Cold-reheat temperature -0.04% per O F
Hot-reheat temperature +0.05% per O F
Final feedwater temperature [Note (I)] +0.03% to +0.04% per OF

Final feedwater temperature [Note (2)] -0.12% per O F


Temperature of condensatet o deaerator [Note (I)] -0.11% to -0.13% per OF

Temperature of feedwater to top heater [Note (I)] +0.02% to +0.04% per OF

Temperature of feedwater to first high-pressure heater


[Note (111 -0.05% t o
-0.08% per O F
Temperature of condensate from deaerator [Note(I)] +0.12% per O F
+0.06% to
Throttle pressure +0.02% to
+0.04% per %
Cold-reheat pressure -0.05% t o
-0.08% per %
Hot-reheat pressure +0.08% per %
Low-pressure-turbine exhaust pressure Derive from correction curve
Main-condensate flow +1.0% per %
Power -1.0% per %

GENERAL NOTE: Effects are for +I0F o r +1.0%.


NOTES:
(1) This value applies only when extraction flowsare used to determinefeedwater flows, as when
the main flow measured i s in the condensate line to the deaerator.
(2) This value appliesonly when the main flow measurement is essentially final feedwater flow,as
when all heaters are the tube-and-shell type and the drainscascade to the condenser or low-
pressure heater.

flow and power affect the overall test result on a component uncertaintyis calculated. Hence, over-
1:1 ratio; ¡.e., a 1% uncertainty in flow or power all uncertainty:
causes a 1%uncertainty insteam rate or heat rate.
Other test variables, such as pressures, tempera-
tures, and secondary flows, affect the overall test UHR = j Z
i= 1

results t o a lesser extent. These ratios may also be


termedinfluence factors.The developmentof where
these ratios i s discussed i n Pars. 5.06 through 5.08. U,; = uncertainty of each variable used to de-
The reader is cautioned against the inappropriate termine the finaltest result (heat rate)
use of the familiarcorrection-factorcurves for As discussed i n Pars. 0.02 and 3.01, agreement
throttle andreheat steam conditions to determine should bereached prior to testing on expected
the
theseratios.Since uncertainties in these steam uncertaintyduetodeviations from theCode. Using
conditions affect steam enthalpies usedin the heat themethodspresented herein, instrumentation
rate equation, these curves will not reflect the ef- uncertaintyand, insome cases, spatial uncertainty
fects of measurement uncertainties. Therefore, a can be predetermined.For example, Table 4.17 al-
specified change andan equal uncertaintywill not lows the determination of spatial uncertainty in
produce the same correction to the test results. turbine exhaust pressure whenthenumberof
However, for a condensing unit, the exhaust pres- probes is less than that recommended by Code. the
sure correction to heat rate can be usedto deter- However, in cases where few previoustest results
minetheexhaust pressureuncertaintyeffect, since exist, spatial and time uncertainties cannot bede-
the heat rate equation values are unaffected. termined. Nevertheless, adherence to the require-
ments ofPar. 3.05 will assure that the effect of this
5.05 Obtainingan Overall Uncertainty for the source of uncertainty ontest results is minimized.
Test Result.For the same confidence level(¡.e., 95%) If test measurements significantly exceed the test
in the overall uncertaintyas in the component un- uncertainty agreed to before the test, a new un-
certainty, the square root of the sum of squares certainty agreement and test may be indicated.
41
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 W 0 7 5 9 b 9 0 Ob07007 Lbb D I

ANSUASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

5.06 Table 5.2 can be used to determine the ef- value of final-feedwater enthalpy includ-
fects of individual measurements on the test re- ing Group 1 corrections (specified cycle
sults required to determine the influence factors corrections, see Code Par. 5.22)
discussed in Par. 5.04. valueof generator output including Group
Table 5.2 contains results of calculations made 1 corrections
for reheat regenerative turbine generator units heat-rate-divisor correction factor for
with throttlepressures ranging between 1800 psig throttle pressure
to 2400 psig and throttle and reheat temperatures heat-rate-divisor correction factor for
between 1000°F to llOO°F. Since many combina- throttle temperature
tions of steam conditions and cycles are possible, heat-rate-divisor correction factor for ex-

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
a range of probable values i s given. The list in- haust pressure
cludes only those variables having the greatest in- (b) Determine the effect of achange in each var-
fluence on test results. iable in theright-hand side of Eq. (1) on theoverall
test result. This maybe readily done by inspection
5.07 When the effect of theindividual mea- for flow, power, and each of the correction factors;
surement cannot be obtained from Table5.2, it can but a general approach follows.
be determined by following an appropriate cal- (7) Rewrite the overall test result expression
culation procedure. One procedureevaluates a test in logarithmic form. For example:
twice, using each of the twovalues of a particular
variableand notingtheirdifference. Sincethis must
be done foreach variable of significance, it i s best
to use acomputer.An alternative approach
involves an analysis which is outlined in the fol-
(2) Differentiate term by
term, noting that d(ln
lowing paragraph and should beused for the less
u) = du/u, and replace the differential d with dif-
complex cases.
ference A
5.08 An alternative approach to evaluating the
effects of uncertaintiesin test measurements upon
the overall uncertainty employs analytical or nu-
merical differentiation. The method i s outlined as
follows.
(a) Define the test result to be evaluated, in-
cluding correctionfactors to contract conditions,
if applicable. An example is selected with thefol-
lowing data: Each of the terms in Eq. (3) except the twocon-
Steam conditions of 850 psig, 900°F, 1.5 in. Hg tainingenthalpyvariables represents thefractional
abs, 141,590 Ibm/h throttleflow, 16,500 kW, at 0.85 change for therespective variable; and,in the con-
power factor, 351.8OF final feedwater temperature, text of this analysis, they represent the uncertainty
with a specified heat rate of of that variable expressed as a fraction. It should
be notedthat an uncertainty in flow affects the un-
141,590(1453.1 - 325.0) certainty in heat rate in the same direction, whereas
HR = = 9680 Btu/kWh
16,500 uncertainty in power and correction factors affect
the heat rate in theopposite direction. This is de-
For this example, the uncertainty in the cor- noted in the following analysis by theuse of plus
rected heat rate will be evaluated. The corrected or minus coefficients, respectively.
heat rate is defined as: (3) Theeffect of uncertainty in each correction
factor due to uncertainties in the corresponding
test variable is determined from correctioncurves.
Typical correction curves in Figs, 5.1 through 5.3
are used to illustrate this procedure. From these
where curves the followingeffects on corrected heat rate
W, = test value for throttle flow uncertainty are established by determining the
h,, = test value for throttle enthalpy slope of the curve at the test values of 850 psig,
42

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E PTC b REPORT-ENGL 1785 0757b70 Ob07008 U T 2

GUfDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

FIG. 5.1 TYPICAL THROTTLE PRESSURE CORRECTION CURVES FOR TURBINES WITH SUPERHEATED INITIAL
STEAM CONDITIONS

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
(Y-
c
n
c
m
I
O
c

L
O
V

Throttle Temperature, OF

FIG. 5.2 TYPICAL THROTTLE TEMPERATURE CORRECTION CURVE FOR TURBINES WITH SUPERHEATED
INITIAL STEAM CONDITIONS

43

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

Throttle flow, Ibm/h


+5

+4

+3

pi
d +2

O
Y
+1

-1

-2
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

-3
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
Exhaust Pressure, in. Hg abs.

