PIPE-FLO Nuclear

Millstone Power Station. Image via www.nrc.gov

Now that PIPE-FLO Nuclear is nearing its release, one of our new employees asked me how someone in a nuclear power plant could use the new program. That got me thinking about my first job after getting out of the Navy. In 1975, I was hired by Northeast Utilities as a start-up and test engineer at Millstone Unit 2 in Waterford Connecticut. I was assigned to a group of five engineers involved in a pre-operation test in which we balanced the component cooling water system. The component cooling water system is a safety related system and must be operational after a postulated accident.  
This involved test went on 24 hours a day for about two weeks. It started when the engineers at Bechtel in Gaithersburg, Maryland (the EPC for the plant) sent us a datasheet with the prescribed valve position as the initial “guess” for balancing the system. 

During the second shift, the plant operators placed the component cooling water system in the proper configuration for the test. The team of test engineers would place the throttle valves to the prescribed valve position. Once this was done, we would then record the pressures and flow rates using the installed plant instrumentation. We would compile the information into a report; type in onto a report and by about 5:00 AM, would finally fax the results to Bechtel in Gaithersburg.
 
During the day, a group of engineers at Bechtel evaluated our test data from the night before, and after a day of calculations, compiled a new set of valve positions. They would then type a report with the new valve positions and fax it to us by 7:00 PM, so we could repeat the process. This was an iterative process and after each round of test data and new valve positions, the flow rates to each load in the cooling water system got closer to the design values. This process continued for about two week until the results were within the prescribed value outlined in our Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR for short).

Image from the 1999 movie "Office Space", where
disgruntled workers obliterated their fax machine.

As you can see this was a team effort with about ten engineers in two location working around the clock to balance a critical system in a nuclear power plant. Even the FAX machine required two full time operators, using a Xerox Magnafax Telecopier, one at Millstone the other in Gaithersburg. Let me quickly describe this arduous process and this is such old technology I could not find a picture of one anywhere on the internet, but try to imagine with me. The fax machine was a hefty 46 pounds and was connected to a standard telephone buy inserting the phones handset into an acoustic coupler. The operator sending the fax would place a call on a POT (Plain Old Telephone) to the operator on the receiving end. The sending operator would then place the page on a drum, to start the process the drum would rotate, the machine would screech and once the two machines were talking to each other the receiving operator would flip a switch and the Fax would come through line by line. After six minutes, a single page was done and the operators would then manually reload the paper on each end and start the process for the next page in the report. With two good operators, we could transmit a six-page report in an hour! 

As you can see, technology has come a long way. About 10 year ago, I met up with one of the test engineers from Millstone. He was now in plant management and said that they used PIPE-FLO to calculate the valve positions needed to balance his plants cooling water system. I asked him how long it took with PIPE-FLO, and he said once the model was validated, the valve positions were calculated within seconds. The operators then set the valves to the prescribed position and then took the pressure and flow readings just like before. Now they would compare the calculated values with the observed values. If the results were within the prescribed values, the test is signed off. He said from start to finish they were able to balance their equipment cooling water system in less than a day. 

In 2005, the NRC granted Millstone 2 and 3 a 20-year extension on their operating license after an extensive 22-month review process. I find it remarkable that after 40 years, the plant that I helped start up is still running and has another 10 years of operation. 

One of the reasons that the US civilian nuclear power program has been so successful and safe is because of the quality requirements placed on the equipment, and the training requirements of the plant personnel.


Our soon to be released PIPE-FLO Nuclear program comes with an extensive Commercial Grade Dedication in which we document the engineering methods used, outline our development and testing programs, along with an extensive set of test procedures that we developed. To automate the testing process we use PIPE-FLO’s DataLink feature to export design data and calculated results from the PIPE-FLO model to any ODBC capable program like Microsoft ® Excel® or Access®. 

Using the Excel spreadsheets included in the PIPE-FLO Nuclear, one is able to compare PIPE-FLO’s calculated results with the results calculated using Excel. The Excel Verification Worksheets utilize conditional formatting to automatically highlight any values greater than those specified in the Acceptance Criteria. By using Excel, anyone can review the formulas use in the spreadsheets and validate our check calculations.

Nuclear power plants have used PIPE-FLO for over 20 years, but until the release of PIPE-FLO Nuclear, each of our utility customers had to develop their own Commercial Grade Dedication, which may take months to develop. Since a Commercial Grade Dedication needs to be performed for each new version of PIPE-FLO, and the cost is so high for them to perform the work, many use older versions of PIPE-FLO. 

By making PIPE-FLO Nuclear available to our nuclear customers, they will benefit from the latest versions of the software much more quickly. They will still need to run their own commercial grade dedication, but using our supplied templates, they will be able to do their own CGD in a fraction of the time.

Now that is progress. 

Read the Instructions!

A local news station that I watch has a question of the day and this one I found particularly interesting.

92% of these are thrown away without ever being used. What are they?

Answer: Instructions

INSTRUCTIONS!! Yeah, I know, I am guilty of this myself on occasion, but 92% of all the instructions I receive? That seems pretty high. Especially when you consider the drawer in my office where I "file" all of the important users manuals I keep from various electronics and equipment.

I keep them because I never know when something might go wrong with any of these devices and the manufacture went to all that trouble to print out the booklet for me...

Anyway, when I see a number like that I have to think how much wasted paper we have been sending out for years with our products. Engineered Software no longer sends printed users manuals, but includes them INSIDE our programs now in very informative Help Files. Moreover, when we don't have the right answers in the Help files, we have this cool place on our website called the Knowledge Base where we regularly write articles that cover both technical support topics, product usage support topics, and just plain old informative. Most of the time we direct users to articles we have written in the "KB" and when that doesn't have the solution, we have some of the best support professionals in the software industry.

The biggest thing I notice today is that people seem to be too rushed to read anything, including manuals but like I always say, "If you don't have time to do something right the first time (or read the directions), how could you have time to do it twice?"

There are some seriously legitimate reasons user instructions are included with the products we buy, and although they don't all apply to the software we sell at Engineered Software, this epidemic of not reading directions is important enough to list. Many times companies include instructions with their products having consumer safety in mind or to protect the integrity of the product. Not following instructions can have devastating consequences. An individual may also lose valid information especially if dealing with complex products such as electronics or software.

Product Safety & Saving Lives

In the worst case scenario - you could be harmed or even die! Ask any pharmacist, doctor or nurse, not following the directions on a bottle of medication can lead to poisoning, overdosing, or clashes with other medicines, which end in the very worst ways! And if you ask any safety manager for an industrial job, not following instructions on caustic chemicals or aerosols could cause accidents, injuries or death as well. Plus, you want to ensure the longevity of your investment. What I mean is, typically when you buy a product, you want it to work or last as long as possible. Not knowing the limitations of that product and how NOT to use it, will inevitably result in the product malfunctioning.

