...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

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!

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!

From ESCAPE to Premium

Estimated Reading Time: 7 minutes 42 seconds. Read Later

In my last post, I discussed the creation of PUMP-FLO and its transition from a DOS application to a Windows application, developed and first released as E.S.C.A.P.E. by the Aurora Pump Company. With the completion of E.S.C.A.P.E., it was time for us to release PUMP-FLO as our MS Windows pump selection program.

The major difference between PUMP-FLO and Aurora's E.S.C.A.P.E. at that time was that PUMP-FLO could select pumps from ANY supporting pump manufacturer’s catalog. E.S.C.A.P.E. could only select pumps from the Aurora product lines. In other words, PUMP-FLO could select any centrifugal pump provided the manufacturer had an electronic pump catalog for use with our program.

After a couple of months of development, we released PUMP-FLO for Windows version 1. Upon the release, we had one pump manufacturer onboard, Aurora (the Aurora catalog ran with both PUMP-FLO and ESCAPE.) Now it was time to get some more manufacturers onboard.

Once again I got out my list of pump manufacturers and sent them all a letter describing how they can use PUMP-FLO as their pump selection program simply by creating and adding an electronic pump catalog. Once again, we were overwhelmed with silence. Crickets.

Since we had firsthand experience with the Aurora sales group, we knew the value PUMP-FLO held for a pump sales team and we would not be stopped. So I decided to start calling the pump manufacturers on my list to tell them the story first hand.

After a couple of months I had over 90 pump manufacturers identified in North America, complete with their company address, markets served, along with their sales manager. I discovered that many of the manufacturers had multiple brands they sold their products under (Original Equipment Manufacturers or OEMs).

Once I got the pump market sorted out I decided it was time to go visit them and sell them on the idea of creating their company’s electronic pump catalog for use with PUMP-FLO. What was really disappointing is that we were offering to create the manufacturers’ pump catalogs for free, and we still didn't have any takers. All a manufacturer had to do was to supply us with their pump curves in paper form, we would create their catalog, and send it for their review and approval.

As an engineer I never had a business class, nor did I know how to sell, but now I was on a mission. I took my 10-pound laptop on the road with me and demonstrated the program to manufactures, pump distributors, to pump buyers at trade shows, in airport waiting rooms and even on a cross-country flight. Based on the positive response I knew that we had a winner, but we still had the problem of getting the manufacturers on board with their electronic pump catalogs.

After 18 months, PUMP-FLO still only had the Aurora catalog available for selection. Getting the manufacturers to commit was much harder than I originally thought. I then had a great idea, we would create mini-catalogs (25 pump curves of our customers choosing) for our PUMP-FLO customers for free. The PUMP-FLO customer would send us a copy of the manufacturer’s paper catalog pages they wanted, we would enter the data, and send them a disk back in the mail that could be used with PUMP-FLO. To make it even more valuable we would merge previous curves from the same manufacturer into the catalog so over time we would have a bigger catalog for the manufacturer.

We did this for about six months and in no time we had a collection of manufacturer’s catalogs. We then started sending out press releases announcing the availability of the each manufacturer’s catalogs. One of the manufacturers found out that we were distributing an electronic pump catalog for their products and had their New York lawyer send us a letter wanting to know how much money we were making so they would know how much to sue us for.

Needless to say we got our lawyer on the case and after spending a week in study he gave us a lawyer opinion. He said there was precedence in favor of what we were doing, and precedence favoring the manufacturer (just what you would expect from a lawyer). I then asked him what he would recommend and after 30 minutes of disclosure, precedence, and hemming and hawing he suggested we write a letter to the manufacturer "Asking for forgiveness and promising to sin no more." I spent the weekend writing a very contrite letter; it must have worked because they said they would drop the suit if we never sent out their pump data ever again.

Finally our luck changed and after two years of trying we finally got our second manufacturer to sign. I wish I could say that it was because of my excellent salesmanship. It turns out I was out of the office when Don Smiley of Weinman Pump called.

Since I was out, Carolyn Popp, (our President & Chief Technical Officer) answered the phone and had a nice talk with him. He said they were really interested in getting added to PUMP-FLO, but they didn't want their pumps listed next to their competitors. She said that was not how the program worked.

She explained that our mutual customers would buy PUMP-FLO from us, and get the Weinman electronic catalog from them. Don then asked how the customer got the electronic catalog. Carolyn explained that we would create their electronic catalog for them from their paper pump curves. Once we create the catalog they would review it, and once approved they would get a master catalog disk that they could freely copy and send out to their customers with PUMP-FLO. She went on to explain that since they sent out their catalog they would know everyone who had their electronic catalog.