FIG. 5.3 TYPICALEXHAUST PRESSURE CORRECTION CURVES

44

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S I E PTC L REPORT-ENGL. 750 m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATfONALSTANDARD

900°F, 1.5 in. Hgabs and141,590 Ibm/h throttle flow Aha X 100 - -0.036 X 100
- AP/f
(using the 150,000 lbmlh curve). (hl, - hll) (1453.1 - 325.0)
(a) Throttle pressure. A change of + I O psi
0.565 X 100
= -0.10% on heat rate. This becomes +0.010% on
(1453.1
+
- 325.0)
ATlt = -0.003Ap/t O.O5OAT/, (6) +
heat rate per psi when the negative coefficient from
Eq. (3) is applied.
(b) Throttle temperature. A change of+ I O O F
= -0.30% on heat rate. This becomes +0.030%o n (c) The basis for final feedwater enthalpy
heat rate per O F when the negative coefficient from determination differs with the type of test con-
Eq. (3) is applied. ducted. For the example for the specified cycle, the
(c) Exhaust pressure. A change of +0.6 in value is taken after Croup1corrections have been
Hg = 1.20% on heat rate. This becomes -2.0% on applied; as such, it i s based upon the pressuremea-
heat rate perin. Hg when the negative coefficient surement at the turbine flange in the extraction line
from Eq. (3) is applied. feeding the final heater, with specified line pres-
(4) The two terms in Eq. (3) containing en- sure drop and specified heater terminal difference
thalpy must be converted to actual test measure- applied.
ment as follows. For routine tests, where the specified cycle is not
(a) Throttleenthalpy is generallydeter- considered, the final feedwater enthalpy depends
mined.fromdirectpressureandtemperature onthetemperatureand pressure measurementsof
measurements at that location. Therefore, theun- that feedwater.
certainty in throttle enthalpy may be expressed as: For example, the effect of an uncertainty in the
turbineextraction pressure measurement upon the
finalfeedwaterenthalpywilldepend upon the
thermodynamic relationship between enthalpy of
compressedliquidandsaturationpressure. For
where practical purposes, the slope of the saturated liq-
uid enthalpyversus pressure relation can be used.
= uncertainty in throttleenthalpy in units
The difference between the slopes of the com-
of Btu/lbm
pressed liquid and saturatedliquid enthalpy-pres-
= slopeofthesuperheated steamen- sure relations i s negligible.
[TlJ thalpy versus pressurecurveatcon-
stant temperature. This slope i s given
in Fig. 5.4. For the example 850 psig,
900°F, it is -0.036 Btullbm-psi.
[%] P
= slope of thesuperheated steam en-
thalpy versus temperaturecurveat
where
Ah,, = uncertainty in final feedwater enthalpy
in units of Btullbm

[zl
constant pressure. This slope is given
in Fig. 5.5. For the example 850 psig, = slopeof saturated liquid enthalpyversus
900°F, it i s 0.565 BtuAbrn-OF. saturationpressurecurve.Thisslope is
Aplt, AT,, = the uncertainties in test throttle pres- plotted on Fig. 5.6 for saturated liquid
sure and temperature in units o f psi [Note (I)]. For the exampleit is 0.566 Btu/
and O F , respectively Ibm-psi (at 147 psia) [Note (2)].
(6)This uncertainty in throttle enthalpy af-
fects the corrected heat rate uncertaintyas deter- NOTES:
(1) The companion slope (dHxL/dJSJis given in Fig. 5.7 for use
mined in E q . (31, as follows: when the final feedwater enthalpy is based upon a tem-
perature measurement.
(2) This is the pressure equivalent to measured pressure at the
turbine extraction flange (164.9 psia), less 5% specified line
pressure loss andless 5 O F specified heater terminal tem-
perature difference.
Apx = uncertainty in test pressure at turbine ex-
For example, on a percent heat rate uncertainty
ba- traction flange connected to final heater,
sis: in units of psi
45
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D m A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 m 0757b70 Ob07011 b97

A N W A S M E PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF' MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

CALCULATED FROM STEAM TABLES


O

- 0.05
.-
B
k
.
o
a
tñ - 0.10
h
T

- 0.15

- 0.20
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1 100 1200

Steam Temperature, O F

FIG. 5.4 SLOPE OF SUPERHEATED STEAM ENTHALPY AT CONSTANT TEMPERATURE

CALCULATED FROM STEAM TABLES


t 0.90

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
+ 0.80
LL

I
E
o
\

m'
. 4.0.70

t 0.50
400 500 600 700 800 900 lo00 1100 1200
Steam Temperature, O F

FIG. 5.5 SLOPE OF SUPERHEATED STEAM ENTHALPYATCONSTANT PRESSURE

46

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

CALCULATED FROM STEAM TABLES


t 1 .5

I
E + 1.0
.
o
3
S

t 0.5

O
O 1O0 200 300 400 500
Pressure of Saturated Liquid, psia

FIG. 5.6 SLOPE O F SATURATED LIQUID ENTHALPY (PRESSURE)

1.3

1.2

U
O
I
1.1

1.o

0.9
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

0.8
1O0 200 300 400 500

Temperature of Saturated Liquid, OF

FIG. 5.7 SLOPE OF SATURATED LIQUID ENTHALPY (TEMPERATURE)

47

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTSOF STEAM TURBINES

(d) This uncertainty in final feedwater en- basic instrument uncertaintyis k0.05 in. Hg (Table
thalpy affects the corrected heat rate uncertainty 4.13, Item 2), and since four manometers and four
as determined in Eq. (3) as follows: probes are used, the average uncertainty of the
readings is k0.025 in. Hg (¡.e., O.OS/&).
Net effect on heat rate uncertainty = -2%per in.
Hg (Table 5.3, Column B, line 5).
Heat rate uncertainty = -2 x k 0.025 = f 0.05%
(Column D).
Although the number of probes satisfies the
Codecriteria for minimum uncertainty, the spatial
uncertainty has not been previouslydemonstrated
For example, on a % heat rate uncertainty basis:
as required by the Code. This may increase the un-
certainty of the average exhaust pressure mea-
surement. Consequently, the readings should be
checked after the test to determine if sampling un-
certainties due to spatial variations should have
- -(0.566)(100) Ap, = -0.05O2Apx been accounted for.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
(1453.1 - 325.0) (4Extraction pressure is measured with an 8
in., 300 psig full scale station gage (Table 4.15). Un-
certainty of k 1 % of full scale gives k 3 psi instru-
5.09 To illustrate the use of the data and pro-
ment uncertainty.
cedures in the foregoing paragraphs, an example
Net effect on heat rate uncertainty = -0.05% per
of a pretest uncertainty estimate follows. Table 5.3
presents a summary of the results. In this table, psi (Table 5.3, Column B, line 6).
Heat rate uncertainty = -0.05 x 2 3 = 20.15%
Column A is the measurement under considera-
(Column D).
tion, Column B is the calculated effect of thatmea-
(e) Electrical power is measured with one 2%-
surement on heat rate as discussed in Pars. 5.6
through 5.8, Column C is the resulting instrumen- element polyphase watthour meter which meas-
tation uncertainty, and Column D is the compo- ures the total powerof three phases and is applied
to a three-phase, four-wire connectedgenerator as
nent heat rate uncertainty in percent. In Par. 5.10,
the example is continued to demonstrate the tech- shown in Fig. 4.l(c).
niques for reassessing the uncertainty after per- The following instruments will be used:
forming thetest. (7) watthour meters - three-phase portable
(a) Throttle measurement employs an 8 in. sta- meter without mechanical register, calibrated be-
fore testing;
tion gage with 1000 psig full scale(Table 4.15).
*
Uncertainty of 1 % of full scale gives f 10 psi for (2) potential transformers - type calibration
curve available, burden power factor is 0.85, 0.3%
instrument uncertainty.
metering accuracy class;
Net effect on heat rate uncertainty = 0.007% per
psi (Table 5.3, Column B, line 3). (3) current transformers - typecalibration
Heat rate uncertainty = 0.007 x f 10 = f 0.07% curve available, burden power factor is 0.85,0.3%
(Column D). metering accuracy class.
(b) Throttle temperature measurement uncer- The equation for power as read by a watthour
tainty dueto instrument uncertainty is f 1.73OF as meter is:
previously determined in Par. 5.02.
Net effect on heat rate uncertainty = 0.080% per PT = [(Kh)(R)(CTR)(PTR)llt
O F (Table 5.3, Column B, line 4).
Heat rate uncertainty = 0.080 x f 1.73 = f 0.14%
(Column D). where
(c) Exhaust pressure is sampled by four static PT = total power
pressure probes installed in an exhaust annulus Kh = meter constant
with a 64 ft2 area. A separate mercury manometer R = number of meter disc revolutions
is used on each probe. CTR = current transformer ratio
The manometers are precision-bored and scale PTR = potential transformer ratio
compensated, without optical reading aids. The t = time interval for R revolutions
48

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S t I I : P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1785 m 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob07014 3Tb m

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT
UNCERTAINTY
ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