Efficiency and Saving Time or Money

ANY paperwork we fill out for the most important things like insurances or taxes, require we do things right the first time or our services may be delayed, penalties included, or worse, we could be audited! Plus the bonus of paperwork being processed more quickly. Reading installation instruction or license management documents for software could save hours of backtracking or customer service calls. No one likes those! Plus, you might learn a more efficient way to use your new gadget, or identify special features you didn't know about.

Education and Generally Looking Smart

As students we learn how to follow instructions in order to perform skills efficiently. As adults, we look to instructions only when we can't figure things out intuitively the first time, but users manuals frequently contain the documentation for all the things we don't think we'll need, until we do. Set-up and installation info, warranty details, and any maintenance or troubleshooting advice are all things we WANT to know about our stuff, but just can't seem to make the time to educate ourselves about them. Knowing these things before something goes wrong will help us not be surprised or disappointed later when we have to go buy another because the warranty ran out.

I feel like a company's user documentation is reflection on the company itself, which is why we put so much effort into our Installation documentation, the Help program in our software, and why we have such a robust Knowledge Base for our customers. Engineered Software sells highly technical products, albeit easy to use, and our documentation is thorough. If you have time, and you want to learn some deep dark secrets (Hints & Tips) about our products, you might just start by reading our user manual in the Help file. In today’s frenzied and competitive world, where people need to digest information as efficiently as possible, the lack of quality documentation can be nothing short of ruinous for a manufacturer.

One last factoid, according to one article I read, 95% of all returned gadgets actually work but were returned because customers thought they were too confusing to user or they just weren't meeting their expectations.

Working Together to Build the Best

Last month’s Blog I discussed how pumps get over-sized because of our failure to communicate and the possibility of cumulative error in the process. This month I will discuss ways to communicate together from the get-go so a better system may be built.

In last months blog I stated that the most common communication problem in piping system design is the failure to accurately state the process requirements when selecting a pump. In this month’s blog I will add commentary of what could be done to improve the communications. (Italics indicate quote from last month’s blog.) 

Sizing the Pump

Every system needs a pressure gain device or pump to move the fluid through the piping system. Choosing the right pump, motor sizing, correctly sizing pipes, and determining the best efficiency point all depend on knowing the capacity requirements for the system.

“The owner of the system design provides a capacity requirement based on future system needs knowing full well that the system will be operating at a lower capacity for an extended period of time until the market need catches up with capacity.”

The owner should clearly state in the design documents that the pump system is expected to be operating at 500 gpm for the first 5 years then increase to 1,000 gpm once product sales ramp up. Full disclosure on the system’s intended design and purpose should be stated from the beginning. 

“The engineer designing the system takes the capacity provided by the process group and adds a 20% design margins of flow (to allow for future capacity increases).”

Assuming that the owner has clearly stated their design requirements in the design documents, the engineer now knows from the beginning that the system will be operating at 500 gpm for the foreseeable future, and the possible future requirements of 1,000 gpm capacity. There is no need for the engineer to factor the additional 20% design margin increase in pump selection. The engineer can size the pipelines to meet both the immediate needs AND have a design flexible enough to meet the future needs as well. Once the pipelines are sized, the head loss in the system can be determined for both 500 gpm and 1,000 gpm. Based on this information, the total head for the pump can be determined for both conditions but selected from the current condition of 500 gpm.

Avoiding the Snowball Effect

It may start as a small over estimate but it can get compounded when others on the project try to compensate for the lack of specificity in the beginning.

“In addition, a design margin for head is added (to account for system uncertainties during the design process) when specifying the equipment. As a result the pump design point is 1,200 gpm and 200 ft of head.

The individual selecting the pump chooses a pump with the design point left of the pumps Best Efficiency Point (BEP) to allow the pump to better accommodate future system capacity increases.”

Since engineering is now initially designing the system to operate at 500 gpm, there is no need to add extra capacity for the future at this time. When it comes time to add the future capacity, the owner will have a better understanding of the actual production needs and can factor that into the selection when the increased process loads are known. The engineer submitting the pump specification to the supplier can provide information on the current needs as well as the future needs.

The options available to the engineer and customer can be:

• Select a pump that can meet the future needs with a variable speed drive. This allows the pump to meet both today’s needs (at a slower speed) as well as the projected future requirements (at a higher speed).
• Select a pump that has a sufficient range of impeller diameters to meet the 500 gpm flow rate, with sufficient additional diameter to meet the expected future flow. A new impeller will need to be purchased to meet the future requirements but the savings in pumping cost will more than make up for the difference.
• Design the system with multiple pumps in parallel. To meet the initial 500 gpm one pump can be operated, and to meet the future needs a second pump can be operated providing the proper head and flow for the future capacity.

The next step is for the engineer to submit a pump specification to the pump supplier. Since the system owner provided a detailed description of how the system will operate, the design engineer for the system is able to provide the known information in the pump specifications. Armed with the full details of how the system will be operated throughout the next 5+ years, the pump supplier is able to select the best pump meeting the stated requirements.

By being upfront with the design intentions and explaining the current needs and future vision in detail, each group in the process knows how the system will be operating in the foreseeable future along with the projected future capacity. No assumptions needed. If that information is shared with each individual, every step of the way, the design margins will reflect how the pumps needs to be run, not how it will be run in the future, and less of a chance of a snowball effect.

I have offered one example of a common area of miscommunication in the piping system design process. Please feel free to add your experiences to the comments below or offer advice to anyone starting out on their first design project. I appreciate all of your feedback.

...Failure to Communicate

I am a big fan of Paul Newman, the actor and humanitarian that had a long and successful string of hit movies. One of my favorite is Cool Hand Luke, where he plays Luke, a prisoner in a southern chain gang that is continually bucking the system. 

During the movie the following dialog takes place between the Captain and Luke. Luke just finished time in “the box” after an unsuccessful escape attempt. In addition he was given a set of leg irons “to slow him down.” 

Captain: You gonna get used to wearing them chains after a while, Luke. Don't you never stop listening to them clinking, 'cause they gonna remind you what I been saying for your own good.

Luke: I wish you'd stop being so good to me, Cap'n.

Captain: Don't you ever talk that way to me. (pause, then hitting him) NEVER! NEVER! (Luke rolls down hill; to other prisoners) What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men. 

(Carroll & Rosenberg, 1967)

As a result “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate” has become a common phrase in the American lexicon. 

Many of the problems we experience are caused by the failure to communicate. In piping systems, the failure to communicate causes pumps to be over-sized leading to increased operational, maintenance, and capitol cost and reductions in system reliability and overall output. One of the most common communication problems is the failure to accurately state the process requirements when selecting a pump. It works like this:

The owner of the system design provides a capacity requirement based on future system needs knowing full well that the system will be operating at a lower capacity for an extended period of time until the market need catches up with capacity. So instead of specifying the expected 500 gpm for process design flow, 1,000 gpm is given so as to plan for the future.

The engineer designing the system takes the capacity provided by the process group and adds a 20% design margins of flow (to allow for future capacity increases). In addition a design margin for head is added (to account for system uncertainties during the design process) when specifying the equipment. As a result the pump design point is 1,200 gpm and 200 ft of head.

