ML19319D121
| ML19319D121 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1974 |
| From: | Biese R GILBERT/COMMONWEALTH, INC. (FORMERLY GILBERT ASSOCIAT |
| To: | |
| References | |
| GAI-1847, NUDOCS 8003130681 | |
| Download: ML19319D121 (112) | |
Text
-
d t
CONDENSER COOLING SYSTEM STUDY
,e
~
^
' ',...,p.
p
\\
- 4 "~
p.
,.; ~
a.c O\\
t PREP.
THE ATTACHED FILES ARE OFFI BEEN CHARGED TO YOU FO Q
53 HEY HAVE PERIOD ANS MUST BE RETURN 1
IMITED TIME CENTRAL RECORDS STATION 00ED TO TH REMOVED FOR REPRODUCTION M9. ANY TO ITS/THEIR ORIGINAL ORDER UST BE RETURNED W
~
o DEADLINE RETURN DATE F
- C ~~ } # 1
~$
Eog Rwe.deof Q s'
z - t " % *2 C dlNKS, Cuggp CENyggg RECORDS STATION
-n 2% '7f GILBERT ASSOCIA'ib, uw.
~
003130b READING, PENNSYLVANIA
- %4 w
O 4
OCTOBER 1974 GAI REPORT NO. 1847 FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION CRYSTAL RIVER PLANT UNIT 3 CONDENSER COOLING SYSTEM STUDY f
4 I
J m.1 Prepared by:
Gilbert Associates, Inc.
525 Lancaster Ave.
Reading, Pennsylvania l
l CILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC.~
FOREWORD As a result of Atomic Energy Commision and Environmental Protection Agency concern on the subject heat discharges, Florida Power Corporation was directed to investigate possible alternatives to the existing once through cooling systems at its Crystal River Station. Having selected numerous alternatives for study, Florida Power Corporation engaged Gilbert Associates, Inc., to complete a study addressing the application of the various systems. Two separate reports were to be prepared, one covering options applied to Crystal River Unit 3, the other covering options applied to Crystal River Units 1, 2 and 3 combined. The following report is the result of these efforts pertaining to Crystal River Unit 3 alone.
It is to be noted that the major thrust of the study had a threefold nature.
First was assessment of the technical feasibility of each option.
Second was the establishment of a preliminary working design and plant arrangement for the viable options. Third was assessment of the economic impact of these options on Florida Power Corporation. General descriptive and operational information associated with these basic directives is also provided.
The report draws no specific conclusions regarding one option versus any other.
In the same vein, it proffers no recommendation for any future installation of a redesigned cooling system for the Crystal River Station.
With the exception of a salt drift deposition analysis, environmrntal concerns are not discussed in this report.
Rather, such concerns and regulations pertaining t,o them are used as restraints on the various alternative designs.
Since the subject of salt deposition from drif t emitted by cooling towers is a i
l l
CH.BERT ASSOCIATES INC.
i L
wuQ subject requiring specialized analysis, Florida Power Corporation requested Gilbert Associates, Inc., to arrange for study of the subject. Work was coordinated through Dr. Charles L. Hosler of the Pennsylvania State University and the results are presented as Appendix E to this report. No assessment of the environmental issues pertinent to any tower installation at the Crystal River Station is made in this report.
O P
r
!I s
l_
- GILBERT ASSOCIATES INC.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Gilbert Associates, Inc., wishes to ac1cnowledge with gratitude the cooperation of.The Marley Company, Zurn Industries, Inc., and Cherne Industrial, Inc., in the m <paration of this report.
CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
iii i
c_
~
REPORT PERSONNEL ORGANIZATION The majority of the information in this report was prepared by the following responsible individuals at Gilbert Associates.
R.J. BIESE PROJ. MGR.
C.O. GRUBER F.G. BOUTROS R.P. CRONK J.M. NORMANN J.W. FOSTER R.W. ST E FFY Q
ESTIMATING MECH./NUC.
ELECTRICAL CIVIL / HYDRAULIC TECH. SUPPORT LAYOUT SERV.
