On the Energy Front

Since the first of the year I have traveled 43,000 airline miles, taught three Piping System Fundamentals courses, attended a major trade show and visited countless customers.  It seems that everyone is asking what can be done to reduce their energy consumption.  I really enjoy that questions because of my deep involvement in helping people find the answers to that question.

I am a member of the ISO 14414-TC115-WG07 Pumping system energy assessment committee. I spent two days with 12 other committee member in Phoenix, AZ  to work on the final draft prior to submission for a wide review. We had members present from Europe, South America, and the United States, along with extensive comments from other members around the world.  The standard presents a variety of ways to look at how piping systems use the energy. 

In addition to the ISO meeting I’m a member of the Hydraulic Institute / Pump Systems Matter (HI/PSM) committee revising their Pump System Optimization course.  This course focuses on the value of conducting pump system assessments, and how to set up and conduct an assessment program.  

Since the first of the year, I have written a monthly column for Pumps & Systems Magazine on Pump System Improvements. Links to the articles can be found below:

•  Jan 2014 Solution for Pump Discharge Pipe Cracking
•  Feb 2014 Finally Justifying Improvements
•  March 2014 A Financial Justification for Pump System Improvement
•  April 2014 Overcome Resistance to Program Upgrade

They are a great group to work with and I would like to send out a special Thank You to Amanda Perry. She is a fantastic editor and does a great job of turning my submissions into a clear and concise article. I'm excited to share that last month they told me my column has been picked up for the remainder of 2014! I would encourage you all to get a subscription to Pumps & Systems Magazine, it’s full of excellent articles, and industry news. 

Once again, if you have any questions or comments please feel free to leave a comment. 

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. 

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

3D Printers and PIPE-FLO

Estimated Reading Time: 1 minutes 2 seconds. Read Later (Video is 10 minutes)

So there has been a great deal of press about mass-market 3D printers, and their increasing affordability to the Average-Joe, (who just happened to have $1500 lying around). The technology isn’t new of course, but it’s practicality hasn’t been sufficient for in-home use.

So when I happened on the article about the 3D printer that could build a house, or rather print one, I was fascinated by the prospect. The concept of building something so large with a printer and more importantly software was compelling.

I began to envision a piping system, designed efficiently using PIPE-FLO and then printed out using a 3D printer to connect all the pipes, and automate the installation of the major components adding to the efficiency of operation. The speed of completion alone is something to be excited about, particularly in the home building industry. Imagine after a natural disaster like hurricanes, getting people into homes in less than a week? Amazing! But I digress…

I will be interested to see what will become of the large scale printers and how it will be used in the future. Maybe piping systems are not the best use for a printer like this, but maybe it would be. And maybe PIPE-FLO should be the supporting software used in the design of these printed piping systems. The we will have to wait and see what the future holds but I’m excited.

If you had one of the personal 3D printers, what would you print? If you haven’t seen what I am talking about yet, check this TED Talk video out.



Share this blog with your friends!

It Flies Just Like the Simulator

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 37 seconds. Read Later

The Pacific Northwest is home to The Boeing Company and as such, the first flight of any new aircraft is big news.

When the 787 Dreamliner made its first flight, the two test pilots stated, “The airplane flies beautifully, it did exactly as we expected. No surprises and no major issues with the airplane.” 

Prior to conducting the first actual flight, the test pilots “learned to fly the aircraft” using a flight simulator and will do this before any inaugural flight. These simulators have all the flight characteristics of the 787 Dreamliner in the program, which is how the test pilots knew what to expect on the first flight. Flight simulators range from multi-million dollar three axis flight simulator to flight simulator programs for use on PC’s.

Boeing 787 Dreamliner Flight Simulator - image
courtesy The Boeing Company boeing.com

One of the things I like best about my job is the ability to visit customers to see how they are using PIPE-FLO. The majority of our customers use PIPE-FLO to perform the preliminary design of their piping systems, specifically to obtain the design data needed for equipment selection. More recently though, I’ve been learning that more of our customers are entering increasingly detailed design data for their completed systems into their PIPE-FLO models. This provides them a better understanding of how the finished design will operate once it is placed in service. 