The above equation is correct if the metering (4) Potential


transformeruncertainty,
method meets Blondel’s Theorem as discussed in APTRIPTR - the potential transformer uncertainty
Par. 4.04. If the meteringdoes not meet Blondel’s is obtained from Table 4.4, Item (b), and i s 0.3%.
Theorem, the power calculated by the above equa- However, the number of potential transformers
tion should be multipled by a correction factor. used in the metering circuit mustalso be consid-
That factor is unknown but, within the context of ered. This information i s obtained from Table 4.1,
this analysis, only that factor’s uncertainty i s re- Item (c), and is 2. Theeffect of potential trans-
quired. Let the variable M represent the correction former uncertainty on power uncertaintywill be:
factor. Rewriting the above equation to include the
correction factorresults in the following equation: APTRlPTR = + 0 . 3 / 4

PT = [M(Kh)(R)(CTR)(PTR))Ilt (5) Current


transformer
uncertainty
ACTRICTR - the current transformer uncertainty
Following the procedure outlined in Par. 5.08, is obtained from Table4.5, Item (b), andi s k 0.10%.
andwriting the powerequationinlogarithmic The number of current transformers used in the
form: metering circuit is obtained from Table 4.1, Item
(c), and is 3. The effect of current transformer un-
certainty on power uncertainty willbe:
In PT = In M + In Kh + In R
ACTR~CTR= o.lol&
+ In CTR + In PTR - In t
(6) Timing uncertaintyAt/t - the time in-
A p J P , = ( A M / M ) + (Al(h/Kh) -I-(ARIR) terval for 50 meter revolutions is approximately 8
min and the smallest time increment of the clock
+ (APTR/PTR) + ( A C T R I U R ) - (Adt). is 1sec; therefore, the minimumuncertainty is the
smallest timing increment and equals 1 sec. The
uncertainty during the8 min interval is:
Each bracketed right-hand termi n this equation
can beidentified asan instrument ormeasurement
uncertainty. The uncertainty of each term in the
At
t
- ’
8x60
x 100 = +0.21%
above equation can now be determined.
(7) Metering method uncertainty, AMIM (7) Overall power uncertainty A P J P ~-
- the uncertaintyis obtained fromTable 4.1, Item the overall power uncertainty i s the square root of
(c):
the sum of the squares of the individual uncer-
tainties previously described:
AMIM = * o s %
(2) Disc revolution uncertainty, ARlR -
assume that 50 disc revolutions were counted and = +0.64%
timed. There is a chance for miscount, but this
should be readily apparent by comparison of the
timed interval with adjacent timings of the same Net effect on heat rate uncertainty = -1% per
run and should be eliminated; hence: percent (Table 5.3, Column B, line 2).
Heat rate uncertainty = 1.0 x kO.64 = +0.64%
ARIR= o (Column D).
( f ) Theprimaryflow is measured in the
(3) Meter constant uncertainty, AKh/Kh - boiler feedwater line downstreamof the topheater
the meterconstantuncertainty is taken as the using a flow nozzle with pipetaps walland a6 ratio
watthour meter uncertainty and shown i n Table of 0.6. The nozzle was calibrated prior t o instal-
4.3, Item (c) (for watthourmeters with three-phase lation. A 2 0 section flow straightener i s installed 16
calibration) pipe diameters upstream of the nozzle andan in-
spection port allows before and after test inspec-
AKh/Kh = f 0.25% tions. The equation for flow is:

49

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSUASME
PTC 6 REPORT-1985
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION
MEASUREMENT
OF UNCERTAINTY
ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

W = Cd2 KFa 6 (4) About 8 in. nozzle pressuredropis ex-


pected, and measured byacommercial grade,
where compensated scale manometer without reading
W = flow aid. Theinstrument uncertainty is & 0.10 in. (Table
C = a constant 4.13, item 3):
d = nozzle throat diameter
K = flow coefficient
F, = thermal expansion factor
Ap = pressure drop across nozzle ( ispecific weight
The is a function of
P = specific weight temperature andpressure (measured upstream of
Following the procedure in Par. 5.08, rewrite the the flow section). Hence:
flow equation in logarithmic form:

In W = In C + 2(ln d ) + In K + In fa
+ Yi [In (Ap) + lnpl where ( a ~ ) / ( a pand
) ~ (ap)/(aT),, are the effects of
changes in pressure and temperature, respec-
du tively, on specific weight as obtained from the
Differentiating, noting d(ln u) = - and substitut- ASMESteam Tables [Appendix III, Ref. (76)].Ap
U
and AT are the uncertainties in the fluidpressure
ing A for d:
and temperature measurements.
Uncertainty in the pressure measurement is neg-
ligible, since for compressed water:

the uncertainty of each component can be deter-


mined as follows.
(7) The throat diameter is measured at Feedwater temperature is measured using asingle
2.300 in. usinga micrometerwithan uncertaintyof test thermocouple withseparate test leads and an
fO.OO1 in. instrument uncertaintyof& 3.OoF (Table4.18). From
the ASME Steam Tables:
(Ad) = 2 x
2-
(d1
*2.300
o.oo1 x 100 = *om%
-(") - - -O.O7%/OF
(aT),
(2) The uncertainty in flow coefficient is
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

composed of four components as discussed in Sec- Hence, the specific weight uncertainty is:
tion 4:
Base uncertainty (Table 4.10, item O, uB = 0.6
Uncertaintydue to high /3 ratio (Fig. 4.61, U, = 0.2
Uncertainty due toshort distance between flow
straightener and nozzle (Fig. 4.71, ULs, = 0.0
(6) Combining the five uncertainty com-
Uncertainty due tosmall number ofsections in
ponents, the total flowuncertainty is:
flow straightener (Fig. 4.8), ULSZ= 0.6

J(0.09)2 + (0.8n2 + (O.0l2 + (0.62)*+ (0.10)2 = f1.08%


= d(0.6)2 + (0.212 + (0.0)2 + (0.6)* = *0.87%
(KI
Net effect on heat rate uncertainty = 1% per per-
cent (Table 5.3, Column B).
(3) The flow uncertainty due to thermal Heat rate uncertainty = f 1.08 x 1 = f 1.08%
expansion factor uncertainty i s negligible: (Column D, Line 1).
(g) Combining the uncertaintiesof items
(a) through (6 produces the pretest instrumenta-
tion uncertainty in corrected heat rate:
50

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D -AStlE P T C h REPORT-ENGL

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 5.3
HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY DUE TO INSTRUMENTATION

Component
Heat Rate
Instrumentation Uncertainty,
Test Measurement Effect on Heat Rate, 0 Uncertainty, U, UHR,
A B C D

Throttle flow +I
%/% 1.08% 1.08%

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Power -I%/% 0.64% -0.64 %
Throttle pressure
[Note (I)] +0.010 - 0.003 = +O.O07%/psi 10 psi 0.07%
Throttle temperature
[Note (I)] +0.030 + 0.050 = + 0.080%/0F 1.73OF 0.14%
Exhaust pressure -2%/in. Hg 0.025 in. Hg -0.05%
Extraction pressure -O.OS%/psi 3 psi -0.15%

NOTE:
(I) The same measurements of throttle pressure and temperature are used in determining the
throttle enthalpy and the corresponding correction factors.Hence, their effects are combined
algebraically to determine the neteffect on heat rate uncertainty.

