Gunjan:
I think I have an understanding of what is troubling you and preventing Joe from helping you directly through his references. The source of your dilemma, I believe, is due to what I consider the worse insidious problem in engineering: bad engineering communication due to
bad writing. And the bad writing I’m referring to is that found in your company’s “Relief Philosophy”.
I have been through many Hazops, Design Reviews, PSV “corrective” projects, and have written quite a few operations and maintenance manuals during my 47-yr career. One outstanding obstacle to converting the information discussed and found in each engineering effort has been the correct, accurate, and understandable English employed in writing the minutes, the manuals, and the Management of Change documentation involved. It seems as if most Chemical Engineers have been totally asleep during their English or writing courses in High School and through University. And I don’t refer strictly to English Courses. I know that Universities in other countries teach their equivalent of English in their native language – but the engineering graduate produced still comes out with an inability to communicate correctly and accurately in their native language as well as in other languages. It’s not about the language – it’s about the thinking and mental process of organizing and transmitting your thoughts accurately.
Now let me explain what is happening, in my opinion, in your particular case. You are correct in trying to understand what to take into consideration when you have a partial (as opposed to a 100%) power failure. Your situation is a very practical and rational one: you need to know what the cooling duty in your induced fan coils is when the electric power fails to those fans. The engineering directive you find in your “Relief Philosophy” states:
- For induced draft fans will have 30 % of normal cooling duty
- For Forced draft fans will have 15 % if normal cooling duty
The above, in my opinion, is bad communications. What should have been correctly written is the following:
- In the case of an induced fan coil application, approximately 30% of the normal cooling duty should be assumed to be transferred during a partial power failure when the coil’s fans cease to operate;
- In the case of a forced fan coil application, approximately 15% of the normal cooling duty should be assumed to be transferred during a partial power failure when the coil’s fans cease to operate.
I believe that my description is pretty explicit and explains what you need to know. Joe Wong was also trying to explain this – but by explaining the mechanical details involved between an induced and a forced draft installation.
Note how easy it is to mis-communicate. I don’t know if the following is literally found in your “Relief Philosophy” or if you committed a typo error, but the word “if” should be replaced with “of” because the meaning changes:
“For Forced draft fans will have 15 %
if normal cooling duty”
Joe Wong correctly addressed your basic question: “why there is difference for induced draft and forced draft because any way the fans will not be working”. He answered by directing you to explanations over the difference between the induced and forced draft fan designs – which is what you asked for. The explicit answer is that when a coil is left without a fan to force air across its heat transfer area, the coil still retains an ability to cool its internal fluid through the creation of natural draft air currents that are created due to the temperature differences between the atmospheric incoming air and the coil surface – very similar to a thermosyphon effect. There is a difference in the cooling rate between both because of the physical positions of the fans are different and also because of possible baffles and louvers that are used.