The individual selecting the pump chooses a pump with the design point left of the pumps Best Efficiency Point (BEP) to allow the pump to better accommodate future system capacity increases. 

“What we've got here is failure to communicate.”

Each group in the process added their design margin, just to be on the safe side. Yet they fail to document or communicate their design margins to the entire group. This is the way things are done today because that’s the way things have always been done. We as engineers, have a tendency to add design margin just to make sure thing work. There is nothing wrong with that except that problems arise when we don’t consider the consequences of compounding design margins on the system operating costs, maintenance costs, capitol costs, and plant reliability. 

That is where PUMP-FLO comes in handy; it’s a great way to communicate. Anytime during the process the user can enter basic system operating information and the program calculates the static head and dynamic head. Combined with the pump curve you can see the interaction between the pump, process, and control. For example the following pump/system curve was generated with the PUMP-FLO program using a pump curve from the Crane Deming Pumps catalog. 

  
Notice the design point for the selected pump was 1,200 gpm with 200 ft of head based on the calculations performed by the engineer. The individual selecting the pump chose one with the design point left of the pump’s best efficiency point of 1,550 gpm. As we can see the pump is the most efficient at a flow rate that will never be achieved.

The blue lines represent the system curve. The upper blue line was used in calculating the system static head for the pump selection calculations; this represents the maximum static head expected even though the possibility of the system operating under this condition is less than 1% of the time.  The lower system curve shows the typical valve for static head. The pump was sized for the maximum static head that occurs infrequently and at a flow rate that is not expected to be needed for 10 years.

What is this costing us? Cost is a primary driver for most operating system, and one again PUMP-FLO is able to help you communicate how much the system costs to operate.  For example the projected pump operation during the first 5 years is 500 gpm resulting in a 72 psi pressure drop across the control valve.  When the system is running as described for a year it consumes 395,000 kWh and with a power cost of $0.10/kWh costs $39,500/yr to operate.

If the differential pressure across the control valve was reduced to a more reasonable pressure drop of 28 psid, by reducing the impeller diameter on the pump to the minimum allowed by the manufacturer, the pump will consume only 214600 kWh per year with an operating cost of $21,460/year.

The Captain was wrong, we don’t have to get used to the leg irons of system inefficiency if we just communicate our process and total cost to everyone involved. 

By the way if you haven’t seen Cool Hand Luke I would suggest renting in on Netflix® or Amazon.com® and watch an excellent story with an outstanding cast. And please let me know what you think about the article or about Cool Hand Luke.

---

References:
Carroll, G. (Producer), & Rosenberg, S. (Director). (1967). Cool Hand Luke [Motion picture]. United States: Warner Bros.-Seven Arts

A Dynamic Welcome

Estimated Reading Time: 1 minutes 40 seconds. Read Later

I’m not sure if you’ve heard yet, but we have just recently released a little program and we’re pretty excited about all the new changes that were made in this release. I am talking of course, about the PIPE-FLO software that our company was founded on, and has recently undergone a three-year major rewrite.

The new PIPE-FLO 12 release has a whole new look and one of the first things you notice is the new Start Menu or Welcome Screen.

 

The whole purpose of the Start Menu aims at giving you quick access to a number of the common tasks and allows you to get familiar with some of the major features very easily.

The new Start Menu is part of the fast and fluid PIPE-FLO 12 experience. We really wanted to make this opening screen a hub for users of the program, does come in handy when you first open the program at the beginning of the day to do some work.

We have made the Tutorial, New and Recent Systems, Contacting Support and the Knowledge Base all accessible from the first screen. Doing this shortens the amount of clicks a user needs to start their project and get down to business!

The Start Menu will only display when no PIPE-FLO project is open.

Also, and arguably most important, the Reactivation Date is shown in the upper right corner. This Reactivation Date includes a link to more information about how to keep the software license operating.

This new design concept includes new Dynamic Content that works like a bulletin board for Engineered Software to share program updates and new feature information directly with users!

For instance, we have the Yellow Box in the Dynamic Content alerting users to whether their version of PIPE-FLO is the most Up-to-date and including links to more current downloads when appropriate.

This is also a great way for updated program announcements to be communicated and maintenance releases to be distributed immediately – which is why it is a good idea to make sure the IT department has allowed the dynamic content to run.

Dynamic content requires an internet connection, and there is a check box to show/hide this information. If there is no internet connection or the internet is disabled, the Dynamic portion of the Start Menu should show as blank. If the Dynamic content is enabled, and appears not to be displaying correctly, then your IT department may have other network settings affecting the display.

So the next time you start up PIPE-FLO 12 take a closer look at the Dynamic Content on the Start Menu. You might find that there is some interesting Video or Program Announcement there for you!



If you found this post interesting, share it with your friends or coworkers!

Darcy's Fables IV

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 49 seconds. Read Later

A couple of nights ago I was reading to my grand-kids from their favorite book, Piping System Fundamentals. We were reading the section on how to properly specify equipment for a pumped system. They all appeared to be a little confused, so the oldest asked “Pop Pop, why is it so important to know the system requirements when specifying equipment?” I then decided it was time for a Darcy’s Fable.

The Farmers and their Horses' Power

Once in the deep woods there was a bear, a puma, and a wolf. They were all friendly animals wanting to shed their common stereotypes passed down throughout the ages in popular fables and folk stories. These three friends decided to make a career change and tried their hand in farming.

After a couple of days of being farmers they were sitting down together and shared their experiences. They all complained about how hard it was to prepare the ground for planting.

All of a sudden the bear said “I think I will go into town and buy a horse!”

“That’s a great idea,” said the puma, “I am hungry and a horse would taste good now.”

“No, no, no! I want the horse to pull my plow not to eat it,” replied the bear. So, after a lengthy discussion, each of the friends resolved to go to the market and purchase a horse.

The bear told the horse trader, “I am the strongest animal in the forest; I need to buy a big strong horse to plow my field. As I expand my farm to meet my future goals, having a big horse will allow me to pull my big plow and get much more done.” Later that afternoon, the bear came back from the market with a Belgian Draft horse.

The puma told the horse trader, “I am the fastest animal in the forest; I must have the fast horse to pull my plow.  As my farm gets bigger, and to meet my future goals, I would like to have fast horse that will be able to run while pulling the plow.” By the afternoon, the puma came back from the market with a Thoroughbred horse. 

At the horse market the wolf said, “I am not the strongest or fastest animal in the forest, so I must buy smart. What type of horse would you suggest that I purchase to help me around my small farm?” So, later that afternoon, the wolf returned from the market with a mule*.

The bear and the puma laughed at how funny and small the wolf’s mule looked, and teased the wolf for is choice. “That animal will not get the job done at all!” they said to him. The wolf took no mind.

After a week the bear, puma, and wolf were again at their favorite watering hole for happy hour and the conversation turned to their horses.