J.S. GERMANN C.O. GRUBER W.J. SANTAMOUR J.M. NORMANN R.C. PECK G. KILE E ?.ECTRICA L CIVIL / STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY HYDRAULIC D.W. HART D. SY ANISLAWCZYK D.F. LAKATOS PIPING i
~
i TABLE OF CONTENTS j
Section Title Pm 1.0 PURPOSE 1
2.0 SCOPE 2
3.0 INVESTMENT
SUMMARY
3 4.0 ESTIMATING CRITERIA 10 j
5.0 PERFORMANCE
SUMMARY
12 6.0 GENERAL PHYSICAL AND HYDRAULIC DESIGN 16 7.0 GENERAL ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL DESIGN 18 l
8.0 OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES 21 8.1 MULTICELL MECHANICAL DRAFT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION 21 8.2 CIRCULAR MECHANICAL DRAIT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION 22 8.3 NATURAL DRAFT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION 24 8.4 FAN ASSISTED NATURAL DRAFT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OFERATION 25 8.5 SPRAY DEVICES - OPEN CIRCUIT OPERATION 27 i-8.6 SPRAY DEVICES - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION 29 8.7 EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH BANK OF THE INTAKE CANAL - OPEN CIRCUIT COOLING 32 9.0 SALT DRIFT DEPOSITION 33 10.0 SWITCHYARD WASHING 34 11.0 MILESTONE TIME SPANS 35 APPENDICES:
A. LAYOUT DRAWINGS B. FLOW DIACRAMS GILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
V
APPENDICES (Cont'd):
C.-PERFORMANCE CURVES D. ELECTRICAL ONE LINE DIAGRAMS f
E. SALT DEPOSITION STUDY
.g' s
b CILBERT ASSOCI ATES. INC.
vi
LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 1
Investment Summary 5
2 Final Cost Analysis for Cooling Options 6
'3 Sample Computations - Estimated Costs 7
4 Performance Chart 14 5
Estimates for Floating Spray Units 30 6
Thermal Conditions - Open Circuit Sprays 31
- I t
o
!r k-
\\.
CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
vii
u-LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 1
Cooling Tower Pump Intake Arrangement 2
Multicell Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower 3
Circular Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower 4
Natural Draf t Cooling Tower 5
-Fan Assisted Natural Draft Cooling Tower 6
Spray Device
~~
'(
l CILBERT ASSOCIATES INC.
viii 1
1 1.O PURPOSE.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the economic and technical aspects of alternatives to the installed method of once through condenser cooling for Crystal River Unit 3.
This unit is a nominal 840 W nuclear addition to two fossil fired units:
e Unit 1. of 390 W; and Unit 2, of 510 W nominal capacity.
I a
)
4
-7 k
s s
CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
t
2
-2.0 SCOPE-This report presents a brief system description, a capital cost estimate and an evaluated cost estimate for each alternative.
Arrangement and electrical one line drawings for each system are also included, as are preliminary sketches showing major new structures and modifications to the existing plant. The thermal performance of each system is described and performance curves are provided for the full range of operation. The options considered are as follows:
a.
Multicell mechanically induced draft cooling towers in closed circuit operation.
b.
Circular mechanically induced draft cooling towers in closed circuit operation.
c.
Natural draft cooling towers in closed circuit operation.
d.
Emm assisted natural draf t cooling towers in closed circuit operation.
e.
Spray module cooling to reduce the intake to discharge temperature rise of Unit 3 to that of Units 1 and 2 in an open circuit.
f.
Spray module cooling in closed circuit operation.
g.
Extension of the south dike of the intake canal.
'I s
~
CILsERT ASSOCIATES, INC.
3 P
3.0 INVESTMENT
SUMMARY
Tables 1 and 2 categorize the capital requirements associated with each alternat:.ve. Table 1 presents only the total first and annual costs. Table 2 indicates those factors which make up the total figures.
The methodology applied to arrive at these estimated costs employed data from various sources. Major equipment prices (e.g.
cooling towers, spray devices, etc.) were received directly as budget quotations from the manufacturers.
Each tower selection is based upon a preliminary optimization of a number of such budget prices for each tower type. After selection was completed for each tower option, it was applied to a specific system and design and arrangement drawings were prepared.
Sufficient detail was included in these drawings and in the backup design work to permit estimation of installation costs.
These costs were annualized at the fixed charge rate and were added to the annual penalties for both energy consumed and capability lost. These penalties were applied to both auxiliary power consumption and main turbine backpressure corrections. Unit load was assumed to be 100 percent for all operating time. Annual maintenance costs were estimated as a fixed percentage of tower first cost. The summation of these costs yields the levelized annual revenue requirement for each option.