5.11 Theeffectofuncertaintyduetoinstru-
mentation, time, and space variability are com-
bined in Table 5.5 to yield the overall heat rate
uncertainty for the test. It is noteworthy that the
effect of time and space variability had only
a small
effect on the overall uncertainty, as should be ex-
These figures are summarized in Table 5.3.
pected for a well-planned and executed test.
5.10 After test completion, the time uncertainty 5.12 Example in the Use
of Figs. 3.1 and
for the multiple-reading measurements and the 3.2. Figures 3.1 and 3.2 are intended foruse by the
spatial variability for the multilocation measure- engineer directing the test to determine the effect
ments (in this example, the latter affectsonly tur- of time uncertaintyon test results, and should be
binethrottletemperatureandturbineexhaust used as the testprogresses. An example for the use
pressure), were estimated using the procedures of these figures follows.
described inPar. 5.02. The results are summarized (a) Table 5.3 indicates that the expected uncer-
in Tables 5.4A and 5.4B. The calculations for the tainty in the test will b e *1.27%. At 1.27%, Fig. 3.1
time and spatial uncertainty for throttle ternpera- indicates that Ur, the allowable effect due scat- to
ture and exhaust pressure are shownin Par. 5.02. ter, i s 0.12%.
Although not shown, similar calculations are done (6) After 50 m i n o f a planned 1 hr test, the En-
for the other variables including the effect sam-
of gineer directing the test determines by scanning
ple size (denoted by the variables N and L in Tables the differential pressure readings for the 10 sam-
5.4A and 5.4B) in determining the appropriate es- ples of five readings that the average range is 0.17
timate of variability (standard deviation of range) and the scanned average reading i s 8.0.
and using an average estimate of the standard de- (c) Ofrom Table3.1 = 0.5 for flow, by flow nozzle
viation, or range, if more than one instrument (de- differential. f f o r Fig. 3.2 can now be calculatedas
noted by M ) was used. follows:
51

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSUASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

TABLE 5.4A
HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY DUE T O VARIABILITY WITH TIME
No. of Degrees Estimate Uncertainty-
Per Readings No. of of Time of Statistical Time
Instrument Instruments Variability Freedom Distribution Variability
Test Measurement N M S or R Y t, or t.' u1
Throttle flow 61 1 0.47% 0.12%
60 2.000
Power 6 0.13% 1 0.12%
2.571 5
Throttle pressure 13 1 1.87 3.10 psi2.179 12 psi
Throttle temperature 10 3 3.18OoF
2.052 27 1.19OF
Exhaust pressure 13 4 0.01 in.
2.010 48 0.002 in.
pressure
Extraction 13 1 0.3 psi
0.5 2.179 12 psi

GENERAL NOTES:
(a) If N > 10, use standard deviation S to estimate time variability and Student's [-distribution.

IfM>I IfM=l
Y = N - I V = M(N - 1)

N M

c (x, - X)2 c S,¿


S = ;='N - 1 S="'
M

-
S S
UT = t. -
fi
u, = t, -
fi

(b) If N < IO, use range R to estimate time variability and substitute t-distribution.

IfM=l IfM> 1
u = N v = M

-
R
u, = t,'R u - t'
I -

- 100 X 0.5 X 0.17 required, a test extension would be necessary to


Z= = 1.06%
8.0 obtain the required number of readings.

NOTE:
?/U, = 1.06/0.12 = 8.83 The number of readings can also be calculated by:
N R = [(? x tg,)/(UT X cl2*)]'
( d ) Entering Fig. 3.2 at 8.83,the number of read-
ings required is approximately 57 as read from the where 2 is calculated as in (c) zbove and U r is determined as
ordinate at the intersection of the 8 or more sam- in (a) above. Degrees of freedom andd2* for determiningtSsare
from Appendix II, Table 11-1.
ples line. Thus, there will be sufficient readings at For 10 samples of size 5, d2* = 2.34 and v = 36.5 tssfor Y of
the conclusion of the planned duration of the test 36.5 = 2
that time variability has minimal effect. Had the 1.06 x 2 '
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

calculations shown that more than 61 readings are NR = (0.12 x 2.34) = 57

52

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 D R 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob07018 T q 1 Ip

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


INPERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

TABLE 5.48
HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY DUE TO VARIABILITY W I T H SPACE

No. of No. of Estimate Uncertainty-


Sampling Instruments of Space Degrees of Statistical Space
locations Per Location Variability Freedom Distribution Variability
Measurements
Test L M S or R v t, or t,' u5

flow Throttle 1 ... ... ... ...


Power 1 ... ... ... ...
pressure
Throttle 1 ... ... ... ...
temperature
Throttle 3 1.o0 3 1.304 1.304O F
Exhaust pressure 4 0.12 4 0.717 0.09 in.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
pressure
Extraction 1 ... ... ... ...
~

GENERAL NOTES:
(a) If L > IO, use standard deviation S to estimate time variability and Student's t-distribution.

IfM=I lfM>l
v = L v = L

-
S S
u -t- u,= t" -
'JI m

(b) If L < I O , use range R to estimate time variability and substitute t-distribution.

IfM=l IfM>I
u = L v = L

-
R
u, = C,' -
fi

53

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M EP Ï C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 m 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob070L9 988 D ' .

ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY


AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

TABLE 5.5
OVERALL HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY

Sources of Uncertainty
Effect on Overall Component
Heat Rate Time Space Measurement Heat Rate
UncertaintyVariability
Variability
Instrument Uncertainty Uncertainty
Test Measurement e U, u, US UT UHR,

Throttle flow 1.0%/% 1.08% 0.12% ... 1.09% f 1.09%


Power l.O%/% 0.64% 0.13% ... 0.65% f 0.65%
Throttle pressure O.O07%/psi 10 psi 1.87 psi ... 10.17 psi f 0.07%
Throttle temperature
1.304OF 1.17OF
O.O8O%/OF 1.73OF 2.09"F f0.17%
Exhaust pressure 2.0%/in. Hg 0.025 in. Hg 0.002 in. Hg 0.09 in. Hg 0.09 in. Hg *0.18%
Extraction pressure O.O50%/psi 3 psi 0.3 psi ... 3.01 psi *0.15%
Overall heat rate uncertainty = f 1.30%

uHR,
= e X uT

54
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

APPENDIX I
COMPUTATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY IN
PERFORMANCE TEST FOR A REHEAT TURBINE CYCLE

1.00 INTRODUCTION
The uncertainty of an overall test result for a reheat turbine i s dependent upon the collective in-
fluenceof theuncertaintiesof thedatausedin determining thetest result. Sincevariouscombinations
of instruments may be selected for any given test, a method i s given for determining how individual
uncertainties in test data may be combined into an uncertainty for the overall test result. Thiscan
be done in three steps, as follows.
(a) Determine the uncertainty of each of the several individual measurements. Component un-
certainties o f variables that require more than one type test of
measurement, suchas flow and power,
should be combinedas the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual measurements.
(6) Express the uncertainty ofeach individual measurement ofStep (a) in terms ofi t s effect on the
overall test result.
(c) Compute the overall uncertainty for the test. This is the square rootof the sum of thesquares
of the values obtained in Step (b).
Certain test variables, such as flow and power, affect the overall test result on a 1:l ratio; ¡.e., a
1% uncertainty in flow or power causes a 1% uncertainty insteam rate or heat rate. Other testvariables,
such as pressures, temperatures, and secondary flows, affect the overall test results o n less than a
1:1 ratio.
The reader i s cautioned against the inappropriateuse of the familiar correction-factor curves for
throttle and reheat steam conditions to determine the effect on heat rate. Since errors in thesesteam
conditions affect steam enthalpies which appear in the heat-rate equation, thesedo curves
not show
the total effect of the measurement errors. Therefore, the effect of an actual change in these variables
is not the same as the effect of an error of the same magnitude in that variable when applied in the
analysis of specific test results. However, theexhaust pressure correction t o heat rate for acondensing
unit can be correctly usedto determine the effectof an error in exhaust pressure, since there i s no
effect on values in the heat rate equation.
The effect of the individual measurement on the overall result can be determined by one of the
following appropriate calculation procedures. One procedure evaluates the test twice, using each
of the twovalues of a particular variable and noting the effect of the difference. Since this must be
done foreach variable of significance, it i s best to usea high-speed computer. An alternative approach
involves an analysis which is outlined in the following paragraph and i s better suited for the less com-
plex cases.
This alternative approachto evaluating the effects of uncertainties in test measurements upon the
overall uncertaintyemploys analytical or numerical differentiation. The method i s outlined as follows.