The bear said that his Belgian horse was so strong it could pull the dark out of midnight. But that it was so big that it wouldn’t fit into the barn.

The puma said that his Thoroughbred could run faster than the wind but it was so high strung that it kicked out the walls in the barn.

The wolf said that his mule was a hard worker, and he enjoyed living in the dry barn.

After the crops were in the bear, puma, and the wolf meet up at the harvest ball. Soon the discussion turned to their farming success.

The bear said that he had to sell his larger Belgian Draft horse. He said that although his crops were in early because his big horse made such short work of the plowing, the horse was so big and hungry it ate half his crops! In addition, the Belgian was just too big to work around the bear’s small farm.

The puma said that he too had to sell his Thoroughbred. His crops were planted late because the horse didn’t want to pull the plow. Due to the late planting and short growing season his crops didn’t come in that well. The Thoroughbred horse enjoyed running but would not help around the puma’s small farm.

The wolf said that with the help of his hard working mule he got the crops planted on time. Since the mule was the right size for the small farm he didn’t eat a lot of the crops and was able to help around the farm. The wolf said that after the crops came in he had enough money to pay all his bills, put some money in the bank for the future, and buy some more land and a second mule to expand the farm.

. . .

All of a sudden one of my grand-kids said, “Now I get it Pop Pop, if you don’t size the process equipment to meet the systems requirements, the operating and maintenance cost will be excessive which affects the plants profitability.”

With a twinkle in my eye I said “Yes my little ones, you learn well.”

The youngest of the grand-kids wanted to know what became of the Belgian and the Thoroughbred horses. Well, the Belgian was sold to a brewery in St. Louis and is making nightly beer runs. The Thoroughbred was sold to a jockey to run at the track but it turns out the Thoroughbred was a nag and never finished in the money and is now working at a glue factory.

* To be correct a mule is not a horse. A mule is the offspring of a male donkey and a female horse. Mules are typically more patient, sure footed, and live longer than a horse, and are typically less obstinate, faster, and more intelligent that donkeys.[1]

If you like reading about my Piping System Fundamentals, Darcy’s Fables, let me know! I’d welcome your version of a Darcy’s Fable as well. Send your email to blogger@eng-software.com. Thanks for reading!

---

1.    Jackson, Louise A. The Mule Men: A History of Stock Packing in the Sierra Nevada, p. 5 (Mountain Press Publishing Co, Missoula, Montana, 2004).

Darcy's Fables III

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 38 seconds. Read Later

The other night I was babysitting my grand-kids and they asked me to read them a story from their favorite book Piping System Fundamentals. So I asked my middle grandchild, what part of the book she would like me to read. She said the part about balancing the energy usage within a pumped system and the need to identify and eliminate excess pump head. When I started reading, she said “No Pop-Pop not with those words, make it into a story with kings, and animals.” Well I knew I needed to bring out my old French friend Henry Darcy to create another “Darcy’s Fable.”

 

The Story of the Elephant King and the Busy Beavers

 

Once upon a time, there lived an Elephant King, who liked to provide his subjects with all the best the kingdom could offer. The King decided that for the kingdom to grow and prosper he would need to bring water from Lake Lilly, the giant water hole in the center of the kingdom, to all the cities and villages.

The first order of business was to get the Zebras together to plan the water system for the future and make sure it wasn’t too small. The Zebras came up with their estimate and then doubled it just to be on the safe side. They forwarded their estimate to the Wart Hogs to come up with a design. (My grandson thinks Wart Hogs are nice and wants them in every story!) The Wart Hogs did all their calculations, and since they were planning for the future they too added an ample margin for future growth.

As the system was built, everyone was excited. The Squirrels, having a knack for saving, were in charge of kingdom finances. Since the Squirrels had to pay for the project out of the royal treasury, they were starting to get concerned about the project costs. The project went ahead and was finished on time but over budget. 

The water pumps were big and they took large teams of Horses to run them, but they were bright and shiny. Everyone was impressed with what had been built. Once the water system was finished and the pumps started, there was plenty of water everywhere around the kingdom. In fact, there was too much water in many locations and some of the villages had problems dealing with the water. 

In one farming village, there were floods in the fields but the resourceful farmers planted rice in the fields instead of wheat to try and “fix” or “cover” up the overabundance. In other villages, the excess water went into the streets making it difficult to travel, but it was quickly diverted by the Hippopotami to existing streams that lead back to Lake Lilly. Over time, all the startup problems were solved and the system worked. As the wise Elephant King envisioned the kingdom prospered.

After a couple of months, the Squirrels approached the Elephant King and said that the water project cost twice as much to operate than originally planned. But since the kingdoms productivity increased there was enough in the royal treasury to pay for the increased operating cost.

In the summer months, when the water was needed the most there were parts of the kingdom that didn’t have enough water. The King decided that something needed to be done so he brought in the Busy Beavers to look at the system to see what could be done.

The first thing the Beavers discovered was that some areas in the kingdom got too much water while other areas more distant from Lake Lilly didn’t get enough. The Beavers busily set about to plug some of the pipe outlets in the areas that had too much water. As they started plugging the pipelines close to Lake Lilly, they started getting more water to the more remote locations of the kingdom. As they worked their way out from Lake Lilly, they found that all the pipelines needed to be partially plugged to prevent flooding. Soon the Beavers found that over time, the plugs they placed in the pipelines to balance the flow would spring leaks requiring continual repairs.

After talking to the Squirrels about the operating costs, the Beavers discovered the cost to operate the large Horse driven pumps continued to climb. It seemed the raceway the Horses ran on to drive the pumps was also beginning to wear out. When the dirt raceway was replaced with a stone raceway, the Horses’ shoes wore out much faster and their hooves were splitting, increasing the system maintenance cost. Neither of those solutions worked!

Then the Beavers put two and two together and determined that the pump was too large for the needs of the system. After reviewing the pump curve and performing a few pump affinity speed calculations, they determined that if they replaced the fast Horses with smaller and slower Goats the pump would develop less pressure and would stop blowing out the plugs. After replacing the Horses with Goats, they rebalanced the system and all was well in the royal water system. The Beavers were able to reduce the cost to run the pumps as well as practically eliminate all of the breakdowns and maintenance troubles.

The Elephant King was so happy that the system worked that he had a royal dinner for the Beavers and everyone lived happily ever after.

THE END

My granddaughter was so happy about the story she said “See Pop-Pop, if you optimize a pump, you can reduce your capital costs, operating cost, and maintenance costs while increasing system reliability. I really like stories with happy endings.”

Darcy's Fables II

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 31 seconds. Read Later

I was reading to my grandchildren from Piping System Fundamentals, their favorite book, and enjoying some family time. We were talking about the pump curve, one of the most important documents dealing with pumped systems. They all had questions about reading the pump curve and understanding why it was so important to know where it is running on the curve. Since they had so many questions, I created this Darcy’s Fable to explain:

The Raccoon, Possum, Porcupine, and the Golden Map

Once upon a time was a Raccoon, Possum, and Porcupine lived in the Primeval Woods. Life was hard for the woodland critters, and the past winter was especially long and cold which put everyone in a foul mood. Moreover, food was in short supply and everyone was worried about the future.