CILBERT ASSOCI ATES. INC.
4 Another evaluated cost indicated by these tables is the t;tal present worth of each system. This value is given, in 1978 dollars, as the sum of the first costs plus the direct cost of replacing lost capability (by either auxiliary power consumption or turbine backpressure correction) plus the present worth of the energy and maintenance penalties for 30 years at the Florida Power Corporation cost of capital.
The evaluation factors used in this study were as follows:
Plant life 30 years Cost of Capital 11.25%
Fixed Charge Rate 17.7%
System Capacity (Capability) Charge 250 $/kW System Energy Cost 0.020 S/kWh Capacity (Load) Factor 75%
Sample computations using these factors are given in Table 3. It 1
is important to note that, since these schemes can be constructed and J
started without requiring an extended outage, no cost has been assigned to generation losses due to construction.
i i
CILBERT ASSOCI ATES. INC.
t
. p.
TABLE 1 Florida. Power Corporation Crystal River Station Cooling System Study, Unit 3 Investment Summary Closed Circuit Alternatives Extend S. Dike Multicell Circular Natural Fan Assisted Open. Circuit Intake' Canal Mech. Draft Mech. Draft Draft Nat. Draft Spray Cooling 3600 ft/7200 ft Total First Cost-
$32,800,000 37,200,000 53,600,000 39,200,000 12,300,000 153,000/306,000 Equipment plus Installation Annual Revenue 5,805,600 6,584,41'O 9,487,000 6,938,400 2,177,100 27,081/54,162 Requirement For Capital Investment Annual Total Evaluated 9,337,736 10,203,483 12.456,124 10,430,488 2,753, 27,081/54,172 Revenue Requirement Total Evaluated Present 60,492,489 65,630,565 76,790,075 66,522,423 16,835,232 153,000/306,000 Worth-1978 Dollars u.
4 n
i i
3 TABLE 2 Florida Power Corpo;;ation Crystal River Station Cooling System Study Unit 3 Cost Analysis for Cooling Alternatives Unit 3 Closed Circu!L Options Open Circuit Extend S. Dike.
Multicell Circular Natural Fan Assisted Intake Canal Nech. Draft Mech. Draft Draf t Nat. Draft Spray Cooling 3600 ft/7200 ft NOTES:
CAPITAL EIPENDITURES A.
Evaluation Factors -
Unit 3 1.
Plant Life / Load Factor 30/75 Structures &
2.
Cost of Capital 11.25%
Improvements
$6,683,000 8,332,000-9.625,000 5.013,000 895,000 3.
Fixed Charge Rate 17.7Z Cire. Water 4.
Energy -
$0.020/KWH System (Eqpt.)
4,392.000 3,615,000 4,552,000 4,461,000 5.
Capacity
$250/KW Cooling Towers 3,736,000 5,800,000 14,500,000 10,300,000 2,468,000 B.
Turbine capability penalty evaluated Electrical 2,183,000 2,055,000 1,242,000 1,917,000 2,757,000 at I percent weather conditions C.
Turbine energy penalty evaluated at yearly average conditions Tot. Direct Cost 16.994,000. 19,802,000 29,919,000 21,691,000 6.120,000 D.
All evaluations have existing once Tot. Indirect Cost 15,806,000 17,398,000 23,681,000 17,509.000 6.180,000 through system as base E.
Tower selections based on preliminary Tot. First Cost 32,800,000 37,200,000 53,600,000 39,200,000 12,300,000 153,000/306.000 optimization or previous optimizations for Unit 4 EVALUATED EXPENSES F.
Refer to Sec. 8.5 for selection LEVELIZED ANNUAL criteria for spray devices-First Cost 5,805,600 6,584,400 9,487,000 6,938,400 2,177,100 27,081/54,162 Aux. Energy 1,714.639 1,775,740 1,404,403 1,459,871 394,548 Aux. Capability 577,148 587,994 472,994 491,618 132,838 Turbine Energy 502,849 902,849 789,977 1,128,595 Turbine Capability 265,500 265,500 265,500 360,504 Maintenance 72,000 87,000 36,250 51,500 49,360 Annual Revenue Requirement 9.337,736 10,203,483 12,456,124 10.430,488 2,753,846 27,081/54,162 PRESENT WORTH First Cost 32,800,000 37,200,000 53.600 000 39,200,000 12,300,000 Aux. Energy 14,618,736 15,139,673 11,973,714 12,446,770 3,363,892 Aux. Capability 3,262,250 3,378,500 2,672,000 2,777,500 750,500 Turbine Energy 7,697,635 7,697,635 6,735,296 9.622.322 Turbine capability 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 2,036,746 Maintenance 613,868 714,757 309,065 439,085 420,840 a.
