UNIVERSITY DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION PLANNING A CASE STUDY
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE FACILITIES PERSONNEL ◦ Scott Turley, Facilities Director ◦ Doug Moore, Plant Manager
TME ENGINEERS, LITTLE ROCK, AR ◦ James Hess, P.E., CEM, Project Manager ◦ Jay Keazer, EIT, Project Engineer (now P.E.)
VA:W, RENTON, WA ◦ Alan Werner, P.E., F.NSPE, Thermodynamic Model
360 ACRES IN MAIN CAMPUS
75+ BUILDINGS
71 BUILDING USING CHILLED WATER FOR 5.9 MILLION SQUARE FEET 75 BUILDINGS HEATED WITH STEAM OR HYDRONICALLY FOR 5.8 MILLION SQUARE FEET
STEAM PLANT: ◦ 6 EA 10 KPPH MIURA EXH-300 ◦ 2 EA B&W WATERWALL BOILERS – 60 KPPH AND 100 KPPH
FOUR CHILLER PLANTS ◦ 14,300 TONS CHILLING CAPACITY, INITIAL ◦ 12,550 TONS CHILLING CAPACITY, PRESENT ◦ NINE COOLING TOWERS
HEAT PUMP CHILLER ◦ 17 MMBTU/HR AT 155 ⁰F NOMINAL TEMPERATURE
FREE COOLING IN SWCP FREE COOLING INSTALLED IN CCHP, NOT MODELED HEAT PUMP CHILLER TO SUPPLANT STEAM INTERLOCKING CIRCULATION SYSTEMS ONE SEPARATE CIRCULATION SYSTEM
GOALS ◦ To create a model that would validate specific planned changes to the Campus DES
TASKS ◦ Gather, reconcile, and consolidate utility records ◦ Create a validated thermodynamic model baseline ◦ Run modified model configurations to match changes
SOURCE: TME
SOURCE: TME
DATA SYSTEMS ◦ DELTA V FOR STEAM ◦ CARRIER ON AND SQUARE D POWER LOGIC FOR ELECTRICAL ◦ METASYS FOR CHILLED WATER
DATA COLLECTION ◦ MANY RECORDS
SMOOTH DATA ◦ MAKE ALL DATA AS COMPATIBLE AS POSSIBLE ◦ INTERPOLATE AS REQUIRED FOR GAPS
BASIS ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
STEAM IDEAL (STOICHIOMETRIC) COMBUSTION CHILLERS MANUFACTURER kW/TON DATA COOLING TOWERS WET BULB COOLING DATA EQUIPMENT CURVE FIT TO OPERATING SPEC’S.
CONFIGURATION
◦ TO MATCH THE SYSTEM SCHEMATIC
DATA INPUT
◦ INPUTS FROM TME DATA COLLECTION
DATA OUTPUT
◦ OUTPUTS ARE RESULTS FROM VEA CALCULATIONS
52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52
42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42
55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55
P_L OA D_ (T O NS )
SW C
TW ST_ SP HP _
CC
HP _
1964 1944 1913 1906 1896 1876 1930 1952 1924 1925 1931 1983 2035 2149 2156 2099
A PORTION OF THE WHOLE
_(F )
_(F ) CH WS T_S P
F) CH WR T _(
HP _
LO AD _(T ON S)
CC
21.0 20.5 20.0 19.0 19.4 18.6 19.0 19.0 18.0 21.0 24.0 28.0 30.0 34.0 33.0 34.0
HP _
F) 22.0 21.5 21.0 20.0 20.1 19.6 20.0 20.0 19.0 22.0 26.0 32.0 35.0 39.0 39.0 40.0
CC
Hour 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
CC
Day 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
OA _W BT _(F )
Month 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
OA _D BT _(
Hour Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Day of Week (1 = Mon 8 = Hol) 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
497 484 463 458 452 439 475 489 471 471 475 510 544 620 625 588
H3 _L oa CC d_ HP (T on _C s) H4 _L oa CC d_ HP (T on _C s) H1 _P ow CC er HP _( _C kW H3 ) _P ow er _( kW )