As the Raccoon, Possum and Porcupine were sitting by the side of a brook complaining about how hard life was, a beautiful Water Sprite flew by on shimmering wings.

She said to the trio, “I have been listing to your worries and complaints so I thought I would help you out. I will give each one of you a Golden Map. With it, you can find your way to Westwood. There you will find the weather is mild, the food is plentiful and life is much better. Just follow the Golden Map and all will be well.”

Then the Water Sprite flitted off laughing, knowing that her gift would cause misfortune for some of the critters. You see, this sprite was quite mischievous, often tricking people. She then vanished as quickly as she had appeared.

Possum quickly looked at the Golden Map and said, “This looks very simple, I will put it in my backpack and start the journey right away!” However, as the Possum was putting the Golden Map into his backpack, a sudden breeze caught the paper and it fell into the brook where it was swept away.

Possum was undeterred and he said, “No matter, it looked so simple I can easily remember it and find my way to the Westwood,” and he promptly set off.

Then Porcupine looked at the Golden Map and said, “This map must be very important, so I will make sure it is safely in my backpack and I will only take it out if I really need it.” Then he too, immediately set off for Westwood.

After the other two had so quickly gone on their merry way, Raccoon looked at the Golden Map and said, “This must be important, and since Westwood is so very far away I think I will study and learn about this map before starting my journey.”

He then set out to find the Great Owl, the wisest animal in the forest. The Great Owl looked at the Golden Map and after a while, was able to unlock its secrets.

He shared the secrets of the map with Raccoon and showed him the blue line to follow from the Primeval Woods through the Spot of Sweetness and finally going Between the Emerald Peaks (Let’s call it BEP) then your journey to Westwood will be easy.

The Raccoon then set about getting ready and packing for the journey, starting off the following morning. Within two days journey, he made it to Westwood where the winters are mild, the mood bright, and the food is plentiful. Racoon was so thankful he had learned how to read his Golden Map!

But the poor Possum without the aid of the Golden Map went into the “Lowlands of Poor Operation” where there was turbulence, cavitation, and excessive noise. The Possum was so scared in this land that he got totally missed the truck coming down the road he was standing on. Unfortunately he was run over and can still be found by the side of the road.*

*(I always like it when a character dies in a story. It keeps them from being too sappy.)

Porcupine started his journey, but when he looked at the Golden Map, he could not unlock its secrets. He wandered about aimlessly in the “Land of the Rough Running.” The rocks and the thorny bushes cut his shoes and ripped at his cloths and the noise and thunder keeps him awake at night. He was constantly buying new shoes and wandering around with tattered clothing, a very miserable porcupine. 

Suddenly one of my granddaughters exclaimed “Now it get it Pop Pop, for every pump in the plant we should have a pump curve. We should know where each pump is running on its curve and try to operate Between the Emerald Peaks, I mean around the BEP. If we do that we can reduce both its operating cost and maintenance cost.”

Her sister, always the romantic said, “Pop Pop whatever happened to the Raccoon in Westwood?”

I said that he is currently in a long-term relationship with a very attractive girl raccoon and they are looking to have a litter of kits when the time is right. She seemed satisfied with that answer so I chose to leave it at that!

If you'd like to learn more about reading pump curves. Engineered Software Knowledge Base has a couple articles that might help.

Reading a Pump Curve and Pump Curve Landmarks are both very informative.

Let me know what you think of these Darcy's Fables. I have at least one more to share, but I'd like to know what you all think about them. (Read The First Darcy's Fable Here) Leave a comment below or send an email to blogger@eng-software dot com. Thanks for reading!

Piping Systems as Simple as 1-2-3

Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes 33 seconds. Read Later

I find it much easier to break down a complex process into its various parts, that way I find it much easier to understand. Take a piping system, it doesn’t matter how many tanks, pumps, components, control valves, or pipelines a pumped system can be broken down into three basic components. By working together these three basic components make it so the system can meet its design objective. 

The three basic components of a piping system are the 1) Pump, 2) Process equipment and 3) Control equipment. I will use the drawing to help categorize the items in the system.

Item 1 is the pump, which is the easiest element in the system because they are usually grouped together. In this case, we have a single centrifugal pump; it provides the energy needed to overcome the resistance to flow. What makes the pump simple to understand is that it can only operate on its pump curve.

Item 2, is the process equipment. It’s easy to identify the process equipment because this is why the system is built. The purpose of this system is to supply 1,200 gpm of treated water to the product tank to meet the plant’s needs.  Here’s how the various items are used

• The raw water tank provides transient storage to allow for fluctuations in raw water flow. 
• The pipeline provides a conduit to deliver the raw water from the tank to the water treatment plant. 
• The water treatment plant treats the water to its meet the systems water quality requirements. 
• The pipeline delivers the treated water from the water treatment plant to the product tank.
• The product tank provides a transient storage to allow for fluctuations in the treated water flow. 
• The various valves and fittings are added to redirect the flow in the pipelines as well as isolate system equipment for maintenance

Each of the items in the process group consumes the energy supplied by the pump. 

Item 3 is the energy needed to control the system. For a given flow rate the pump produces a given head value, and at that same flow rate the system requires a given head valve. The difference between what the pump produces and what the system requires, is consumed by the control valve. Once again the energy drop across the control valve is supplied by the pump.

Some people call the energy drop across the control valve as wasted energy. I find this totally incorrect; I like to refer to it as the price that must be paid to control the system. During normal system operation the levels and the pressure in the tanks vary, changing the amount of energy that the system needs for a flow rate. To meet the changes the control valve needs to open and close to control the product tank level. As the treated water flow rates vary to meet the plant’s requirements, changes both the head the pump produces and the losses in the pipelines and components, once again the control valve opens or closes to control the flow rate to the required value. 

We can put this into the following formula:

Pump Head = Component Losses + Control Valve Losses

See it as simple as 1, 2, 3. 

For simple systems like the one displayed above the pumps curve can be overlaid with the systems curve to create a pump / system curve. The difference between what the pump produces and what the system requires for a given flow rate equals to the pressure drop across the control valve.

If you would like to see how to develop pump / system curve, and see how to evaluate more complex systems please refer to a three part article on the Engineered Software Knowledge Base entitled: Value of a System Resistance Curve.

Remember it as simple as 1, 2, 3.

Leave your questions or comments below or send an email to blogger@eng-software dot com. We really do read every one!

James Watt

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes 14 seconds. Read Later

This month's blog is about James Watt (1736 to 1819) the Scottish inventor and mechanical engineer whose work on the early steam engine ushered in the industrial revolution and laid the foundation for the study of thermodynamics.