Present Worth 60,492,489 65,630,565 76,790,075 66,522,423 16,835,232 153,000/306,000 TOWER SELECTIONS (DESIGN) range vat bulb T
F 17/79/12 17/79/12 1/,9/1 17/19/14
.9/F/F approach
--a
~
T/.BLE 3 Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Station Cooling System Study Unit 3 Sample Computations - Estimated Costs 1.
To exemplify the procedure used to estimate the cost of any option, the costs of the multicell mechanical draft system are reconstructed in this table.
2.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES: Sum of the following first Costs.
Structures and Improvements - Earthwork, Canals, Tower Basins, Pump Structures, Roadway, etc.
6,683,000 Cire. Water System (Eqpt.) - Mechanical Equipment such as Pumps, and Motors Valves, Expansion Joints, etc.
4,392,000 Cooling Towers - Towers and Accessories by tower afgr.
(mech. draft incl. fire protection), spray devices 3,736,000 Electrical - Transmission and Transformers, Cable, Starters, Control, Electric Installation 2,183,000 TOTAL DIRECT COST Subtotal
$16,994,000 INDIRECT COSTS - Temporary Roads and Buildings, Construction Power and Light, Guards, Toilets, Cleanup, Engineering Escalation, Contingency, allowance for funds during construction, etc., for 1978 Construction.
$15,806,000 TOTAL FIRST COST
$32,800,000
r
~
)
4 TABLE 3 (Cont'd) 3.
. EVALUATED EXPENSES
-a.
LEVELIZED ANNUAL = Summation of the following:
6 First Cost = (Total First Cost) (Fixed Charge Rate) = (32.8 X 10 ) (.177) 5,805,600'
=
Auxiliary Energy = (Power Consumed by Pumps & Fans, kW) (8760 hrs /yr) (Load Factor) 1 (Energy Charge) = (13,049 kW) (8760 hrs /yr) (.75 yr/yr) (.020 $/ kwhr) 1,714,639
=
Auxiliary Capability = (Power Consumed by Pumps & Fans kW) (Capability Charge)
(Fixed Charge Rate) = (13,049 kW) (250 $/kW) (.177) 577,148
=
Turbine Generator Energy = (Yearly Avg. Turbine Backpressure Penalty kW) (8,760 hrs /yr)
(Load Factor)
(Energy Charge) = (6,871 kW) (8760 hrs /yr) (.75 yr/yr)
(.020 $/ kwhr) 902,849
=
Turbine Generator Capability = (Turbine Backpressure Penalty Not Exceeded More Than 1%
of the Time, kW) (Capability Charge) (Fixed Charge Rate) =
(6,000 kW) (250 $/kW) (.177) 265,500
=
Maintenance = (First Cost of Tower) (% of Tower First Cost
- Per Year) =
72,000 (3,600,000) (.02/yr)
=
i l
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT
$9,337,736
- Estimate received from manufacturers - varies among cooling techniques.
oo l
I l
3 TABLE 3 (Cont'd) b.
PRESENT WORTH (1978 Dollars) = Summation of the following:
32,800,000 First Cost = Total First Cost
=
Auxiliary Energy = (Power Consumed by Pumps & Fans, kW) (8,760 hrs /yr) (Load " actor)
-(Energy Charge) (Present Worth Factor **)
=
(13,049 kW) (8,760 hrs /yr) (.75 yr/yr) (.020 $/ kwhr) (8.5259388 yr)-
14,618,736
=
Auxiliary Capability = (Power Consumed by Pumps E Fans kW) (Capability Charge) =
(13,049 kW) (250 $/kW) 3,262,250
=
Turbine Energy = (Yearly Avg. Turbine Backpressure Penalty kW) (8760 hrs /yr)
(Load Factor) (Energy Charge) (Present Worth Factor **)
=
(6,871 kW) (8760 hrs /yr) (.75 yr/yr) (.020 $/ kwhr) (8.5259388 yr) 7,697,635
=
Turbine Capability = (Turbine Backpressure Penalty Not Exceeded More Than 1% of the Time kW) (Capability Charge) =.(6,000 kW) (250 $/kW) 1,500,000
=
Maintenance = (First Cost of Tower) (% of Tower Figst Cost
- per Year)
(Present Worth Factor **) = (3.6 X 10 ) (.02/yr) (8.5259388 yr) 613,868
=
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH - 1978 DOLLARS
$60,492,489 NOTES:
Estimate received from manufacturers - varies among cooling techniques.