1.01 Nomenclature and Definitions


For a reheat turbine cycle, the corrected heat rate is defined as:

55

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANWASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

where
HR, = test heat rate corrected for steam conditions
W,, = calculated test value for throttle flow
wRH= calculated test value for reheat flow
H,,= test value for throttle enthalpy
Hll = test value of final-feed enthalpy
HHRH = test value for hot reheat enthalpy
HCRH= test value for cold reheat enthalpy
Pg = value of generator output at specified generator. conditions
CF,, = heat-rate divisor correction factor for throttle pressure
CFT1 = heat-rate divisor correction factor for throttle temperature
CF,, = heat-rate divisor correction factor for exhaust pressure
CFT",, = heat-rate divisor correction factor for hot reheat temperature
CF,, = heat-rate divisor correction factor for reheater pressure drop

1.02 Expression of Individual Measurements in Terms of Their Effects on Overall Test Result
Now determine the effect thata change in each variable in the right-hand side ofEq. (1) will have
upon the overall test result. This maybe readily done by inspection for flow, power, and each of the
correction factors, b u t a general approach is as follows.
(a) Derive General Mathematical .Expression. For simplicity, rewrite above equation as

A x B + C x D
HR, =
E

where

In(HR,) = In ( A x B ~ C x D ) = I n ( A x B + C x D ) - I n E

du
This equation can be written in differential form, and since d(ln U ) = -,
U

dln(HR,) = d[ln(A X B +CX D ) ] - d(ln E)

-AxdS+BxdA+CxdD+DxdC --
df
A x B + C x D f

Based on the previousdefinitions, the differentials in Eq. (11) can be expressed as follows:

56
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
STD-ASFE P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1 9 8 5 m 0757b70Ob07022472 m
ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD

dA = d w f

and

Now, substituting these values in Eq. (11) and replacing the differentials cf by the differences A,
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

For convenience, let

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPCKT-ENGL L935 m 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob07023 309

ANSllASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

Equation (17) can thus be rewritten

'W,, (3)
AT,,
T'r] _
1
aTlt P,,
_
DENOM Tl(
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Since the correctionfactorsarecalculated in terms of measured quantities, the uncertaintyin those


factors can be evaluated in terms of the errors in therelevant measured quantities. For example, the
initial pressure correction factor can be written as follows:

Similarly, the other correction factor terms can be rewritten

(21)

6 = (ACFpdCF
Apdp6p6) x (22)

Also, since the reheater pressure drop is a function of the hot and coldreheat pressures

58

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

where (ACFApIPcHR is the changein reheater pressure drop correction factor when PHRH i s allowed to
change and pCRH= constant, and conversely, where (ACFA,JPHRH is the change in reheater pressure
drop correction factor whenpCRHi s allowed to change and pHRH is constant.
The values for the uncertainties in the correction factors can thus be substituted in Eq. (19):

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

We have thus obtained a general expression for the uncertainty


in calculated heat rateas afunction
of the error in individual measurements.
If the terms for each independent measurement are grouped, Eq. (26) can be rewritten:
59

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSVASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAMTURBINES

Each of the termsin Eq. (27) represents the fractional change fora specific measured variable mul-
tiplied by a weighting factor between brackets (this factor is referred to as sensitivity ratio). In the
context of this analysis, they represent the percentage of errorin that variable and its effecton the
uncertainty in calculated heat rate.
These terms are individually calculated for this example in the following paragraphs.
(b) Apply Results. The parametersin Eq. (27) can b e calculated for the unit.
A heat balance diagram
for this unit is shown in Fig. 1.1. From this heat balance,

wlt = 5,958,707 Ibm/h


H,, = 1460.5 BtuAbrn
Hll = 536.7 Btullbm
wRH= 4,819,165 Ibm/h
HHRH= 1520.5 Btu/lbm
HCRH = 1306.1 Btullbm
The parameter DENOM can thus be calculated
60

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
I
I
I

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 W 0759b70 0b07027 T5'4 m

ANSllASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

= 5,958,707(1460.5 - 536.7) + 4,819,165(1520.5 - 1306.1)

= 6.53788 x IO9 (34)

The effect of each measured quantity on heat rate can thus be calculated.

(7) Throttle Pressure. The uncertainty in heat rate caused by a 1%error in throttle pressure or
the sensitivity ratio for throttle pressure(SR,,) can be written fromE q . (27).

Tll ACF,,,/CF,,,
SR,, = (35)
DENOM "' - APllPl

The term r&)aPIt TI,


i s the slope of the superheated steam enthalpy vs pressure curve at constant

temperature. This slope is given in Fig. 5.4. For this case,

(%) = [E(p = 2412, T = 1000) = -0.035


+It rit 3~ li

The heat balance throttle pressure and temperature have been substituted i n Eq. (35). Therefore,

rlI 5,958,707 x (-0.035) x (2412)


= -0.0769 (37)
DENOM I' = 6.53788 X lo9

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The second right-hand side term i n Eq. (35) is the uncertainty due to the correction
factor.
The term AcFpl'cFpl i s the slope of the throttlepressure correction factor curve. This slope can
A PIIPI
be found bygraphical differentiation as shown in Fig. 1.2.

ACfpl/CFpl -
- "
0.3% -
- -0.0625%/%
APllP1 4.8%

The total effect on corrected heat rate can be thus calculated

= -0.0769 - (-0.0625) = -0.014 (39)

(2)ThrottleTemperature. Theuncertainty inheat ratecausedby a l % error in throttletemperature


or the sensitivity ratio of throttle temperature (SRTt) can be written fromEq. (27):

The term is the slope of the superheated steam enthalpy vs temperature curve at constant

pressure. This slope is given in Fig. 5.5. For this case,


62

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985
IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

% Change in Heat Rate

1I4 load

112 load

Rated load

Rated load

112 load
114 load

FIG. 1.2 INITIAL PRESSURE CORRECTION FACTOR FOR SINGLE REHEAT TURBINES WITH SUPERHEATED
INITIAL STEAM CONDITIONS
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

36 Change in Heat Rate

Rated load
1 14 load

FIG. 1.3 INITIAL TEMPERATURECORREC TlON FACTOR FOR TURBINES WITH SUPERHEATED INITIAL STEAM
CONDITIONS

63

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

(%)
aTft P,,
= [g(p = 2412, T = 1OOO)

The information onthe heat balance allows the calculation of the first right-hand side term in Eq.
(39).

The second right-hand side term in Eq. (39) is the uncertainty dueto the correction factor. It is the
slope of the throttle temperature correction factor curve found in Fig. 1.3.

ACFT1/CFT1- -0.7
--=
The term -O.O153%/OF (43)
A TJT, 45.7

At 1000°F, 1% = IOOF. i
For a I O O F error in throttle temperature, the effect of the throttle temperature correction factor is

-0.0153 X 10 = -0.153%/% (44)

The uncertainty in corrected heat rate due to 1% error in throttletemperature is thus

= 0.606 - (-0.153) = 0.76%/% (45)

(3) Final Feedwater Pressure. The term (8Hl1/dp&,, i s the slope of the compressed water en-
thalpy vs pressure at constant temperature. Since enthalpy hardlychanges in the compressed liquid
range if thetemperature is left constant, for the practical range of error in pressure measurement,

(4) Final Feedwater Temperature. Thefourth term in Eq. (27) is an expression of the uncertainty
in heat rate caused by an error in thefinal feedwater temperature measurement. Since in the com-
pressed liquid region, enthalpy does not change for thepressure errors being considered, the partial
derivative (8H,l/8Tl,)p can be written as a total derivative

where dHsLldTsL is the slope of thesaturated enthalpy vs saturated temperature curve. This slope is
given in Fig. 5.7.

(T = 542) = 1.26
dTsr

The fourth term inEq. (27) can thus be calculated

=
-5,958,707U.26) (542)
= -0.622 (49)
DENOM 6.53788 X io9

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L785 0759b70 Ob07030 5Li9 W

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AMERICAN
NATIONAL
AN
STANDARD

(5) Throttle Flow. The throttle flow term i s calculated as follows:

(6) Reheat Flow. The reheat flow term is calculated as follows:

( 7 ) Hot Reheat Pressure. The uncertainty in heat ratecausedb y a 1% error in hot reheat pressure
or the sensitivity ratio for reheat pressure(SRPHRH)can be written from Eq. (27).

is given in Fig. 5.4. It is


The term (dHHRH/¿3pHRH)THRH

[g ( p = 495, T = 1000)
IT
= -0.03 (53)

The first term of Eq. (52) can thus be calculated

WRH (%)
~PHRH THRH 4,819,165(-0.03) (495)
= -0.011 (54)
DENOM = 6.53788 X 10'

Fig. 1.4.