For example, one of our long time PIPE-FLO customers needed to add cooling loads to a large cooling water system in their chemical process plant in Houston, Texas. The system was previously modeled using PIPE-FLO to determine if a new pump was needed for the proposed expansion. Once the system was modeled in PIPE-FLO, they determined that the existing pumps could meet the projected needs.

As the design became finalized, the PIPE-FLO model was updated with the design changes of the expanded cooling water system. After conducting a simulation, they were able to determine the valve positions of all the throttle valves. This was accomplished by entering the Cv characteristics of each throttle valve in the system into their PIPE-FLO model. Once this was done, PIPE-FLO calculated the valve position and identified that cavitation would occur in two of the control valves. Once the problem was identified in the simulation, the valve supplier was called in to see what could be done to correct the problem. The valve supplier suggested changing out the cavitating control valves with a different design. The model was updated with the new valve characteristics and the problem was solved. All this was done well before commissioning the expanded system.

When it came time to start up the expanded cooling water system, all the control valves were set to their calculated balanced valve position and the system was brought online. The client stated that normally it took an outside contractor two to three days to balance the cooling water system by manually adjusting things after taking readings. Using the valve positions calculated in the PIPE-FLO simulation, it only took half a day to validate that the system was balanced. Additionally, it was confirmed that no cavitation occurs in any of the control valves.

Many of our customers said it was difficult to get valve operating data for their control valves, so in PIPE-FLO 12 we made it easier by creating the Control Valve Estimator. Using default data found in the ISA 75.01.01 and IEC 60532 Industrial Process Control Valves standards, you are able to answer a few questions about control valve construction as well as the fully open Cv, and the program will create an accurate representation of control valve operation.

One of PIPE-FLO’s unique features is the used of manufacturers’ electronic pump catalogs. Using the same electronic pump catalogs the manufacturers use to pick a pump for customers, you are able to insert the pump into the piping system model to gain an accurate simulation. Once again the PIPE-FLO uses the methodology outlined in a variety of Hydraulic Institute standards for pump operation.

Finally, flow elements such as orifices, nozzles and venturi types are accurately modeled based on the applicable ASME and ISA standards. 

During the simulation, all the information is factored into the total calculations. For example if during the simulation the user changes the temperature of the process fluid the program:

• Looks up the fluid properties of density, viscosity, and vapor pressure and use this information in all calculations. 
• Calculates the head loss in all the pipelines affecting the pressures throughout the system.
• The change if the fluids vapor pressure and head loss in the suction pipeline affect the NPSH available at the pump suction.
• The vapor pressure also affects the cavitation calculations for control valves, flow meters, and pressure calculations throughout the system.

As you can see any change in the operating piping system affects the operation of every item in the system. 

I would be hard pressed to say that a PIPE-FLO simulation has as much entertainment value as a flight simulator program, knowing how much I love flying aircraft, but it can show you a clear picture of how your piping system operates. And that type of solid reassurance and validation is exactly what you need before you take a multi-million dollar system online for the first time. Leaving you to say on your inaugural start-up, “The system runs beautifully, it did exactly as we expected. No surprises and no major issues with this piping system!”

Share this blog with your friends!

PIPE-FLO v12 Features Poll

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 18 seconds. Read Later

We are so pleased to have the newest release of PIPE-FLO available. Not only do our customers have new features and functionality, but the Engineering Support team for ESI also reaps the benefits. A poll from our team of engineers reveals four standout improvements that are worth mentioning.

#4 the Property Grid

Starting the top four features list is the newly conceived Property Grid. One third of our Engineers thought this was the feature they appreciated the most.

Take a closer look at the Property Grid:

The Property Grid brings all the system design and calculated information to the forefront making editing devices effortless. This new feature allows many more calculated results to be shown and the flexibility to customize the display of these results on the FLO-Sheet. The Property Grid has an added Property Tips area with helpful hints and links to the Help file.

#3 Messages Window

There is a tie for the #2 and #3 spots on the list. The brand new Messages Window received 50% of the Engineering Teams’ votes. This may be because our Engineering team deals mostly in the support of our users. That doesn’t lessen the value of this feature, because users will also see the benefits right away.

Take a closer look at the Messages Window:

The new Messages Window shows all calculation and design warnings for the piping system. This is particularly useful since PIPE-FLO v12 now allows users to draw an entire system without entering in design data. In earlier versions of the program, PIPE-FLO only reported the most severe warnings. Having the message window allows us to now report ALL the applicable messages for the system and allows us to provide some guidance as to the severity of the warning. In addition, linking it to the system colors and the Help File all provide the user greater visibility to both the applicable warnings and assists in troubleshooting the system.