The present worth (PW) of an annual expenditure (A) for a plant life (n) at a cost of money (1) is determined as follows:
A {[1-(1 1125)~ A (8.5259388), where {8.5259388) is PW = A { ~ } = = called the present worth factor. e
9' 10 ?* 4.0 ESTIMATING CRITERE 'The estimates of first cost, prepared in accordance with the guidelines previously described, were based upon the following assumptions: 'a. Piling will not be required for tower options. Earth will be excavated to rock and backfilled with compacted fill. b. Land is already clear. c. Roads to the tower' complex will be added from existing roadways. d. All tower basins are assumed to be six feet deep. e. Electrical equipment, including switchgear and transformers for towers and pumps, will be enclosed in prefabricated buildings. f. Buried concrete pipe will be harnessed at high thrust 1 areas. Thrust blocks will be used only where pipe l rises out of the ground. f t. g. The existing grade is assumed to have an elevation of 98 ft-0 in. (plant reference). This will also be the finished grade. Rock elevation for these schemes was assumed to be 15 feet below grade. CILBERT ASSOCIATES. ISC.
11 Escalation was calculated for all schemes using a weighted average of labor and materials equaling 10 percent. This weighted average was applied assuming a mid-1978 completion date and a two year construction schedule. Allowance for funds during construction was calculated for a two year constructica schedule at a cost of money equal to 11.25 percent. For the spray cooling scheme a one year - construction schedule was assumed with a mid 1978 completion date. 1 t i "1. j. CILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC.
12 f - 5.0 PERFORMANCE
SUMMARY
Table 4 summarizes the operating penalties associated with each alternative. Factors which forecast generation penalties are tabulated using the once through system as a base. Total penalties include turbine energy and capability losses along with auxiliary energy and capability losses. Turbine losses are dependent on ambient conditions while auxiliary power consumption is not. The average once through capacity of the unit is based upon generating capability at the turbine backpressure associated with quarterly average temperatures of the Gulf of Mexico, taken to be condenser inlet temperatures. The mean of these quarterly averages is taken as the yearly average. When operating in a closed circuit and meeting Florida State regulations with respect to the chemical composition of blowdown, nominally 80 percent of the cooled circulating water will be returned to the existing intake canal. The remaining 20 percent will be made up from the canal. Thus, the condenser inlet temperature will be the temperature of the two mixed streams. The closed circuit capacity of the unit is based upon generating capability at the turbine backpressure associated with the quarterly average temperature of a mixture of 80 percent cooled water and 20 percent Gulf of Mexico water. The mean of these quarterly averages is taken as the yearly closed circuit average. The difference between these two yearly mean' is the average turbine generation penalty shown in Table 4. It is used in the evaluation to compute the turbine energy penalty. i l li. ^ cILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC. 1
13 I Capability penalties are taken as the difference between the generation capacity exceeded 99 percent of the time on a once through syst'em and the generation capability exceeded 99 percent of the time on a closed circuit system. This difference in peak generation losses is used in.t,he eyaluation to compute the turbine capability penalty. r The total system capability penalty is the sum of the turbine correction at the 1 percent case plus auxiliary power lost. Note that the open circuit system receives inlet water directly from the Gulf of Mexico; therefore, no backpressure penalty is aasigned. 4 Also included in Table 4 are the thermal performance data associated with each system. For closed circuit systems, the tower design is based upon the 2 percent hot condition or 79 F i wet bulb temperature. The open spray is to meet the special criteria as outlined in Section 8.5. l CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC
= y TAB.E 4 Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Station Cooling System Study Unit 3 Performance Chart Operating Penalties
- KW Closed Circuit Tower Options Open Multicell Circular Natural Fan Assisted Spray Dike Mech. Draft Mech. Draft Draft Nat. Draft Cooling Extension Penalties Exceeded 1% of Time Turbine Backpressure 6,000 6,000 6,000 8,147 0
0 Aux Power 13.049 13,514 10,688 11,352 3,002 0 Total 1% 19,049 19,514 16,688 19,499 3,002 0 Penalties Realized as Yearly Average Turbine Backpressure 6,871 6,871 6,012 8,589 0 0 Aux Power 13.049 13,514 10,688 11,352 3,002 0 Total Avg. 19,920 20,385 16,700 19,941 3,002 0
- Penalties are based on once through performance.