James Watt started out his professional career as maker of mathematical instruments including parallel rulers, telescopes, barometers and such. While working on an astronomical instrument at the University of Glasgow his skills were so appreciated that in 1757, he was offered space to set up his workshop to repair the universities instruments.

Two years later, Watt started looking at the Newcomen steam engine, which was used to pump water from the coalmines throughout Scotland and England. The Newcomen steam engine consisted of a cylinder, piston, and balance beam with a counter weight. The steam was introduced into the base of the cylinder driving the piston. Once the piston was at the top of its stroke, a valve closed the steam flow, and another valve opened injecting cold water into the cylinder. The cold water created a vacuum within the cylinder causing the piston to retract. The piston was connected to a rocker beam and the other end of the rocker beam was connected to a rod pump that pumped out the mine.

The primary drawback of the Newcomen steam engine was the need to inject cold water into the cylinder to create the vacuum. The cold water caused the walls of the cylinder to cool down requiring additional steam injection to warm up the cylinder.

In 1763 Watt was asked to repair the University’s Newcomen steam engine. Although never having seen one before he was able to get it operating, but quickly determined that most of the steam being supplied to the engine was used to heat the cylinder after each cold water injection cycle.

By 1765 Watt determined that by condensing the steam in a separate chamber instead of the piston, and by keeping the cylinder temperature the same value as the inlet steam temperature, he realized that more energy from the steam could be converted to mechanical energy. The Watt steam engine still used saturated steam slightly above atmospheric pressure. The steam was injected into the cylinder at the bottom of the piston stroke to move the piston. On the Watt steam engine, a valve in the cylinder was opened once the piston reached the end of the stroke allowing steam to flow to a separate chamber. Water was then injected into the separate chamber to condense the steam. Later the condensing chamber was further improved by setting the condenser chamber in a cold-water tank, eliminating the need to inject cold water. Further improvements were made by collecting the warm condensate from the condenser and using it as boiler feed.

Watt further improved the design by sealing the top of the cylinder and injecting low-pressure steam into the top of the upper part of the cylinder to help move the piston down. This helped push the steam from the cylinder to the condenser chamber while increasing the speed of the engine. In 1775 these design improvement went into the first production version.

Like every good startup Watt needed a moneyman or “angel investor.” (The term “angel” was first used in 1978 by William Wetzel, a professor at that time at the University of New Hampshire.) Enter Matthew Boulton a serial entrepreneur that funded the Watt’s first steam engine. The new company Watt and Boulton got their original design completed and installed three engines in 1776. Their engines used 75% less fuel than the Newcomen engine due to its more efficient use of steam.

The early company made a practice of not selling the steam engines directly, instead they were given to the mine but the Watt and Boulton company charged a license fee to the engine owners based on their fuel savings over the Newcomen engine. As you can imagine many of the users of the Watt Boulton steam engines tried to stiff the company by not paying their full licensing. This resulted in multiple legal actions, making them both wealthy men.

Additional improvements to the Watt and Boulton engine occurred in later designs when the cylinders could be “precision bored” to minimize steam leakage. In addition an arrangement of steam inlet valves on the other side of the piston, allows the entrance of steam to both ends of the piston. This resulted in a double action engine, which in effect doubled the power output of the engine.

The next major improvement included the addition of epicycle sun and planet gears, and a flywheel to allow the output of the reciprocating engine to supply power to rotary loads. Now steam engines could replace water wheels and windmills in grain mills, textile mills, and other factories allowing the location of industrial plants anywhere instead of being required to be located next to streams and rivers. As an aside, Watt used the epicycle sun and plant gears to avoid paying licensing fees to the inventor of the crank. Once the patent for the crank ran out, the Watt and Boulton engines used the crank and flywheel design.

Watt continued to make improvements to the steam engine, including the flywheel governor to even out the load, and the Watt indicator to monitor the efficiency of his steam engine. Watt never stopped inventing. He developed the concept of horsepower and the SI unit of power, (the watt), was named after him. Watt pioneered the efficiency effort using improved design, among many of his great contributions.

I consider James Watt both and inventor, as well as the father of mechanical engineering. He took a rudimentary steam engine, gained an understanding of how it operated, and improved its efficiency 100 years prior to the study of thermodynamics. Not only did the Watt and Boulton steam engine do an excellent job of pumping out coalmines in England, but also its ability to bring power to any industrial process anywhere that required energy made the industrial revolution possible.

As you can see, just as today, in the 1700s there was cutting-edge technology, angle investors, patent disputes and legal action to enforce intellectual property rights. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Who do you consider as the father of engineering? Who would better represent the mechanical engineering field? Let me know by leaving a comment or sending me an email to blogger@eng-software.com. We are welcoming guest bloggers. Just send us a message if you would be interested in becoming a guest blogger.

It’s the System Not the Pump: DOE’s Proposal for New Pump Efficiency Standards

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes 40 seconds. Read Later

This post covers the US Department of Energy (DOE) notice of proposed rule-making for pump efficiency. On June 13, 2011, the US DOE issued a Request For Information (RFI) regarding the establishment of energy conservation standards for pumps. (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-06-13/html/2011-14553.htm). After viewing the information found on the Federal Register RFI, I have serious doubts about some of the estimates presented along with the value of establishing minimum pump efficiency standard.

The RFI states there are other regulatory programs that provide energy efficiency information such as the Energy Star labeling program developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency and DOE. The Energy Star labeling can be found for a variety of products such as refrigerators, dishwashers and dryers.

The Energy Star labeling program deals with appliances that are typically standalone devices. For example, your refrigerator doesn’t work with any of the other appliances in your house, making it very easy to determine how much power it will take to operate a standalone appliance in a year.

A pump on the other hand, is part of a total system that may be called on to operate in a variety of ways during a year, with a variety of flow rates through the pump. As a result, a program similar to an Energy Start labeling program for pumps would have limited value.

The RFI continues that pumps are not covered under the Energy Star labeling. It further states in “The US DOE has the intention to evaluate the energy savings potential of energy conservation standards, labels, or both, for commercial and industrial pumps.” They continue with “After public comment on this RFI, DOE will consider developing test procedures and energy conservation standards or labels for this equipment.” (Bold & italic entered by the author.)

One area in the RFI that I have real concerns about is their estimation on the availability of pump efficiency improvements. It states:

“Reports cited in this RFI estimate potential energy savings from pumps of 10 percent to 50 percent. Because these estimates include a variety of system and pump efficiency measures including proper sizing of equipment, the lowest energy savings estimate of 10 percent, based on an European Union (EU) study of pump efficiencies (cited in (c) below), is assumed for the pump efficiency alone.”

The reports cited in the statement estimating a potential energy savings from pumps of 10 percent to 50 percent are based on finding of a variety of Pumped System assessments. The energy savings are based on system related issues. A pump does not know or care how the energy it supplies to the system is used, it only reacts to the system’s needs.

