ESP Rapping Control via Sparking Rate Feedback

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Electrostatic precipitators face challenges in efficiently controlling the rapping of collecting electrode plates, leading to increased dust particle emissions and wear on rapping devices, due to suboptimal timing and frequency of rapping events, which can be exacerbated by the need for more fields in series to meet stringent emission standards.

Innovation Solution

A method and device that utilize the sparking rate as an indirect measure of dust particle load on collecting electrode plates to initiate rapping only when necessary, minimizing emissions and wear by correlating the sparking rate with the dust particle emission curve, allowing for real-time adjustment of rapping events based on the load and conditions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If rapping is performed frequently to maintain collecting efficiency, then dust particle collection capability is improved, but rapping device wear and dust particle emissions increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedust particle collection capabilityVSAvoidrapping device wear
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The control system continuously monitors the sparking rate between discharge and collecting electrodes, using this feedback to determine when dust load reaches a threshold that necessitates rapping. This closed-loop control ensures rapping occurs only when needed, avoiding unnecessary wear while maintaining collection efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The rapping frequency is dynamically adjusted based on real-time sparking rate measurements rather than following a fixed schedule. The system adapts the rapping interval to actual operating conditions, increasing frequency when dust load is high and decreasing it when collecting electrodes remain efficient.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Loss of substance

If rapping is delayed to reduce wear and emissions, then rapping device wear and dust particle emissions are reduced, but collecting efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedust particle emissionsVSAvoidcollecting efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of substanceVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses continuous monitoring of the sparking rate as a feedback signal to detect when dust accumulation begins to impair collecting efficiency. This early detection allows timely rapping intervention before efficiency significantly deteriorates, while avoiding premature rapping that would increase emissions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control system initiates rapping in advance when the sparking rate indicates approaching dust load thresholds, before collecting efficiency significantly drops. This preliminary action prevents efficiency loss while minimizing the frequency of rapping operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If more fields are added in series to meet emission standards, then dust particle removal efficiency is improved, but investment and operating cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedust particle removal efficiencyVSAvoidnumber of fields in series
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

By implementing sparking rate monitoring and conditional rapping control, the system maximizes the performance of existing fields through optimized operation. This feedback-based control improves dust removal efficiency without requiring additional fields, avoiding increased complexity and cost.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes operational parameters (rapping timing and frequency) based on real-time measurements to extract maximum performance from the existing ESP configuration. By optimizing operation rather than expanding capacity, the system achieves improved removal efficiency without adding fields.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enhances the average collecting efficiency of electrostatic precipitators by reducing dust particle emissions and minimizing rapping device wear, enabling compliance with stringent emission standards using a minimum number of fields and electrode area, while maintaining efficient dust removal.

Implementation Method 1

The discharge electrodes charge dust particles which are then collected at the collecting electrode plates

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElectrical ionization: Ionisation

Implementation Method 2

The discharge electrodes charge dust particles which are then collected at the collecting electrode plates

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElectrostatic attraction: Electrostatics

Data Source

PatentEP1967276B1A method of estimating the dust load of an esp, and a method and a device of controlling the rapping of an esp
Publication Date: 2019.05.08 GENERAL ELECTRIC TECH GMBH
  • EP1967276B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP1967276B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP1967276B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method of controlling the rapping of at least one collecting electrode plate (30) of an electrostatic precipitator (1) comprises applying, by means of a power source (32), a voltage between said at least one collecting electrode plate (30) and at least one discharge electrode (28), measuring the sparking rate between said at least one collecting electrode plate (30) and said at least one discharge electrode (28), and controlling, using the measured present sparking rate, the rapping of said at least one collecting electrode plate (30).