5
TABLE 4 (Cont'd) Thermal CIDSED CIRCUIT TOWER OPTIONS OPEN CIRCUIT DIKE MECH. DRAFT' NAT. DRAFT FAN ASSISTED
- SPRAY COOLING' EXTENSION T
T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T C g g y y y g y y y c y y g g y y y y y 11 88 102.1 92.2 91.3 108.3 100.4 92.2 91.3 108.3 100.4 94.0 92.7 109.7 100.7 75 88 105 97.2 105 103.5 Spring' 75 89.1. 88.5 85.5 102.5 85 88.0 85.1 102.1 88.9 90.5 87.1 104.1 89.4 66 75 92 85.1 92 90.5 Summer 85 99.1 89.8 88.7 105.7 97.5 89.5 88.5 105.5 97.4 91.8 90.3 107.3 97.8 73 85 102 94.5 102 100.5 Fall 75 89.1 88.5 -85.5 102.5 89 88.0 85.1 102.1 88.9 90.5 87.1 104.1 89,4 66 75 92 85.1 92 90.5 Winter 60 74.1 80.5 76 93 75.2 77.0 73.3 90.3 74.6 82.5 77.6 94.6 75.o 55 60 77 71.4 77 75.5 Temperature Key: T - Culf of Mexico, makeup g T - Cold water from cooling device C T - Inlet to condenser, mixture of T and T y C C T - Hot to tower, condenser discharge H T - System discharge, mixture of T and both Units 1 & 2 discharge D C T - Existing mixed discharge of Units 1 & 2 only E
- Performance of spray options is based on CAI estimated performance curve, not manufacturer's data (refer to section 8.5 and figure C-4)
U
16 1 6.0 GENERAL PHYSICAL AND HYDRAULIC DESIGN
- Appendix A is a compilation of arrangement drawings for all options considered. Appendix B compiles the flow diagrams.
These appendices pictorially represent both the physical and i l conceptual aspects of all options. For the closed circuit options the towers would be located southeast of the plant. Water exiting Unit 3 would be captured in a sheet piling basin at the head of the discharge canal. The basin, which would extend the head of the canal eastward 200 feet, would terminate in a pump chamber. Re.fer to Figure 1. There would be four, vertical cooling tower booster pumps in this chamber since there are four existing circulating water pumps for Unit 3. Water would be piped to the towers from this point through buried, harnessed reinforced concrete pipe. Water collected it the tower basins would be channeled to a common canal. As the canal proceeds westward, a channel would be split off in the direction of flow to return blowdown to the head of the discharge canal. The main return flow would be delivered to the head of the intake canal. As the Unit 3 circulating water pumps withdraw the return flow, makeup would be drawn simultaneously since there would be no obstruction of the intake canal. The amount of flow returned versus the amount of flow blown down is determined in the following manner. It is a conservative assumption that, at maximum, 2 percent of the circulating water flow is lost to evaporation. The chemical composition of blowdown with regard to solids must be maintained at a concentration no greater than 1.1 times ambient according to CILsERT ASSOCIATES. INC. r e-
- w m
wr-e
17 ~:, Florida State regulations. Blowdown in the. steady ' state, ignoring drift losses, is deternined from the relationship: Blowdown = evaporation cycles of concentration - 1 Thus, for 2 percent evaporation, blowdown equals 20 percent of the circulating water flow rate. If the system is sized for I' 2 percent evaporation, a very conservative estimate, chemical concentration requirements for blowdown would be met at all times. The flow quantities (neglecting drift) associated with i this breakdown are as follows: a. Circulating water flow, 682,000 gym. b. Nominal blowlown flow, 136,000 gpm. j c. Nominal recirculated flow, 546,000 gpm. In practice the flow rates through the canals are established by culverts in both the return and blowdown streams. These culverts, acting much as do orifices in pipe flow, are sized in such a manner as to return 30 percent and blowdown 20 percent of the circulating water stream under t' e most stringent tide conditions. l-h The tide determines canal water elevations and thus the available i head for return of water from the tower basins. The once through spray option assumes a different appearance (refer to figure A-5). In this case the existing discharge canal from Unit 3 would be isolated from the discharges of the other units l by a dike in the canal. Water from the Unit'3 side of the dike would be sprayed across the dike into the common discharge. The c temperature of the exiting mixture from all three units, treated in this manner, would be the same as it would have been prior to the addition'of Unit 3 discharge water. GILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC. y w a w -,v---,, ,,,+-- - --