For example if a pump operating with a 100 psi discharge pressure, delivering a flow rate of 300 gallons per minute and has an 80% pump efficiency, that pump consumes a given amount of energy. If the system requires 300 gallons per minute at only 60 psi a control valve could be installed to reduce the pressure by 40 psi to what is required by the system. The pump still remains 80% efficient but approximately 60% of the supplied energy by the pump to the system is wasted across the control valve. Remember, the purpose of the control valve is to reduce the excess pressure provide by the pump to that needed by the attached system.

In this example there could be a 40% saving in energy consumption by running the pump at a lower pressure and eliminating the control valve. To accomplish this, an adjustment must be made to the pump so it only produces the 60 psi required by the system. This can be accomplished by either changing the pump impeller diameter or by changing the pump rotational speed. These types of decisions are made when performing an assessment of the total pumped system.

What I really disagree with is the statement “… the lowest energy savings estimate of 10 percent, based on European Union (EU) study of pump efficiencies is assumed for the pump efficiency alone.” What they seem to be saying is based on their experience they could expect at least a 10% system efficiency improvement by improving the pump design. Earlier in the RFI it is stated:

"Pump system efficiencies depend on design factors such as surface roughness, internal clearances, solids handling capability, curve shape, mechanical shaft seal losses, and other factors.

Analyses based on data from the 2003 EU ”European Guide to Pump Efficiency for Single Stage Centrifugal Pumps ”show that for typical flow rates it is reasonable to expect an efficiency improvement of 10 percent from the mean pump efficiency to the maximum practically attainable level."

The European Guide to Pump Efficiency for Single Stage Centrifugal Pumps referenced in the RFI statement above appears to provide an indication to the pump buyer if the pump being supplied by the manufacturer is the most efficient pump. The main focus of the article is to select a pump where the system requirements are close to the pumps Best Efficiency Point based upon the pump design. I was unable to see how a pump’s efficiency could be improved by improving surface roughness, internal clearances, curve shape or mechanical seal losses.

In 2009, I attended the Hydraulic Institute (the North American pump manufacturers association) annual meeting in Marco Island, FL. During that meeting I sat in on a session presented by EuroPump (the European pump manufacturers association) describing a recent statute passed by the EU to increase pump efficiency for industrial centrifugal pumps.

What was really interesting, is the EU enacted the statute without any comments or discussion with the pump manufacturers. I find it amazing that a group of bureaucrats can state that pump efficiency can be increased by 10% simply by changing internal clearances, increase the smoothness of the castings and changing the shape of the pump curve. If it was that simple it would already have been done!

Rather than looking at new ways to develop test procedures and energy conservation standards or labels for pumps the US DOE should concentrate their efforts on their Superior Energy Performance^cm program. The Superior Energy Performance program is based on the recent Energy Assessment for Pumped Systems ASME E-2 2009 standard which concentrates on the evaluation of the entire system rather than concentrating on just the pump.

Pump manufacturers, as well as owners and operators of pumps and pumped systems, have done an excellent job of developing a variety of test standard and ways of presenting the data. The various standards have been developed by the ASME, HI, ANSI, and ASHRAE over the years to meet the needs of both the manufacturers and buyers of pumps. The standards are also reviewed on a periodic basis to ensure they are current and reflect the latest technology. Anyone who has been involved in the development or review of a standard will attest to the care to ensure the standard meets the needs of everyone concerned.

I would love it if you left a comment or even sent me an email to blogger @ eng-software.com. Also, we are currently welcoming guest bloggers. If you are interested, just send me a message about becoming a guest blogger, and what you would like to write about. Thanks!

The Taco Bell Drive-Thru and Pumping System Assessments

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes 45 seconds. Read Later

Admiral H.G. Rickover 1900 - 1986

When I was a Lieutenant (jg) in the US Navy nuclear power program in the 1970’s there was only one admiral that mattered, that was Admiral H.G. Rickover. Some call him the father of the nuclear navy, but I thought of him as more of an all-seeing, all-knowing god, than a father. At that time, he had been the director of Naval Reactors for over 25 years and he knew everything that was happening on each one of his nuclear powered vessels. Every month the Admiral would send out a variety of magazine articles designed to make us well rounded naval officers. On the USS Jack (SSN 605) we kept the Admiral’s required reading in the officer’s head (bathroom for you non nautical types) so we could read while sitting. The Admiral’s suggested articles always provided interesting reading. I distinctly remember one article about the animal husbandry of cows and how semen is extracted from a 2,200 pound bull. I also recall an article about the science of honey. The Admiral’s topics would vary widely, along with the ever present transcripts of his annual testimony given to the US House and Senate on the state of the Nuclear Navy.

So last week I read an interesting article that I would like to share with you. You don’t have to read it in the head because I have provided a link. (Unless your Wi-Fi reaches the restroom and you happen to have a water-proof device.) In the May 5th, 2011 issue of Bloomberg Businessweek, I was fascinated by the article "Taco Bell and the Golden Age of Drive-Thru." It talked about how the QSR (Quick Service Restaurant - They don’t refer to it as fast food), has some of the most advanced operational thinking. Their aim is to enable their customers to place an order, have it filled accurately (over 93% of the time), pay and then be on their way with a hot meal in less than 164 seconds.

It turns out it hasn’t always been that way. In the 1990’s, when the drive-thru revenue only represented 50% of the stores business, order accuracy was a joke, the waits for food were painfully long, and it was often served cold. That is when management realized that they needed to get the drive thru right or they were going to miss out on millions in profit.

The folks at Taco Bell looked at every step of the process from how the order was taken and paid for, how the kitchen received and tracked the orders, the layout of the kitchen, how the “Food Champions” prepared each menu item, along with the menu items available. After years of hard work, performing a cost benefits analysis and time motion studies of every phase of the process, the industry made some serious changes. The QSR industry is now an example of American ingenuity and how a business can make quality products that meet the needs and expectations of their customers.

Drive-thru timer and efficiency clock.
Image Courtesy Techknow Inc.
gotechknow.com

Today a typical Taco Bell has a menu of over 400 menu items, while most restaurants work three shifts a day. Today everything is covered in great detail, when a new employee is hired they must successfully complete training on that position. As a “Service Champion” you learn there is only one way to greet a customer: “Hi, how are you today?” followed by “You may order when you’re ready.” Studies found that not only does this put customer first, it eliminates any stress they may be experiencing in their car (such as a 3 year old having a meltdown in the back seat). Each “Food Champion” is taught the correct way to make each item on the menu, along with the correct way to wrap tacos and burritos. This is done in order to make it easier for the customer to eat their item while minimizing the number of food wrappers a Taco Bell store must stock. It appears they have evaluated every detail to streamline the process and minimize costs. It is especially important because now in the Quick Serve Restaurant industry, over 70% of the revenue comes through the drive thru window.

Now how does this tie into the value of conducting Pumped System Assessments? I would consider the efficiency of the average pumped system today is where the fast food industry was in the 1990’s. These pumped systems are able to manufacturer products that the consumers want, but often there are too many unscheduled plant outages. Other outages and process inefficiencies occur while performing maintenance on certain items of equipment dominating the maintenance expenses, while training plant personnel, while maintaining a safe plant, while not causing an environmental problem. Not to mention the constant quest to increase plant reliability so the plant can produce more products, while reducing operating cost, maintenance cost and capitol costs.