The uncertainty in corrected heat rate is then

= -0.011 - 0.100 = -0.111 (56)

(8) Hot Reheat Temperature. The uncertainty in heat rate caused by a 1%error in hot reheat
temperature (SRTHRH)i s found from E q . (27).

The term (aHHRH/dTHRH)PHRH i s again calculated from Fig. 5.5; it is

(-)
aTtfRH P"RH
= [e
aT
(p = 495, T = 1000)
1, = 0.54

65
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E PTC b REPORT-ENGL L985 m 0757b70 Ob07031 Y85

ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

The first term in Eq. (55) is thus

4,819,165(0.54) (1OOO)
THRH= = 0.398 (59)
DENOM 6.53788 X IO9

The second term is the slope of the hotreheat temperature correction factor. It is found fromFig.
1.5.

(60)

The uncertainty in corrected heat rate is

= 0.398 - (-0.14) = 0.54

(9) Cold Reheat Pressure. The uncertainty in heat rate caused by a 1% error in cold reheat pres-
sure (SRPCRH)is

The term ( 1 3 H ~ ~ ~ is
/ calculated
d p ~ ~ ~ ) ~Fig.
from ~ 5.4.
~ ~

(-) =
~ P C R H rCRH
[E ( P = 550, T = 620)
IT
= -0.078

The first term is thus

The second term (ACFA,H~JCFAp)I(ApcRHIpcRH)


i s the slope of thereheater pressure drop correction
factor, Fig. 1.4.

The uncertainty in corrected heat rate is

+0.032 - 0.10 = -0.07 (66)

(70) ColdReheat Temperature. The sensitivity ratio (SR,,) for the cold
reheat temperature mea-
surement i s

66
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L L985 W 0757b70IIb07032 311 W

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSIIASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

% Change in Heat Rate

loads

All I

FIG. 1.4REHEATERPRESSURE DROPCORRECTION FACTOR FOR TURBINES W I T H SUPERHEATED INITIAL


STEAM CONDITIONS

% Change in Heat Rate

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
114 load
1i 2 load
Rated load

FIG. 1.5 REHEATER TEMPERATURE CORRECTION FACTOR FOR TURBINES WITH SUPERHEATED INITIAL STEAM
CONDITIONS

67

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
ANSllASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

+ 12.0 85,000 Ibmlh

t 10.0

+ 8.0
1,875,000 Ibrn/h

8
S +6.0
å?
c

P 2,550,000 Ibm/h
.C + 4.0

r
p
o 3,450,000 Ibrnlh
+ 2.0

-2.0

-4.0

-6.0
O 0.5 1.o 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

Exhaust Pressure, in. Hg abs.

FIG. 1.6 EXHAUSTPRESSURECORRECTIONFACTORFORTURBINESWITHSUPERHEATEDINITIAL STEAM


CONDITIONS

68
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 D 0759b70 Ob07034 194 D

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

TABLE 1.1
ERRORS IN CALCULATEDHEAT RATE DUE T O ERRORS IN INDIVIDUAL MEASUREMENTS

EffectAdditional
on Effect
Heat Rate Due to Assumed
Uncertainty C.orrection Effect
Uncertainty
on of Heat Rate
Test Measurement (per %) Factor Measurement
Heat Rate Uncertainty
A B C D=B+C E (%) F=DxE F2

[Note
Throttle
flow (I)] 0.84 0.16 [Note (2)] 1 .o f 0.15 f 0.15 0.0225

pressure
Power
Throttle
-1.0
-0.077
-
0.0625
-1.0
-0.014
f 0.10
f 0.85
* 0.10
f 0.0119
0.0100
0.000142
temperature
Throttle 0.606 0.153 0.76 f0.10 f 0.076 0.005783
pressure
Final feed O - O f 1.00 0.000 f 0.00
temperature
Final feed -0.62 - 0.62 f 0.18 f0.112 0.0125
Hot reheat
pressure -0.01 1 -0.10 0.111 f 0.45 f 0.050 0.0025
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Hot reheat
temperature 0.398 0.14 0.54 f 0.10 0.00292
f 0.0540
Cold
pressure
reheat 0.0316 -0.10 -0.068 f 1.34 f 0.0911 0.0083
Cold
temperature
reheat -0.279 - -0.28 f 0.16 f 0.0448 0.002
Exhaust pressure - -0.044 -0.044 f 1.0 f 0.044 0.00194

NOTES:
is not thesame as condensate flow uncertainty; it must be calculated fromheat
(1) The uncertaintyin throttle flow thebalance around
the heaters.
(2) The reheat flow uncertainty dependson throttle flow uncertainty.A 1 % uncertainty in throttle flow is assumed to cause 1 % un-
certainty in thecalculated reheat flow.

"IOKH -
DENOM 'LKH

The partial derivative term can be evaluated from Fig. 5.5.

(%)
aTCRH Pene
= ["
l3T
( p = 550, T = 620)
Ip = 0.61

Therefore,

-4,819,165(0.61) (620)
SRTCRH= DENOM TCRH= = -0.279 (69)
6.53788 X IO9

(77) Exhaust Pressure. The sensitivity ratio for exhaust pressure is

AcfpdCFp6
SRp, = (70)
APdP6

This expression can be calculated by graphical differentiation of Fig. 1.6.


The slope of the exhaust pressure correction curveat design exhaust pressure of 3 in. Hg and at
full load flow is 1.47% per in. Hg. For a 1%change in exhaust pressure, the correction becomes1.47
x 0.03 or 0.044% per percent.
69

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S f l E PTC b REPORT-ENGL 1985 0 7 5 7 b 7 0 Ob07035 O20

ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

In the foregoing analysis, the uncertainty in calculated heat rate resulting from a1% error in each
independent measurement was calculated. An additional uncertainty term was introduced when the
test heat rate was corrected to design conditions. These uncertainties are listed in Table 1.1 under
Columns B and C, respectively. The number in Column D is thus the uncertainty in heat rate.

D=B+C (71)

Column E contains the assumed uncertainty for each of the measurements on the unit.Thus, the
uncertainty in heat rate caused by each of the measurements is given by the following formula.

The total uncertainty(u) in theresult (corrected heat rate) caused


by these combined measurement
uncertainties can thus be calculated

u2 = sum of squares = CF2 = 0.06858 (73)


u = m= *0.26% (74)

70
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 0759b70 Ob0703b Tb7 9

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES ANAMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

APPENDIX II
DERIVATION OF FIG. 3.2

This Appendix presents the method used for de- range (maximum reading-minimum reading) for
veloping Fig. 3.2, required number of readings for identical sample sizes may be used t o estimate S.,
a test.
Fig. U,on 3.1 i s defined as S, = z / d ; (4)

Where 2 is the average range for the number of


samples being considered (each sample contain-
I n this equation, O, i s the ratio of the percentage ing the same number of readings) and d: is from
1 change in heatrate or steam rate to the percentage Table 11.1.
Substituting Eq. (4) for S, in Eq. (3) results i n
change in readings, and €J2is the percentage change
i n heat rateor steam rate per unit of reading(such
as OF). Values of €J1 and B2 applicable t o steam tur-
bine tests are given i n Table 3.1. S, is the estimated
standard deviation for the average of the readings,
tg5i s the Student's t-distribution forN-I degrees of tg5 in this equation is the Student's t-distribution
freedom from Table 5.1, and 52 i s the average of N for thedegrees of freedom v given in Table 11.1 for
number of readings. the M number of samples of sample size N used
to establish R.
The Fig. 3.2 family of curves, which were devel-
Substitutingfor tg& in Eq. (I) resultsin: oped using Eq. (4) as a basis, can be used for man-
Ji;j uallyestablishing the number readings
of required
for a test. The term 7 in the calculation for entry
into the abscissa of this curve i s equal t o Bl(R)
z
1OO/x or B, x R i n Eq. (4). for calculating z/UTfor
entry intoFig. 3.1 is calculated by using the average
of the maximum-minimum readings in all thesam-
I n Eq. (2), S, i s the estimated standard deviation ples M of size N considered for R, and an average
of N number of readings. for 57.
An approximate average for X based on a
Solving Eq. (2) for N scanned average or from the term 0.5 (maximum
plus minimum readings) can be used(see nomen-

rori"]
~

clature in Par. 3.05).