Hour 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
HP _C
HP _C
H1 _L OA D
(T on s) Day 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CC
Month 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CC
Hour Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Day of Week (1 = Sun) 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1009.226 989.1707 957.9914 950.7074 941.1184 921.2726 975.3274 996.6072 968.9379 969.551 975.4169 1028.249 1079.63 1193.727 1200.57 1144.368 1188.7 1155.909 1200.233 1128.24
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
508.34 501.89 491.78 489.39 486.24 479.68 497.42 504.29 495.34 495.54 497.45 514.40 530.64 566.29 568.43 550.88 564.72 554.48 568.32 545.85
Load Share Calculation Boiler Plant Steam Load Boiler 1 Boiler 2 Boiler 3 Boiler 4 Boiler 5 Boiler 6 Boiler 7 Boiler 8
HEAT 22210.88 pph 5000 pph 5000 pph 5000 pph 5000 pph 5000 pph 0 pph 0 pph 0 pph
Miura #1 Correction Factor Miura #2 Correction Factor Miura #3 Correction Factor Miura #4 Correction Factor Miura #5 Correction Factor Miura #6 Correction Factor
1 1 1 1 0.442176 0
Miura 1-3 Correction Factor Miura 4-6 Correction Factor
1 0.721088
Boiler Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
Inputs Fire Rate (0,1=half, 2=full) Required Steam lb/hr Load
1 5,000
Group Output lb/hr
Steam Temperature °F
1 5,000
1
1
5,000
5,000
15.00
Steam Production KPPH Pressure psig
1 5,000
7.21
15.38 100
100
0 -
7.40 100
100
100
100
337.0
337.0
337.0
337.0
337.0
337.0
Excess Oxygen (Flue)
40.8% 5.60%
40.8% 5.60%
40.8% 5.60%
40.8% 5.60%
40.8% 5.60%
0.0% 0.00%
Flue Gas Temperature °F
Excess Air Used
368.00
368.00
368.00
368.00
368.00
Blowdown
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
Radiant Losses
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
7,303 7,611.23 307.71
7,303.47 7,611.23 307.71
7,303.47 7,611.23 307.71
7,303.47 7,611.23 136.06
0.00 -
Output Air Flow
-
89.75% Lb/hr
Flue Flow Lb/hr Fuel Consumption Lb/hr
7,304 7,611.51 307.71
Central Cooling Plant Chiller No. 1
Aug. CWRT Trane 2250
Return Temperature Chilled Water Flow Load Condenser Water Flow Leaving Water Temperature Percent Load Power Chiller No. 3
51.27 °F 6012.14 GPM 2331.52 Tons 5625.00 GPM 94.32 °F 1.79 1285.24 kW
51.31 °F
Supply Temperature
Entering Water Temperature Range
51.27 °F
42.00 °F 32364604.12 BTU/hr 2818125.00 Lb/hr 82.83 °F 11.50 °F 4386370.21 BTU/hr
York 2250
Return Temperature Chilled Water Flow Load Condenser Water Flow Leaving Water Temperature Percent Load Power
51.27 °F 6012.14 GPM 2331.52 Tons 6400.00 GPM 93.19 °F 1.04 1527.13 kW
Supply Temperature
Entering Water Temperature Range
42.00 °F 33190151.80 BTU/hr 3206400.00 Lb/hr 82.83 °F 10.36 °F 5211917.89 BTU/hr
REASON ◦ TO PROVIDE CONFIDENCE THE MODEL MATCHES ACTUAL OPERATIONS – PARAMOUNT ASPECT
BOILERS ◦ MATCHED AGAINST STEAM AND NATURAL GAS UTILTY RECORDS AND ή CALC’S.
CHILLERS ◦ MATCHED AGAINST ELECTRICAL UTILTY RECORDS AND ή CALC’S.
OVERALL ◦ A COMPOSITE OF ALL VALIDATION COMPARISONS
SOURCE: TME
1.
2. 3. 4.
5.