The next day Don flew up from Conway, Arkansas and signed the agreement in person. Finally we had our second manufacturer committed. From then on I made sure that the pump manufacturer understood they were in the loop and their electronic pump catalog was their property to give to any PUMP-FLO customer they wished.

A couple of weeks later we got a call from Brian Tims of Paco Pump (then located in Oakland, California). Brian was calling from one of their pump distributor’s office and said he saw one of their pumps selected using PUMP-FLO. He wanted to know what we were doing.

Paco was one of the manufacturers that we had created the “free” customer requested catalogs and had many of their pumps already created. Fearing another unpleasant letter from their lawyer, I let them know we were not doing that anymore. Sensing the fear in my voice, he asked how the program worked. I gave him the discussion about how we worked with them to create their electronic catalog, and once reviewed and approved it was their property for them to distribute. He then asked how long it would take to get their catalog created and I confessed that we had previously created their entire pump catalog because of the initial response from our PUMP-FLO customers. Once again, swearing that we no longer send it out.

He then asked how he could get a copy of PUMP-FLO to all his pump distributors, so I told him it was available for purchase. To sweeten the deal, I mentioned if he bought enough copies of PUMP-FLO we would give him the Paco Electronic Pump Catalog that we created for no additional charge. He asked how many they would need to purchase (I assumed that 100 would be the maximum number we could ever possibly sell to pump company), so I said 50 (may as well go big, right?). He said, "OK, I'll send you a check for 50 and once we get the catalog reviewed and approved we'll send in a bigger order." I was elated!

After that we knew without a doubt, that PUMP-FLO was a winner. Re-doubling my sales efforts, I started visiting every pump manufacturer I could. With all the long plane flights, I decided to read some sales books. Every book suggested listening to your customers to find out how their sales and selection process worked, and ask about their current challenges. So I started listening, and began to learn how pump sales groups wanted to use our program in order to do their job better. This allowed me to focus on their needs and show them the existing PUMP-FLO features that best meet their requirements. This in turn, allowed me to determine what new features we should add in the future. Once I started listening and helping them streamline their internal workflow we started signing up pump manufacturers left and right.

In the mid-1990s, the Internet gained in popularity and wide use. Before you knew it, all anyone was talking about was the paradigm shift (remember that buzz word?) and how the Internet would “CHANGE THE WORLD FOREVER.” Before you knew it everyone I talked to, wanted to know when PUMP-FLO would work on the Internet. We then started examining what it would take to create a Web-based version of PUMP-FLO and based on the requests from the pump manufacturers we decided we needed to make the shift.

This time we partnered with Big Machines, an Internet startup based out of Silicon Valley. We started working together so PUMP-FLO could select the pump, and the Big Machines configuration program could help the pump sales person price the pump. After going to a short training course on developing Internet application we were once again on the bleeding edge of technology. After a few months we had PUMP-FLO running on the Web and started shifting pump manufacturers pump selectors to their own Websites. This allowed the manufacturer to send their customers to their company website and have online pump selection that looked like their own brand.

In early 2002, shortly after the dot com bust, we still had pump manufacturers and end users using the program to help them select and specify pumps for their needs. We had survived the bubble and even began to thrive in the next generation of the Internet, Web 2.0. We continued to develop the programs features both on the Windows and Web versions, and now we have more than 115 pump manufacturers using PUMP-FLO to select pumps for their customers. They are even using PUMP-FLO on their mobile devices now. Here are some interesting statistics about the success of the Web version of PUMP-FLO.

Since we started the PUMP-FLO.com website, we have over 243,700 registered users with an average of 2,000 new registered users per month. Every day, over 1,000 people use PUMP-FLO.com to select a pump for a pumping application.

I don't know if this is a paradigm shift, if pump manufacturers have frictionless commerce, or if we have changed forever the way people buy pumps. I don't think so, but I do know that PUMP-FLO is able to bring pump buyers and sellers together. Using PUMP-FLO, pump buyers are better able to understand how a particular pump will operate in their system. The pump sellers can now explain to the pump buyers why the choice they made was the best one for their application. After all isn't that what business is all about, listening to your customer, and giving them what they need to make their life easier?

Do you have any questions for me? I would love it if you left a comment or even sent me an email to blogger @ eng-software.com. In addition, 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 for reading!