8,(t95SX)100
[
02(t95Sx)
Sample sizes of five readings were selected for
N = UT($ (3)
developing Fig. 3.2. The test engineer scanningthe
dataavailableshould beable to readilypickout the
Where computers areavailable in an automated high and low readings from batchesoffive con-
data logging system, Eq. (3) can be used to predict secutive readings. The sample size of five readings
the number of readings required by calculating a was, therefore, selected as a convenience. A curve
running standard deviation and running average similar to Fig. 3.2 can be developed for any sample
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

duringtheprogressof a test. Wherecomputersare sizes from 5 to 10 using Table 11.1 and the above
not available and for sample sizes of 10 or less, the equations.

71

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~~~
~~

S T D - A S MPET C b REPORT-ENGL 1985 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob07037 9 T 3 m


--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ANSUASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

TABLE11.1
VALUESASSOCIATED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION OF THEAVERAGE RANGE'

Number of Observations Per Set N

1 3.8 2.48 4.7 2.67 5.5 2.83 6.3 2.96 7.0 3.08 7.7 3.18
2 7.5 2.40 9.2 2.60 10.8 2.77 12.3 2.91 13.8 3.02 15.1 3.13
3 11.1 2.38 13.6 . 2.58 16.0 2.75 18.3 2.89 20.5 3.01 22.6 3.11
4 14.7 2.37 18.1 2.57 21.3 2.74 24.4 2.88 27.3 3.00 30.1 3.10
5 18.4 2.36 22.6 2.56 26.6 2.73 30.4 2.87 34.0 2.99 37.5 3.10
6 22.0 2.35 27.1 2.56 31.8 2.73 36.4 2.87 40.8 2.99 45.0 3.10
7 25.6 2.35 31.5 2.55 37.1 2.72 42.5 2.87 47.5 2.99 52.4 3.10
8 29.3 2.35 36.0 2.55 42.4 2.72 48.5 2.87 54.3 2.98 59.9 3.09
9 32.9 2.34 40.5 2.55 47.7 2.72 54.5 2.86 61.0 2.98 67.3 3.09
10 36.5 2.34 44.9 2.55 52.9 2.72 60.6 2.86 67.8 2.98 74.8 3.09

NOTE:
(1) Adapted with permission from Ref. (69) of Appendix III.

72

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D - A S M E PTC b R E P O R T - E N G L 1985 m 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 Ob07038 A I T m

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD

APPENDIX 111
R.EFERENCES

(1) Wilson, W. A., “Design of Power PlantTests to Insure ReliabilityofResults,” ASME


53-A-156, Vol. 77, May 1955, 405-408.
(2) Boonshaft, J. C., “Measurement Errors Classification and Interpretation,” ASME
53-A-219, Vol. 77, May 1955, 409-411.
(3) Kimball, D. E., “Accuracy & Results of Steam Consumption Tests on Medium
Steam Turbine-Generator Sets,” ASME 54-A-253, Vol. 77, November 1955,1355-
1367.

(4) Kratz, E. M., “Experience in Testing Large Steam Turbine-Generators in Central


Stations,” ASME 54-A-258, Vol. 77, November 1955, 1369-1375.

(5) Thresher, L. W., and Binder, R. C., “A Practical Application of Uncertainty Cal-
culations to Measure Data,” ASME 55-A-205, Vol. 79, February 1957, 373-376.

(6) Sprenkle, R. E., and Courtwright, N. S., “Straightening Vanes for Flow Mea-
surement,” In Mechanical fngineering, ASME A-76, February 1958.

(7) Murdock, J. W. and Goldsbury, J., “Problems in Measuring Steam Flow at 1250
psia and 95OOF With Nozzles and Orifices,” ASME 57-A-88,

(8) Angelo, J. and Cotton, K. C., ”Observed Effects of Deposits on Steam Turbine
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Efficiency,” ASME 57-A-116.

(9) Fowler, J. E. and Brandon, R. E., ”Steam Flow Distributionat the Exhaust of Large
Steam Turbines,” ASME 59-SA-62.

(IO) Cotton, K. C . and Westcott, J. C., ”Throat Tap Nozzles Used for Accurate Flow
Measurement,” ASME 59-A-174, Vol. 82, October 1960, 247-263.

(11) Rayle, R. E., “Influence of Orifice Geometry onStatic Pressure Measurements,”


ASME 59-A-234.

(12) Benedict, R. P., “Temperature Measurements in Moving Fluids,” ASME 59-A-257.

(13) Cotton, K. C. and Westcott, J. C., “Methods of Measuring Steam Turbine-Gen-


erator Performance,” ASME 60-WA-139.

(14) Custafson, R. L. and Watson, J . H., “Field Testing of Industrial Steam Turbines,”
ASME 62-WA-319.

(15) Lovejoy, S. W., “Examples of Modified Turbine Testing,” ASME 62-WA-318.


(16) Ortega, O. J.,Goodell, J. H., and Deming, N. R., “Engineering a Saturated Steam
PerformanceTest for the450 MW San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station,” ASME
66-WA/PTC 2.

73

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
-

S T D D A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL L985 W 0757b70 Ob07039 77b

ANSUASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

(17) Hilke, J. L., Cotton, K. C., Colwell, K. W., and Carcich, J.A., "Nuclear Turbine
ASME Test Code InstrumentationNiagara Mohawk Power Corp. NineMile Point
525 MW Unit 1" ASME 66-WAIPTC 4.
(18) Morris, F. S . , Gilbert, R. S., Holloway, J. H., Cotton, K.C., and Herzog, W. G.,
"Radioactive Tracer Techniques for Testing Steam Turbines in Nuclear Power
Plants," ASME 6BWAlPTC 3.
(19) Deming, N. R. and Feldman, R. W., "Non-Radioactive Tracer for Performance
Tests of Steam Turbines in PWR Systems," in journal of Engineering for Power,
1972, ASME 71-WAIPTC 2,109-116.
(20) Cotton, K. C., Carcich, J.A., and Schofield, P., "Experience With Throat-Tap Noz-
zle for Accurate Flow Measurement," in journal of Engineering for Power, April
1972, ASME 71-WAIPTC 1,133-141.
(21) Cotton, K. C., Schofield, P., and Herzog, W. G., "ASME Steam Turbine CodeTest
Using Radioactive Tracers," ASME 72-WAIPTC 1.
(22) Miller, R. W. and Kneisel, O., "A Comparison Between Orifice and Flow Nozzle
Laboratory Data and Published Coefficients," in journalofEngineering forfower,
June 1974, ASME 73-WAIFM-5, 139-149.
(23) Rousseau, W. H. and Milgram, E. J.,"Estimating Precision ln-heat Rate Testing,"
ASME 73-WAIPTC 2. I
(24) Sigurdson, S. and Kimball, D. E., "Practical Method ofEstimating Number ofTest
Readings Required," ASME 75-WAIPTC 1.
(25) Benedict, R. P. and Wyler, J. S., "Analytical and Experimental Studies of ASME 1

Flow Nozzles," in lournalof Engineering for Power, September 1978, ASME 77-
WAIFM-1.
- With Particular Ref-
(26) Benedict, R. P. and Wyler, J. S., "Engineering Statistics
erence to Performance Test Code Work," in journalof Engineering for Power,
101, October 1979, ASME 78-WNPTC 2,265-275.
(27) Benedict, R. P., "Generalized Fluid Meters Discharge Coefficient Based Solely
on Boundary Layer Parameters," ASME 78-WNFM-1, in journalof Engineering for
Power, 101, October 1979,572-575.
(28) Cotton, K. C., Estcourt, V. F., and Carvin, W., "A Procedure for Determining the
Optimum Accuracy on a Cost/Effectiveness Basis of an Acceptance Test," Pro-
ceedings of American Power Conference, Vol. 40,1978.
(29) Southall, L. R., and Kapur, A., "Experience With a Computer ControlledData Ac-
quisition System for Field PerformanceTestingof Steam Turbines,"ASME79-WA/
PTC l.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