THE LOADS FILES – INPUT- CHANGED ACCORDING TO DESIRED TYPE OF OUTPUT TYPICAL YEAR LOADS - TYL TYL WITH NCHP TURBINE ADDITION TYL WITH ADDED CCHP CAPACITY TYL WITH NCHP RELOCATED CHILLER FUTURE LOADS – AS PROJECTED
THE VEA OPERATED ON EACH TYPE OF LOAD TO COMPARE OUTPUT RESULTS
SOURCE: TME
Run Description Baseline Modified Baseline
ECRM # -
CCHP CH-1 Replacement
1
Boiler Plant Optimization
2
Chiller Plant Optimization
3
Distribution Pressure reduction
4
Blowdown Heat Recovery
5
Condensing economizer for Miuras Cogeneration - Mercury 50 & LP-TOU rate tariff FULL TIME OPERATION Cogeneration - Mercury 50 & LP-TOU rate tariff ON-PEAK OPERATION ONLY Cogeneration - Mercury 50 & LP-TOU rate tariff FULL TIME OPERATION DCI Condensing Economizer Added
6
NCHP CCHP Configuration Configuration Turbine Chiller Turbine Chiller 1300 Ton Elec Chiller 1300 Ton Elec Chiller 1300 Ton Elec Chiller 1300 Ton Elec Chiller 1300 Ton Elec Chiller 1300 Ton Elec Chiller
New CH-1 (2250 Ton) New CH-1 (2250 Ton) New CH-1 (2250 Ton) New CH-1 (2250 Ton) New CH-1 (2250 Ton) New CH-1 (2250 Ton)
1300 Ton Elec Chiller
New CH-1 (2250 Ton)
Old CH-1 Old CH-1
Boiler Loading Scheme
VEA Version
Baseline
9.4
Baseline
9.4
Baseline
9.4
Optimized
9.4
Baseline
9.4
Baseline
9.4
Baseline
9.4
Input File
Notes
Typical Year Loads
UAF VEA V9.4_Baseline_Typical Year Loads
Future Loads - NCHP *Models the cost of increasing capacity by running the NCHP Turbine Chiller *Will be handled via modifications to loads input file *Replace CCHP Carrier 1300 Ton with TRANE 2250 Ton. Future Loads *Existing Carrier moved to NCHP in place of steam turbine chiller.
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM2_Future Loads
Future Loads
*Model to reflect a 10% reduction in CCHP + SWCP kW.
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM3_Future Loads
Future Loads - Steam *Reduce boiler operating pressure from 100 to 80 psig Pressure Reduction *Will be handled via modifications to loads input file Future Loads Future Loads
Baseline
9.4
Future Loads
7-1
7-2
*Includes sensible and latent heat (i.e. flash steam recovery) *Adds condensing heat recovery system by Direct Contact, Inc. (DCI); works with stacks of (6) Miura boilers. *Mercury 50 gas turbine by Solar, with fired HRSG by Rentech. *HRSG has priority for loading vs the Miura's. *Miura's are used after HRSG fired and unfired output is exceeded. *Mercury 50 gas turbine by Solar, with fired HRSG by Rentech. *HRSG has priority for loading vs the Miura's. *Miura's are used after HRSG fired and unfired output is exceeded. *Mercury 50 gas turbine by Solar, with fired HRSG by Rentech. *HRSG has priority for loading vs the Miura's. *Miura's are used after HRSG fired and unfired output is exceeded. *DCI condensing economizer added
7-3
1300 Ton Elec Chiller
New CH-1 (2250 Ton)
Baseline
9.4
HPC Demand Shedding
9
1300 Ton Elec Chiller
New CH-1 (2250 Ton)
Baseline
9.4
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM1_Future Loads
*Improved boiler staging (algorithm already exists in V8.0)
9.4
8
UAF VEA V9.4_Baseline_Future Loads - NCHP Turbine Chiller
Future Loads
Baseline
Thermal Storage & LP-TOU Tariff
File Name
Future Loads Thermal Storage
*Charge 18,000 ton-hrs during off-peak hours, and 3000 tons/hr during TOU on-peak hours *Will be handled via modifications to loads input file
*Disable HPC during TOU tariff On Peak hours to shed demand. Future Loads - HPC Transfer load to steam converters. Demand Shedding *Will be handled via modifications to loads input file
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM4_Future Loads - Steam Pressure Reduction UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM5_Future Loads UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM6_Future Loads UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM7-1_Future Loads
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM7-2_Future Loads
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM7-3_Future Loads
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM8_Future Loads - Thermal Storage
UAF VEA V9.4_ECRM9_Future Loads - HPC Demand Shedding
SIMPLE CONTEXT – ◦ COMPARE A BASELINE AGAINST THE OUTPUT OF AN ECRM MODIFICATION ◦ CREATE A FILE OF RESULTS ◦ EVALUATE OTHER CRITERIA USING SELECTED RESULTS ENERGY COMPARISON EMISSIONS PROJECTIONS ECONOMIC ANALYSES BUSINESS AS USUAL (BAU) PROJECTED DES MODIFICATIONS
SOURCE: TME
SOURCE: TME
SOURCE: TME
A THERMODYNAMIC MODEL COUPLED WITH GOOD PROJECT ENGINEERING CREATES A POWERFUL PLANNING SYSTEM THE THERMODYNAMIC MODEL OFFERS PLANNING FLEXIBILITY AS NEW OBSERVATIONS OCCUR THE PLANNING PROCESS USING A THERMODYNAMIC MODEL ALLOWS A HIGHER CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR PROJECTED RESULTS