18 4 7.0 GENERAL ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL DESIGN Power for all options would be taken from the 230 kV switchyard by tapping into the incoming lead to the Unit 3 auxiliary transformer. This:would be fed through a 230/13.8'.kV transformer of sufficient rating to carry the load of both the cooling tower pumps and fans. The four circulating water pumps would be fed at 13.8 kV. Both the multicell and the circular mechanical draft tower options include an electrical equipment house located at each tower. Outside each house would be a 13.8 kV/480 V transformer that carries the tower fan load. Inside would be the local control panels and switchgear associated with the fans. The fan assisted natural draft option would have only one equipment house serving all three towers. This arrangement is possible because there is only one fan per tower and each fan motor would be operated at 13.8 kV, negating the need for transformers at the towers. I-In all cases, pump and f an motor controls would offer a capability for both local and remote, manual start /stop. All controls would be digital. Common alarms would be supplied for each group of fans associated with each tower equipment house. Local indication would pinpoint specific causes for alarms. Circulating water pumps would be equipped with individual alarms. The open circuit spray system requires an underground or oil filled takeoff from the 230 kV switchyard af ter tapping into the incoming lead to the~ Unit 3 auxiliary transformer. This takeoff would surface west of'the switchyard. Voltage would be stepped down to 13.8.kV.
- ~
GILsEsT ASSOclATES. INC. __~
19 Since no pumps are required by this system, only a number of 13.8 kV/480 V transformers sufficient to power the multiple spray module units strung out along the discharge canal would be required. -Module control would be as previously described for fans. Operational control of pumps in the tower options would be as ftllows: Existing circulating water pump controls would not be changed. a. b. The four coolr g tower pumps would be paired with the existing circulating water pumps and each would require the following prerequisites for starting: 1. The corresponding, existing circulating water pump must be operating. 2. The low level trip for the cooling tower pump may not be satisfied. 3. Bearing and stuffing box lubricating water must be ~ supplied. I The following startup procedure would be required. a. The circulating water pumps and cooling tower pumps are started in pairs. First the existing circulating water pump is started; then the corresponding cooling tower pump. b. The first cooling tower pump should be started only after the basin is full or overflowing (a section of sheet piling would be set at a proper elevation for startup overflow). In starting subsequent pairs of pumps, the cooling tower pump should be CILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC.
20 started when the corresponding circulating water pump has reached full speed. c. When the start signal to a cooling tower pump is initiated, the pump discharge valve would start to open. When the valve reaches a predetermined open position, usually about 10 to 15 degrees, limit switches would actuate and the pump motor would start autonatically. The valve would continue to open. Automatic, remote manual or local shutdc,wn would be accomplished as follows: a. Cooling tower pumps would trip if the corresponding s circulating water ptsap tripped. b. Cooling tower pumps would trip on low level. c. Cooling tower pumps would trip on loss of bearing or stuffing box water. d. If a cooling tower pump were tripped, its discharge valve would close. e. Loss of a cooling tower pump would alarm but would not trip the corresponding circulating water pump. The following alarms would normally be supplied for the cooling tower pumps: a. A high level alarm. b. A low level alarm. CILsERT ASSOCIATES, INC.