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!

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.

Valve World Expo, Dusseldorf Germany

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes 4 seconds. Read Later

I just got back from the 2010 Valve World Conference and Exhibition in Dusseldorf Germany. It was a long trip through 10 time zones. Engineered Software had a booth at the exhibition and I had the privilege of giving two presentations at the conference. The conference was three days in length and then it was back on the plane for a long ride home. The conference was well attended despite the snow storm and record cold for all three days of the conference.

My wife and I really enjoyed the city wide Christmas celebration with hundreds of street vendors selling German food, gifts, candy, and mulled wine. The first evening we arrived we were outside in the snow, on a crisp and clear night enjoying a hot cup of mulled wine with 400 others. After two cups we made it back to the room and fell fast asleep without any problems with jet lag.

After setting up the booth on Monday and a good night’s rest we were ready to go. The show traffic was great and we met some of our existing customers along with meeting many new engineers involved with the design and operation of piping systems from around the world.

One of my discussions with a visitor was particularly noteworthy. On the second day of the conference, an entourage of four came to the booth, a man in his late 50’s lead the group followed by three younger men in their 20’s (Photo 1). The older gentleman only spoke Russian and German and one of the younger men translated. We introduced ourselves through the younger translator and found out the older man was Professor Gancho Dimitrov from the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy in Sofia Bulgaria. Since I had taught two Engineered Software classes at the Worley Parsons office in Sofia two year, earlier we had something in common and the conversation progressed.

This is me talking to Professor Gancho Dimitrov (far right)
and his students at the Valve World Exhibition. Special thanks
to our translator, the young gentleman between us two old guys.

Professor Dimitrov had many years of operational experience and had written multiple text books on water and waste water treatment. He then asked if I could set up a simple system using the software with multiple pumps. I created a system using metric units (I am "MSU" engineer, Metric as a Second Unit). He wanted a system with three pumps installed and with a total system flow rate of 600 m3/hr. I then selected a pump to pass 200 m3/hr with the total head needed to pass the system flow rate of 900 m3/hr. When I placed the three pumps in the system, the calculated total flow rate was 600 m3/hr, with each pump passing 200 m3/hr. He then wanted me to turn off one of the pumps and calculate the flow through the system with two pumps running.

I knew what he was up to; he wanted to check to see that the flow rate through the two pumps operating in parallel was something less than 400 m3/hr. A typical rookie mistake is in thinking that running two pumps in parallel will translate into two-thirds the flow rate of three pumps in parallel. That subject is covered in detail in our Piping System Fundamentals class. As soon as he saw the answer on the PIPE-FLO screen he immediately started drawing a multiple pump curves on a system curve and talking to his student doing the translation. See figure 1.

Figure 1.

This is the system Professor Dimitrov’s sketched showing how multiple pumps in a system should operate when the resistance is a mixture of both static head and dynamic head caused by pipeline head loss. Notice that with the mixed system when only one pump is running the pump passes 320 m3/hr, two pumps running passes 500 m3/hr, and when all three pumps are running, passes 600 m3/hr.

I knew I needed to look into the system to find out the reason for this unlikely event. It turns out that the system that I designed in PIPE-FLO was dominated by static head, with very little dynamic head loss due to pipe friction (Remember metric units are my second units). The result was a very flat system resistance curve, almost horizontal. While he was still drawing his system curve (Figure 1), I started drawing my system curve (Figure 2) showing how multiple pump curves intersected a resistance curve dominated by static head. As you can see from the system curve, each of the three pumps under this unusual situation produces 200 m3/hr each regardless of the number of pumps running.

Figure 2.

 
This is the system that I had created in PIPE-FLO to show how the system operated. I had not realized that the system that I create was a system dominated with static head. Notice how the flow rate through each pump is 200 m3/hr.

As soon as each of us had our turn explaining our systems with the unfortunate student translator, we both agreed that the PIPE-FLO program produced accurate results for this highly unusual system example.

You could say that a system resistance curve was considered a universal language used to describe the operation of operating piping systems. I had a great time talking to Professor Dimitrov and promised to visit the next time I’m in Sofia Bulgaria.

If you have an opportunity to visit a trade fair in Europe, I would suggest you go, even if you have to work it around a vacation. Valve World was rather small only 20,000 attendees, but was for a very specifically targeted audience. We will also be exhibiting at another international trade show, ACHEMA 2012, running from June 18th – 22nd. The 2009 show drew over 179,000 attendees, and had over 23,000 exhibitors! Like I said the Germans really know how to have a trade fair.