The US Department of Energy has been the driving force behind the pumped system assessment standard. They hired a group of pump system consultants to conduct assessments at industrial plants in order to demonstrate ways of minimizing the operating costs for pumped systems. Much of what the DOE has learned while conducting these assessments has found its way into the official ASME Pump System Assessment Standard.

Fluid Fundamentals (an Engineered Software Business Unit) has developed our Pumped System Assessment and Optimization training class to show the piping and pumping system industry how to implement the ASME standard. The primary focus of the class is to show people how to determine the current annual operating cost of a pumped system and identify each cost in a Energy Cost Balance Sheet. With the current operating cost known, the plant can determine ways to improve the system operation to reduce the various cost items identified in the Energy Cost Balance Sheet. The final step is to document each assessment and determine the potential savings. Companies that have performed assessments have not only reduced their operating costs, but also discovered they can reduce their maintenance cost and increase the reliability of their pumped system.

The objective of the pumped system assessment program is to foster continued improvement with the plant. This is accomplished by evaluating each step of the process, looking for ways to minimize energy consumption, running the process more efficiently, and running the equipment around its best efficiency point. Taco Bell didn’t achieve their 164 second per order time, or 95% accuracy rate over night; it took hard work and a goal of achieving continued improvements to the process.

Thanks to all the efforts put into their process assessment and their inspiring goal of total efficiency, I now find myself thinking about ways to improve pumped system efficiency every time I order a Crunchwrap Supreme and diet soda at my local Taco Bell.

I would love it if you left a comment or even sent me an email to blogger @ eng-software.com. Also, we are currently welcoming guest bloggers. If you are interested, just send me a message about becoming a guest blogger, and what you would like to write about. Thanks!

ESI Announces Solution

I rarely post product release information or press releases on my blog but this announcement is just too exciting not to share:

ESI Announces Solution to End the Energy Crisis

LACEY, Washington - April 1, 2011 - Engineered Software, Inc. makers of the PIPE-FLO® and PUMP-FLO™ software, today announced the release CEPO™, a revolutionary new software program capable of converting unused computing power into clean electrical power that can be supplied back to the power grid.
 
When CEPO is installed on a computer, it runs as a transparent background application. When the computer power is not needed for viewing PowerPoint® presentations, reading e-mail, updating Facebook®, or playing solitaire, the patented software converts the unused computing power to electrical power that is returned to the nation’s power grid.

“With CEPO the United States is well on its way to energy independence,” said Ray Hardee, P.E. Chief Engineer at Engineered Software, Inc. “The goal is to employ CEPO to the cloud computing environment. Here owners of major server farms will be able to harvest much of their unused computing power to the grid saving countless megawatts of power each year.”

Currently the process is not self-sustaining and only 95% of the unused power can be returned to the power grid. However, with an expected influx of investment capital for Wall Street investors, the process is capable of becoming self-sustaining within 10 years. Additional assistance may be needed in the form of government tax incentives. Members of congress are already lining up to support the bill, and the company claims there will be plenty of government money available.
 
Once the process is self-sustaining, a simple laptop can produce enough clean energy to power all the LED lighting in a standard size house. By networking just five Windows® PC’s into a hybrid electric car’s electrical system, CEPO can provide sufficient energy to operate the car indefinitely. That is provided the driver of the car does not “Text” while driving, or any of the Windows does not need to be rebooted. If you have the new Apple® iHybrid car there is an "App for that” and you will need to download the Apple CEPO application at your nearest Apple Store location.

“CEPO will be used by power companies to generate electricity so cheaply that there will be no need to meter the power to their customer,” said Alec Tricity, Manager for Public Utilities Incorporated. “Imagine all the power we need, without having to pay to any foreign oil interests, and full employment at home. I can hardly wait the 10 years until we have everything worked out.”
 
For more information about this faux product please contact april@fools.net.

Or Get the Full Explanation HERE

My New Year’s Pumping Resolutions

Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes 22 seconds. Read Later

This year my New Year’s Resolutions are going to be a little different. Instead of making resolutions for myself I would like to make resolutions for all of my readers. These resolutions are appropriate for design engineers as well as owners and operators of pumped systems. Using this approach I don’t have to break any of my own resolutions, and if you wish to break them, then you shouldn’t feel any guilt either. But I promise these are for the good of your plant designs.

So here goes, my resolutions for YOU, and the pumps in YOUR plant.

1. “I resolve to get a copy of the manufacturer’s supplied pump curve for each centrifugal pump in my plant.”
• By having the pump curve, you will be able to determine if the pump is operating properly. The manufacturer’s supplied pump curve is the most important document needed for pump system maintenance, without it you are flying blind.
2. “I resolve to install pressure gages on the pump suction and pump discharge for each pump in my plant.”
• Having accurate pressure gages on the pump suction and discharge allows you to easily determine the differential pressure across each pump. When used in conjunction with the pump curve (acquired by resolution 1) you can determine the flow rate through the pump.
3. “I resolve to develop a means of determine the flow rate through a pump.”
• This one is very flexible, it can either be an installed meter (only if you have the cash), a clamp on Doppler meter, or determine the power supplied to the motor. Using the flow rate, the pump curve (resolution 1) and the differential pressure values (resolution 2) you’ll be able to determine if the pump is operating on the pump curve. This is very helpful in troubleshooting the operation of any centrifugal pump.
4. “I resolve to determine where each pump is operating in relation to the pumps Best Efficiency Point.”
• If the pumps operational flow rate is between 80% to 120% of the pumps BEP listed on the manufacturer’s pump curve (resolution 1) then that pump should have a long and prosperous life.
5. “I resolve to investigate all pump mechanical seal or bearing failures this year.”
• If the pump is not operating between 80% to 120% around the BEP (resolution 4) the cause of the failure is most likely due to shaft deflection cause by continually running the pump outside the pumps sweet spot.
6. “I resolve to look into performing a pumped system assessment per the ASME EA-2 Energy Assessment for Pumping Systems.”
• The standard can be purchased from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Website www.asme.org, or the Hydraulic Institute Website www.pumps.org.

If you follow all these resolution then your pumped systems (or your customer’s pumped systems) will be running efficiently. You’ll have reduced your operating costs, reduced your maintenance costs, or reduced your capitol cost, all while increasing your plants reliability and profitability. Now wouldn’t you feel better if you were able to keep these resolutions rather than sweating off a couple of pounds at the gym?

That’s my list, but I’d like to hear your professional New Year’s Resolution Lists. Maybe I forgot something on my list? On the other hand, maybe you have other goals for 2011? Leave me a comment or better yet, send me an email, as I have resolved this year to once again answer all questions or comments.

In addition if you would like to be a guest blogger let me know, always interested in finding out what others are thinking about.