#2 Sizing Device Improvements (Control Valve Calculation & Selection)

50% of our Engineering Team listed the improved device sizing functionality in PIPE-FLO v12 as one of their top picks. PIPE-FLO v12 has improved the workflow of selecting pumps, and allowed for more comprehensive control valve calculations. Our engineers appreciate having more results available upon calculation of systems, because they know it will improve a user’s understanding of the interrelatedness of components.

Take a closer look at Sizing Devices:

Having dedicated devices for performing sizing calculations make it clear to the user what the objective of the system modeling is. Through years of support, our Engineering Support team has noticed some of our users with existing, operational systems that have pumps or control valves still defined in a state for sizing (ie: pumps operating in the “size pumps for” lineup setting). Modeling an existing system with a running centrifugal pump in the “size pump for” lineup will not reflect the actual operation of that pump or your system.

Creating specific devices for sizing pumps and control valves allow for two things: The ability to readily see which items are acting as designed, and to focus the calculated data on what parameters are specifically needed for sizing.

#1 Group Select/ Group Edit

With over 80% of our engineering team voting, hands down the fan favorite new feature in PIPE-FLO v12 is the Group Edit and Group Select. With the time saved in initial design and editing systems, there’s little wonder why this features gets a resounding hallelujah from the team.

Take a closer look at Group Edit and Group Select:

Groups Select allows you to perform the Group Edit function. There are multiple ways to select items, (and for that matter, deselect) multiple items in your piping system project. Using the Control (Ctrl) Key, plus the selection tool, users can add or remove items from their selection on the FLO-Sheet. They can Select All using the menu or Ctrl + A as a shortcut. The List View window also allow users to select multiple similar devices such as pipes, and change all or some of the defining characteristics. This leads us nicely into the Group Edit feature. Groups of similar items can be redefined. For instance, maybe you want to change fluid zones for a group of pipes with a certain specification. Bam! You can! Change the surface pressure for all your tanks at a certain elevation? Yup! That too! All you need is to use the List View to sort your devices by any of the columns and then Ctrl + Click and you are creating your list to Group Edit.

Honorable mention include:

•    Draw a System Before Adding Design Data
•    Customizable Printed Report
•    More Shortcut Keys
•    New More Useful Help File
•    DataLink ODBC

For more information about these features and more, checkout the Engineered Software Knowledge Base at http://kb.eng-software.com/questions/467/PIPE-FLO+Professional+12+Release+Notes.

Let us know what you think of the new features in PIPE-FLO v12. Leave us a comment and check out the free PIPE-FLO v12 Demo Download here.

The First PIPE-FLO 12 Training

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes 32 seconds. Read Later

I just got back from running two weeks of training in Bahrain. The client had two groups of 16 engineers that went through our two-day Piping System Fundamentals course followed by our two-day FLO-Master course on our PIPE-FLO software. This also happened to be the first FLO-Master training course we conducted for the newly released PIPE-FLO Professional 12. Since the Piping System Fundamentals course had not been recently change, that course went smoothly and lead perfectly into the FLO-Master course.

Before releasing any new program, the entire development team is on pins and needles worrying about a myriad of details; Will the customers like what we have done? Is the user interface as easy to use as we think? Will they like the new group edit feature? Will someone find a bug that somehow missed our testing?

What really made this exciting is that Bahrain is half way around the world from Lacey, Washington, with an 11-hour difference in time zones. I also learned that the workweek in Bahrain starts on a Sunday. As a result, when I started the class on Sunday morning in Bahrain, it was Saturday evening in Lacey where all our support staff is located.

Since we have a top notch customer support group that has set up hundreds of training centers for our PIPE-FLO class I wasn’t worried about the software installation. Once again, this is the brand new PIPE-FLO 12 program and the training material was still fresh from the printers. First runs will make anyone nervous, even a training and PIPE-FLO veteran like myself.

There were 14 attendees in each course, and 3-4 people in each group had experience with PIPE-FLO 2009, but the majority had no previous PIPE-FLO experience. We started out by exploring the PIPE-FLO interface starting with the existing FLO-Sheet then introducing the new Toolbox, Property Grid, List and Message windows.

