Hello, ppl.

We have installed flame rods in our burners two months ago. They have gas ignitors and the main burners consume gas, then their performances are very good.

Now we intend to install these ignitors to detect flame in oil burners. How can we sustain the reliability in such cases with possible differences in viscosity fuel, quality of steam, dust?

 

Responding to Anonymous' 03-Mar-08 (17:31) query... following is my reply to a similar thread posted in May-04:

"In my experience, flame-rod flame-loss detectors are very reliable, but they are a high maintenance item. Their failure vs time characteristic do not follow the conventional 'bath-tub' curve. Thus, in many refineries and chem plants it is standard practice to assign one full-time instrument technician to maintain flame-rod detectors!"

Regards,
Phil Corso([email protected])

 

hi, per.
Ignitors are usually used to ignite fuel (gas or oil).

Flame detectors, flame scanners, fire eyes, are usually used to detect the presence of flame.

You seem to be using ignitors and some kind of flame detector you're calling a "flame rod" interchangeably.

Are you calling an ignitor a flame rod?

What do you normally burn in your burners? Pulverized coal? Slurry?

Have you looked at the information provided by the "flame rod" manufacturer, or the burner manufacturer, or the boiler manufacturer?

Usually the manufacturer or packager has definite recommendations about the suitability of their equipment for particular applications.

Actually, you've given us very little information to go along with your question. Remember: We're not there at the site with you. We can't read your mind. Not every site is like yours. Not all equipment is like yours. And most importantly, use consistent terms, and explain
terms you think others might be familiar with.

bye,
anoneperson.

 

Whoa.

First, the flame rod is a flame detector that uses the ignitor like a thermoionic diode closing a brigde to send a signal of presence to the supervisory and ESD (emergence shutdown) systems.

Second, the issue is a possible loss of continuity in the ignitor tube/eletrode caused by incomplete burning deposites, mainly by use of high viscosity oils or deficiences in steam in the main burners. (It's an input to ESD!)

Any maintenance plan with short period may prejudice the operational continuity.

 

Thermoionic diode... nah, too easy.

Seriously, if this is an input to the ESD (Emergency Shutdown), then Phil Corso, PE, may have a valid concern about the integrity of the application.

Again, what does the manufacturer say about this application of their product? Do they think it should be used in an ESD circuit?

Did you say in your original post that it was being used in an ESD circuit? (Kind of has an impact on the response, doesn't it?)

By the way, you can't use the exclamation point to tell us (me) that the flame rod(s) is(are) input(s) to the ESD circuit WHEN YOU DIDN'T TELL US THAT IN THE ORIGINAL POST. (Note that I didn't use an exclamation point... though some say it might have been warranted.)

Again, not much to go on in the original post. It just wasn't intuitively obvious this was being used in an ESD circuit. But you got an answer that was relative anyway, didn't you? (I don't think Phil Corso, PE quite gets the credit he deserves here. Maybe it's all those exclamation points...)