(30) Crirn, H. G., Jr. and Westcott, J.C., "Turbine Cycle Test System at Potomac Electric
Power Company," ASME 79-WAIPTC 2.
(31) Arnold, H. S., Ir., Campbell, D.,Wallo, M . J.,and Svenson, E. B,, ir., "Power Plant
Equipment Testing Using Computerized Data Acquisition and Evaluation Tech-
niques," ASME 79-WAIPTC 3.
(32) Kinghorn, F. C., McHugh, A., and Dyet, W. D., "The Use of Etoile Flow Straight-
eners With Orifice Plates in Swirling Flow," ASME 79-WNFM-7.
(33) Miller, R. W. and Koslow, G. A., "The Uncertainty Values for theASME-AGA and
I S 0 5167 Flange Tap Orifice Coefficient Equations," ASME 79-WNFM-5.
74

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
~~ ~

S T D - A S M E P T C b R E P O R T - E N G L L985 m 0757b70 Ob07040 478 D

GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY ANSI/ASME PTC 6 REPORT-1985


IN PERFORMANCETESTS OF STEAM TURBINES AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

Bornstein, B. and Cotton, K. C., ”A Simplified ASME Acceptance Test Procedure


for Steam Turbines,” ASME 80-JPGC/PWR-15.
Cotton, K. C., and Bornstein, B., “Determining Turbine ThrottleFlow From Mea-
sured First Stage Shell Pressure - A Critical Assessment,” ASME 81-)PGC/PWR-
17.
Whitfield, O. J.,Blaylock, G., and Gale, R. W., ”The Use of Tracer Techniques to
Measure Water Flow Rates in Steam Turbines,” Presented at the Institution of
Mechanical EngineersSteam Turbines forthe1980’s, October9-12,1979, London,
England.
Kline, S. J. and McClintock, “Describing Uncertainties in Single-Sample Exper-
iments,” In Mechanical Engineering, January 1953.
Deming, N. R., Silvestri, G. L., Albert, L. J., and Nery, R. A., “Guidelines for Uni-
form Source Connections Design for Steam Turbine EconomyTests,” ASME 82-
JPGC-PTC 1.
Bornstein, B. and Cotton, K.C., “Guidance for Steam Turbine Generator Ac-
ceptance Tests,” ASME 82-JPGC-PTC 3.
Albert, P. G., Sumner, W. J., and Halmi, D., “A Primary Flow Section forUse With
t h e Alternative ASME Acceptance Test,” ASME 82-JPGC-PTC4.
Shafer, H. S., Kellyhouse, W. W., Cotton, K. C., and Smith, D. P., ”Steam Turbine
FieldTestingTechniquesUsingaComputerized DataAcquisition System,”ASME
82-)PCC-PTC 2.
Cotton, K. C., Shafer, H. S., McClosky, T., and Boettcher, R., ”Demonstration &
Verification of the Alternative ASME Turbine-Generator Acceptance Test,” Pro-
ceedings of American Power Conference, Volume 1983.
Shaw, R., “The Influence of Hole DimensionsStatic on PressureMeasurements,”
In Journal of Fluid Mechanics 7, Part 4, April 1960, 550.
Morrison, J.and Doyle, K. G., ”Further Measurement of Modulus of Rigidity of
Ships’ Propeller Shafting by UltrasonicMeans,” In The British Ship Research As-
sociation Report No. 16, Naval Architecture Report No. 4.

PERFORMANCE TEST CODES


ASME PTC 8.2-1965, Centrifugal Pumps
ANSUASME PTC 11-1984, Fans
ANSUASME PTC 10-1965 (R1985), Compressors and Exhausters
ASME PTC 3.1-1958 (R1985), Diesel and Burner Fuels
ASME PTC 3.3-1969 (R1985), Gaseous Fuels
ANSUASME PTC 6-1976 (R1985), Steam Turbines
(51) ANSUASME PTC 6A-1982, Appendix A t o Test Code for Steam Turbines
(52) ANSUASME PTC 6s Report-I970 (R1985), Simplified Procedures for Routine Per-
formance Tests of Steam Turbines
(53) ANSUASME PTC 19.1-1985, Measurement Uncertainties
(54) ANSVASME PTC 19.2 1986, Pressure Measurement

75

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
S T D * A S M E P T C b REPORT-ENGL 1785 0757b70 Ob070‘iL 324 W

ANSllASMEPTC 6 REPORT-1985 GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENTUNCERTAINTY


ANAMERICANNATIONALSTANDARD IN PERFORMANCE TESTS OF STEAM TURBINES

(55) ANSllASME PTC 19.3 (R1985), Temperature Measurement


(56) ASME Interim Supplement 19.5 on Instruments and Apparatus, Application -
Part II on Fluid Meters.
(57) ASME PTC 19.6-1955, Electrical Measurement in Power Circuits
(58) ANSllASME PTC 19.7-1980, Measurement of Shaft Horsepower
(59) ASME PTC 19.11-1970, Part II - Water and Steam in the Power Cycle (Purity and
Quality, Leak Detection and Measurement)
(60) ASME PTC 19.13-1961, Measurement of Rotary Speed
(61) ANSllASME PTC 19.22-1986, Digital Systems Techniques
(62) IEEE 112-78, Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and Generators
(63) IEEE 115-65, Test Procedure for Synchronous Machines
(64) IEEE 113-73, Test Code for Direct-Current Machines With Supplement 113A-76.

REFERENCE BOOKS
(65) “Temperature: I t s Measurement and Control in Science and Industry,” Vol. III,
New York: Reinhold Publishing Corp., 1962.
Part 1: Basic Standards, Concepts and Methods
Part 2: Applied Methods and Instrumentation
Part 3: Biology and Medicine
(66) Benedict, R. P., “Fundamentals of Temperature, Pressure, and Flow Measure-
ments,” 3rd Edition, New York: Wiley-lnterscience.
(67) ”ElectricalMetermansHandbook,”7th Edition, New York: Edison Electric
Institute, 1965.
(68) Perry and Chilton, “Chemical Engineer‘s Handbook,” 5th Edition, New York:
McCraw Hill, 1973, 2.62-2.67.
(69) Duncan, A. J., “Quality Control and Industrial Statistics,” 4th Edition, Home-
wood, Illinois: R. D. Irwin, Inc., 1974.

OTHER CODES, STANDARDS, A N D SPECIFICATIONS


(70) ANSI C12-1975, Code for Electricity Metering
(71) ANSI C12.10-1978, Watthour Meters
(72) ANSI C39.1-1981, Requirements for Electric Analog Indicating Instruments
(73) ANSI C57.13-1978, Requirements for Instrument Transformers
(74) ANSllAPI-2530-1975, Meters and Metering
(75) The ASME Steam Tables, Fifth Edition (With Mollier Chart), 1983
(76) ASTM D 1066-1982, Methods for Sampling Steam
(77) ASTM D 1428-1964, Test Methods for Sodium and Potassium
in Water and Water-
Formed Deposits, by Flame Photometry

76
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
I PERFORMANCE TEST CODES NOW AVAILABLE

PTC 1 - General Instructions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1980


(R1985)
PTC 2 - Definitionsand Values .............................. 1980
(R19851
PTC 6 - Steam Turbines ................................... 1976
(R19821
PTC 6.1 - Interim TestCode for an AlternativeProcedure for
TestingSteam Turbines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1984
PTC 6A - Appendix A to Test Code for Steam Turbines
(With1958Addenda) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1982
While providing for exhaustive
PTC 7 - ReciprocatingSteam-DrivenDisplacement Pumps . . . . . . . . . . 1949

I tests, these Codes are so drawn


that selected partsmay be used
for tests of limited scope.
PTC 7.1 - Displacement Pumps ...............................
(R1969
196:
(R1969)
PTC 8.2 - Centrifugal Pumps (With 1973 Addenda). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1965
PTC 18 - Hydraulic Prime Movers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1949
PTC 18.1 - Pumping ModeofPumplTurbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1978

PTC 6 Report - Guidance for Evaluation of Measurement


Uncertainty in Performance Testsof Steam
Turbines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1974
(R1 985)
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

PTC 6s Report - Simplified Procedures for Routine Performance Test


ofSteamTurbines. .......................... 1974
(R19851

A complete list of ASME publications


will be furnished upon request.
D04186

Copyright ASME International


Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale

Anda mungkin juga menyukai