In our FLO-Master 12 course, we tend to spend more time on how to make the most of our piping simulation software. Our users fall into three groups, people involved in designing piping systems, those involved in testing and commissioning system, and those who operate and maintain piping systems. Each one of these groups has special needs, and PIPE-FLO’s new flexible interface allows each group to customize the interface to best meet their needs. With the attendees familiarized to the way the program looks and basic functionality, I then moved into the usage and case study portion of the course.

In the first case study, we design a caustic dilution system with two centrifugal pumps, two control valves, static mixer and multiple tanks. In addition to the “how-to” steps dealing with equipment selection we also discuss ways for arriving at a reasonable design margin for pump and control valve selection.

Design options are quickly and easily modeled using new functionality that speeds up the drawing process, including the expanded group select and edit features. For example, by selecting all the pipelines in the project then using the property grid, you can change the pipe spec and fluid zone from the drop down list boxes and all selected pipelines are updated. This greatly reduces the time it takes to build a piping system model.

The second case study has two sections. The first section deals with building onto an existing piping system model and validating the changes to the model. The second section takes the recently created piping system and uses it to help troubleshoot a maintenance problem followed by a process modification.

Prior to building the piping system model, we discuss the various design documents that can be used to build an accurate piping system model. Once all design information it is entered into the PIPE-FLO model, it should provide an accurate representation of the initial system design. Conducting the walk down enables designers to determine if any non-documented changes were made to the system.

The final element in building the model is to validate the systems operation. Taking actual readings from the real piping system and comparing them to the piping system model. The FLO-Master course covers which elements and readings are best to collect and validate.

Once the mode is set to accurately represent current system operation, the simulation is run and the calculated results are compared to the plants operating data. We then move on to the second section of this case study and troubleshoot the system to determine where any problems may lie.

The second section of the case study deals with how the model is used in troubleshooting the operation of a system and how the model can be used to conduct plant studies. In the final example a new process load is added to the system and we discover why the system is unable to meet the new process demands. More importantly with the PIPE-FLO model, we are able to evaluate possible system modification that will meet the new process requirements quickly and without having to do any modifications to the actual running system.

The final example was opened to the attendees and I encouraged them to bring a real piping system they currently evaluating. One of the participants brought in a project that he recently inherited. He wanted to model the system under PIPE-FLO so he could compare the pump needs to the pump that was previously selected.

After building the model and sizing the pump, the engineer was able to determine the required total pump head. His calculated pump head requirement was 24 ft of head at the design flow rate. He then compared that to the pump selected and was surprised to see the selected pump produced 240 ft of head at the design flow rate. During his presentation to the attendees, he said he believed the pump was over sized, but he never imagined it would be to that extent. He was able to make the analysis of his system in less than 2 hours!

There were complements galore about PIPE-FLO 12 especially from the 6 people that had used PIPE-FLO 2009. The toughest critics we will likely have will be the users of earlier versions of PIPE-FLO since the program will look much different from before. Their encouraging responses were music to my ears since this was really the introduction of the new PIPE-FLO program as much as it was the new FLO-Master training material.

When I got back to the office, I shared the class’ PIPE-FLO 12 and FLO-Master feedback with the development team. Now that the program was officially released, and with a positive initial reception, they were all smiles. I was all smiles that I accomplished the first public presentation of the new training material! I expect great things from the coming year and I’m truly excited to share the next generation of PIPE-FLO with everyone.

Click to Learn More about PIPE-FLO Professional 12

Bolivia, Isn’t That Where Butch and Sundance Went?

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 54 seconds. Read Later

Film poster for Butch Cassidy and the
Sundance Kid - Copyright 1969,
New Films International

My last trip in 2012 was to Santa Cruz, Bolivia to teach our PIPE-FLO Training to YPFB the Bolivian oil company. When our training lead told me about the pending class, my first response was “Bolivia? Isn’t that where Butch and Sundance went?” 