Now it’s time to hear from you. What trade shows do you plan on visiting and why? What value do you find in attending trade shows? What predictions do you have for the 2011 trade show season?

Please feel free to share your experiences, or opinions on this blog entry or any other subject that is of interest. Leave a comment below or email me. I can be reached at blogger@eng-software.com.

Cultivating Innovative Game Changers

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes. Read Later

Sometimes, in our professional lives, we are lucky enough to be a part of something really great and amazing. An event or discovery so big that it could be considered a “Game Changer.” At Engineered Software, I have had the opportunity to share three game changing moments, and take great pride in being involved with a team that made these events happen. The key to having these moments is to be aware of the possibilities and to be open to innovation. Innovation is not just about the creativity your team possesses, you have to be able and willing to implement those ideas.

My first game changer occurred in 1987 while developing our PUMP-FLO program. PUMP-FLO was developed as a Microsoft version 1 application. This was long before Microsoft had perfected the development environment; and we often referred to Windows 1 as Bill Gates science project.

After working many long hours on the program, my partner gave a shout out and said to come and see what she had done. On her monitor was a pump curve showing the head, flow, and efficiency of the select pump with the impeller diameter meeting the specified design point. I stared at that pump curve for a long while and realized that we had a game changer. We had a program that could present a list of pumps meeting a customer’s design point, using a manufacturers supplied electronic pump catalog, and then dynamically draw each pump curve for the calculated impeller diameter. We realized at that time that the days pump manufacturers needed to supply paper pump curves for pump selection were numbered.

The second game changer was in 1994 when we were working on PIPE-FLO version 5. In previous versions of our hydraulic analysis software, the customer had to establish the piping system connections using lists of pipelines and nodes on the computer screen. It required them to mark up a paper drawing of the piping system, and then using the list interface, manually enter the connection information prior to performing the calculations.

The objective of PIPE-FLO version 5 was to eliminate the need to use the list interface to build the piping system model. The goal was to create built-in drawing tools in the same program that allowed you to enter design data for the pipelines, pumps, components, control valves, and tanks right on the computer screen. We were creating a program that used the drawing to automatically configure the piping connections and displayed the calculated results on the flow diagram. When I first saw the program in operation, I realized the program interface looked like industry standard flow diagrams and P&IDs that our customers were used to working with. Not only did it make it easier for them to create the system, it also made it easier for others involved to understand how the total piping system operated.

This past May I witnessed my third game changer. We were in the final stages of developing our newest web application. One of our major design goals for PUMP-FLO Premium was to allow the user to save their projects on secure servers, thus providing them with access from any computer with internet access and a browser. A second, more ambitious design goal was to allow collaboration between the various pump stakeholders.

One month prior to the scheduled release date all our design goals were met except the collaboration feature, and we didn’t know if it would make the release date. This time I got a call from our PUMP-FLO Project Manager, who asked me to check out the e-mail that she had just sent me. I opened the e-mail and clicked on the attached link, my browser immediately went to a pump list that she had shared with me. I was able to view the list of pumps and display the pump curves for each pump on the list. She then said to display the pump curve for a specific pump; she changed the pumps impeller diameter on her browser, and my browser update the pump curve with the new impeller diameter. Collaborative-interactivity.

This collaboration feature is truly a “game changer.” Using this technology, a pump supplier can make a pump selection and share their selection with the customer. The customer can then evaluate how the recommended pump will operate in their system while talking to the pump supplier. Once the pump has been purchased, the pump supplier can transfer the ownership of the pump project complete with all pump performance data and linked documentation to the owner / operator. They will be able to look at the supplied data, along with all the associated document list for the life of the pump. This ability to collaborate across the internet allows everyone involved in a pumps life cycle to share data, and gain a clear picture how the pump is operating in the customers system.

The nice thing about game changers is that come in all sizes. Some make major changes to the world, and others have less of an impact. The most important thing about game changers is they may come from an idea about how to do something easier, but it’s the hard work of a team that pulls it all together. So the next time you think of a clever idea, follow it through until you can change the game. When you do, please send me an e-mail and tell me about your successes.

Now it’s time to hear from you. What barriers do you have to the execution of your ideas? How have you overcome these challenges to create a “Game Changer?” Please feel free to share your experiences, or opinions on this blog entry or any other subject that is of interest. I can be reached at blogger@eng-software.com.