The reference was to one of my favorite movies, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, released in 1969 staring Paul Newman (Butch Cassidy) and Robert Redford (Sundance Kid). The movie is based on the exploits of Robert Leroy Parker (Butch Cassidy) a real life bank/train robber and the Hole in the wall gang (referred to as the Wild Bunch). The real life Harry Longabaugh “Sundance Kid,” along with Harvey “Kid” Curry, Ben Kilpatrick “The Tall Texan”, Harry Trace, Will “News” Carver, Laura Bullion, “Laughing” Sam Carey, “Black Jack” Ketchum, Elzy Lay, and George “Flat Nose” Curry made up the Wide Bunch. I find two things interesting about the gang, the number of family members and their descriptively entertaining nicknames.

Front row left to right: Harry A. Longabaugh (Sundance Kid), Ben 
Kilpatrick (the Tall Texan), Robert Leroy Parker, alias (Butch 
Cassidy); Standing: Will Carver & Harvey Logan (Kid Curry); 
Fort Worth, Texas, 1900.

Butch and the Hole-in-the-Wall Gang robbed the Union Pacific train in 1899 in Wilcox Wyoming. E.H. Harriman the owner of the Union Pacific Railroad didn’t like people robbing his trains and wanted to bring the robbers to justice, so he hired the Pinkerton Detective Agency to track them down. Charlie Siringo the leader of the Pinkerton men hired Joe Lafors, and Tom Horn to pursue Butch and the Wild Bunch around the inter-mountain west.

Not only is it a great move, but it was filmed in Wyoming, Utah and Colorado where the real life events took place. I grew up in Wyoming and Utah, hiking and camping in many of the areas the story took place. I have to tell you, this part of the country has some of the most beautiful and diverse scenery in the US. There are wide vistas of high desert, breath-taking snow covered mountains, and deep canyons with cobalt blue rivers running through them. The area is vast with plenty of breathing room with few people. As you hike around the area you can almost see Butch, Sundance and the Wild Bunch staying one step ahead of the Pinkerton men.

By 1900, time had started taking a toll on the Wild Bunch, so Butch and Sundance decided to retire from the “banking” business in the US and took their act to South America. There is no proof that they returned to robbing banks once in South America, but the fact remains that during this period, it was reported that banks in Argentina and Bolivia were being robbed by two masked Americans.

Coincidence? Sure lends credibility to the theories! Moreover, the Pinkerton Agency was also going after Butch and Sundance in South America.

In 1907 they decided it was time to go straight and get out of the bank robbing business.  They went to work at the Concordia Tin Mine in the Bolivian Andes as payroll guards. It’s rather ironic that two retired bank robbers would become payroll guards, but back then, it was much more common for people to work on both sides of the law. 

Things must not have worked out well for them because in November 1908 a payroll guard was robbed by two masked American bandits. Held up in a boarding house in San Vicente, and surrounded by the Bolivian Army, the two masked American bandits were killed in a shoot-out. The true story goes along with the movie’s implications that the bandits were Butch and Sundance, and since they were never seen again, that is where the story ends.

It’s a fascinating story and a great movie. So how does it relate to my trip to Bolivia? It doesn’t but since it is my blog I can write about whatever I want!   

A gift from the guys at the Bolivian Oil
Company. Hola! From Lacey, WA!

Getting back to my trip to Bolivia… The YPFB (The Bolivian Oil Company) was under a very tight schedule to complete an engineering evaluation of two piping systems. They purchased PIPE-FLO for use in the project and felt that a training course would cut some time off their learning curve. They sent CAD drawings of their system prior to the course for me to review. The first day of the class, we did the normal FLO-Master training. The second day we started working on their projects. We discussed ways of attacking their problem with the focus on quickly building a large system with the software.

In less than two hours, they built a model of their piping system with over 600 pipelines. We then talked about the various operating conditions they needed to evaluate and within an hour, they had their results. The first thing they discovered was the pump they had on order would not meet their needs plus an additional punch list of items that they needed to address with the program. 

Paul Kelly says thank you too!

In the afternoon, we looked at another system. This time I stood back and allowed them to do the modeling. I was on hand and answered a few questions while they built their system, but within two hours they had their second system modeled and a variety of alternatives considered. They were very pleased with the training and the results of their study.

Later that night, I flew out of the Santa Cruz airport back to Seattle.  As I flew over the black Bolivian landscape I wondered if that was really Butch and Sundance in that San Vicente boarding house, or did they make it out of Bolivia.

My next trip is to Bahrain in the UAE where I will be conducting four training classes for the Bahranian Oil. I will be there for two weeks conducting a back to back Piping System Fundamentals and FLO-Master course for the Bahrain Petroleum Company.  I don’t know of any movie tie-ins to the area, but I’m sure I will have another story of adventure to tell.

You can leave your comments below or send me an email to blogger@eng-software [dot] com. We really do read every one!

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!

Darcy's Fables

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 33 seconds. Read Later

Here is a picture of me reading to my newest grandchild. All my grandchildren love to be read to, and one of their most favorite books is Piping System Fundamentals, which I co-wrote with Jeff Sines of Engineered Software. They like the ease at which the book explains difficult concepts of piping systems along with the compelling graphics. 

As you can see from the picture he has a question about NPSH. It seemed his older sisters told him that NPSH stands for “Not Pumping So Hot” so he wanted to have me set him straight. I told him to watch out because older sisters like to tease younger brothers.

All my grandchildren enjoy the stories in Piping System Fundamentals, but sometimes the topics are a little difficult to understand. As a result I often change the story by making it into a fable.*  Aesop was the master of fables in western cultures, and I still remember my mother reading them to me growing up. 

So I thought I would create some of my own fables to tell to my grandchildren. I decided to call them Darcy's Fables in honor of Henry Darcy, the Frenchman that help develop the equation for calculating head loss due to friction in a pipeline.   

So here is my first Darcy's fable called:

The Wise Cat in the Tree of Knowledge.

Long ago, there was a village built around a Tree of Knowledge. People would come from all over the land each bringing their unique customs and languages to this wonderful village. The people of this village would all sit under the Tree of Knowledge, work together and come up with ideas for wonderful things that everyone wanted. Each clan had their unique powers, there were the Sparks with their electric personality, the Newtonians, possessing an understanding of all things mechanical, and the Chemists, using their knowledge to make the most amazing things from the most basic of elements.

After many years, each group got so involved with what their clan was doing they developed their own "secret" language that could only be understood by their fellow clan members. Since each clan used their own "secret" language it became difficult to exchange ideas at the Tree of Knowledge. Each clan continued to work to develop the most amazing things, but since each group thought they knew the answer, they stopped listening to each other.

One day a young page boy was walking by the Tree of Knowledge and spied a wise cat sitting on a branch. Our young page climbed up into the tree and started petting the cat. The cat enjoyed the attention and started purring as all cats do.

After a good scratch, the cat said to the youngster, "Because you are so kind and took the time to pet me I, will grant you the power to explain."

The young page said, "I don't understand!"

The Wise Cat rose and started to walk away saying, "In time, you will understand. Come back tomorrow and I shall let you pet me again."

The young page came back to the Tree of Knowledge every day to pet the Wise Cat. Every day he would listen to each clan as they discuss their ideas and talked about their problems at the Tree of Knowledge. (In this magical land, yes, they continue to solve problems, and don't have issues!) While the young page pet the cat he would listen to each clan, and after many days, he started understanding each clans’ "secret" language. The young page discovered that each clan was interested in the same thing, but since they didn't understand each other’s "secret" languages, they were unable to explain themselves or work together. 

Then the young page had an idea, if I can cast everyone's problems into a language that everyone can understand, then all the different clans’ members can work together to solve common problems. The boy grew very excited.

“They just need to speak the same language!” he exclaimed.

Instead of creating a new language, our young page decided it would be best to use ideas that were common to all. He chose to explain the various items in terms they already understood, the local form of money, the “Want.” (Because everyone wants something.)  Everyone was paid for the work they did, the things they needed, and saved for a rainy day using the local currency of the Want. By explaining using money, all the members of each clan could understand the common solution using a customary unit that everyone understood. 

As a result of the young page’s gift, the “power to explain,” the clans could come to the Tree of Knowledge and have a place to present their ideas in a common language all could understand. The village continued to grow and all was prosperous and well.

The moral: If you want others to understand your ideas, use a common language that can be understood by all.

*A fable is a short story featuring animals, mythical creatures, plants, inanimate objects and forces of nature to illustrates a point, lesson, or moral which is often explicitly stated at the end.  (I specifically chose the fable here instead of a parable form of prose, because the parable excludes animals, and all kids love those funny little critters.)

Tell me about your favorite fables or stories from your childhood. Leave a comment below or send an email to blogger@eng-software dot com. Thanks for reading!

Why I Enjoy Being a Training Instructor

May was a busy training month for me. With the pending release of a major PIPE-FLO software update, all of the other engineers that teach our Piping System Fundamentals (PSF) course were busy. As a result I was asked to teach back to back courses in Denver and Tucson. I enjoy teaching, it gives me the opportunity to go to new locations, discover new processes, meet interesting people and share experiences with others.

The objective of the PSF course is to provide a clear picture of how the various elements in a pumped system work together. The course is based on the method that the US Navy Nuclear Power Program has been using to train their officers and enlisted personnel to become operators of their nuclear powered ships. 

Each class starts out with introductions. I start out by telling them about my sea year experience at the US Merchant Marine Academy, and my Navy experience. One point I stress is when I was out at sea, if the ship’s crew was unable to fix a problem, none of us would make it back home. I then stated that one of the things I liked the most about working ashore (besides being home every night) was the ability to call engineers at the home office, talk to vendors, and colleagues to help me solve a challenging problem. 

Next we go around the room with each attendee introduce themselves and what knowledge they hoped to take away from the course. It’s amazing the diverse background we get in the PSF course, we have engineers, plant operators, mechanics, maintenance and operations managers, along with pump and control valve sales people. One goal of our PSF course is to provide a means for the attendees with diverse backgrounds to learn and share their experiences with others.

For the first day and a half we discuss tanks, pumps, pipes, control valves, instrumentation, and process equipment. The objective in these equipment sections is to turn the attendees into educated consumers, allowing them to understand how the equipment operates, and explain how not running the equipment properly will increase their operating and maintenance costs. Each of the sections has a variety of examples to help them use and apply the lessons to troubleshooting pumped systems.

My favorite question to ask is “How many of you have pump curves for every pump in your plant?”  At the most one possibly two people out of 25 will raise their hand, another 2 to 4 people will have pump curves for 50% of their pumps, and a few more have curves for 25% of their pump. The second question I ask is “How many of you know where your pumps are running on their curve?”  I have only had a few times in which I got a positive response to this one. 

In the afternoon on the second day we put everything together and start looking at systems. We start out by building systems with multiple pipes, tanks, pumps, controls until we have a total system. There are many “Ah-ha moments” throughout the course and plenty of questions. This is a fast paced section that everyone likes with lively Q&A. The nice thing is that with the diverse groups of attendees many of them share some of their specialized experiences. For example one day a mill wright had everyone’s attention when he described what it took to start a pump for the first time. 

It’s not all fun and games in the training business. I remember an onsite course at a refinery in Ohio. Half the attendees were recent college graduates, the other half were engineers with 10 – 15 years of experience. After an hour, I notice that no one had asked a single question. Conducting a course when there are no questions asked makes for a long day, and it’s usually not a good sign.

During the first break, I had people come up to ask questions about the topic we just covered. I then realized that the recent college graduates were concerned about asking a “stupid” question in front of their supervisors. The experienced engineers didn’t want to chance making a “foolish response” to one of my questions. To solve the problem I started asking questions to specific recent college graduates, and started asking some of the senior engineers if they had anything they would like to add. By the end of the first day we have an excellent exchange of questions and information.

In the introduction of a recent regional course in Los Angeles, one of the attendees (with as much grey hair as I have) stated his course objective was to sit through 16 hours of training so he could meet his continuing educational requirements. As we started the course, he was busy checking his e-mail, and would occasionally listen. As the course progressed he stopped reading e-mail and started following along, including asking questions and providing insight. During lunch on the second day he came to me and said:

“I have been designing and starting piping systems for over 30 years now. I am knowledgeable in most of the things that you have covered, but I have never seen it presented in such a logical method as this course. I am glad I came.”

One final point, it’s not only the attendees that learn in the course, but I probably get as much out of these courses as the attendees. I learn about new processes, how the various people within an engineering firms and process plants interact with pumped system, and gain a lot of industry insight. 

So if you would like to gain a better understanding of how piping system work and improve your trouble shooting skills I would encourage you to join us for one of our upcoming regional training courses or even look into an onsite training at your own facility.

Tell me about some of your recent training experiences. Either as an attendee OR an instructor. I am interested to hear about your experiences. Leave a comment below, and as always, thank you for reading!