21 8.0 OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES Any of the systems considered in this report, with the exception of closed circuit spray cooling, could be installed and made to operate satisf actorily. Discussions briefly describing each system' are presented in following sections. Appendices A through D depict the characteristics of the various alternative systems. Appendix A is a compilation of arrangement drawings, one for each alternative. Appendices B and C present, respectively for each alternative, system flow diagrams and cooling mechanism performance curves. i Appendix D provides electrical power supply (one-line) diagrams i for each alternative. 8.1 MULTICELL MECHANICAL DRAFT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION The multicell mechanical draft tower is the cooling device illustrated in Figure 2. This type of tower has historically been the cooling device most widely applied in the utility industry. Basic, standard construction is of wood with fire retardant fill, louvers, fan decks, drif t eliminators and other components. This type of tower is available, for a premium, in basic concrete construction. This study is based upon standard wood construction with appropriate fire alarms and protection equipment included. Figure A-1 depicts a station arrangement with multicell mechanically induced draf t towers employed in a closed circuit configuration for Unit 3. Figure B-1 diagrammatically represents water flow through the system. The pr.rticular tower selected is a thirty-six cell tower with four banks of nine cells each. The design conditions for this tower would consist of a range of 17 F with a 12 F cold CILBERT AS$ocIATES. INc. e
s 22 = water approach to a 79 F ambient vet bulb temperature. Each bank of cells would be 325 feet long by 70 feet wide by 59 feet to the top of the fan stacks. Each cell would utilize a 200 horsepower motor to drive a 28 foot diameter fan. A tower designco to meet these conditions would give quarterly sverage and peak condition performance as indicated in Table 4. Specific performance may be found by referring to Figures C-1, the cold water versus wet bulb curve, and C-la, the evaporation versus wet bulb curve. The electrical power supply is depicted schematically by Figure D-1. Overall operation of this system may be considered the most setaightforward of all the closed systems. Since there would be four pump pairs and four towers, load would be handled by simply matching the appropriate number of pump pairs with the number of towers or tower fans in operation. This could be accomplished either by t ( stopping water flow to one tower completely for each pair of pumps down or by not operating half the fans per tower pair. Refer to Figure B-1. Pump and fan startup would be as described in Section 7.0. 8.2. CIRCUIAR MECHANICAL DRAFT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION A circular concrete mechanical draf t tower, as referred to herein, is a circular tower fill structure enclosing a cluster of fans which s induce a draf t in a manner similar to a standard multicell mechanical draf t tower. The particular tower referenced in dhis report, shown in Figure 3, is of a circular design. Basic structural l CILBERT AESOCIATES. INC.
23 construction is of concrete with fire retardant or fireproof materials used throughout. No fire protection is included in the estimate of cost for this tower type. This particular type of tower is a recently marketed concept in cooling tower design in this country. As of this date, no towers of this design are in conenercial operation. The main objective of this type of design is to concentrate the heat 'I discharged from the fan stacks yielding greater plume buoyancy and lif t than is achieved by standard multicell towers. Thus the plume should rise to greater heights without the physically taller structure associated with either natural draf t or extended stack mechanical draf t towers. This additional plume rise should assist in reducing salt deposition by spreading salt drif t over a wider area than multicell tower., with equivalent drift percentages. Figure A-2 depicts a station arrangement with circular concrete mechanical draf t towers employed for Unit 3 in closed circuit configuration. Figure B-2 is a diagrammatic representation of water flow through the system. Wo towers, each with thirteen 200 horespower fans would be required to meet the specified duty. The dimensions of each tower would be 415 feet in diameter by 67 feet to the top of the fan stacks. The thermal conditions for which these towers would be designed are identical to those used for the design of standard 4 mechanical draft towers. Thermal performance would also be identical, as indicated in Table 4. Specific performance may be found by referring to Figures C-1 and L-la. The electrical power supply is depicted schematically on Figure D-2. -CILsERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
24 As with the multicell mechanical draf t tower system, operation using these towers would be relatively simple. Two of the four pump pairs would feed one tower. Therefore, incremental load adjustments below 100 percent would be handled by operating the appropriate utsnber of fans per tower up to 50 percent unit heat load. Refer to flow 4 diagram B-2. 8.3 NATURAL DRAFI TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION [ Hyperbolic natural draft cooling towers are circular, concrete fill structures topped by a large diameter, tall, circular stack of sufficient height to induce a draft through the fill by virtue of stack effect alone. A typical cross flow natural draft tower is depicted by Figure 4. The design objectives of this style tower are twofold. The first is elimination of the use of auxiliary power and associated maintenance required by mechanical draf t towers. Second is the provision of a mechanism by which the plume will be discharged at, and rise to, greater heights than mechanical towers. These towers have inherently lower drif t rates than do other tower types, l thus yielding lower overall salt drif t deposition rates spread over a larger area. Figure A-3 depicts a station arrangement with natural draf t towers employed for Unit 3 in a closed circuit configuration. Figure B-2 is a diagrammatic representation of water flow through the system. Two towers would be required, each with a shell height of 450 feet and a base diameter of 440 feet with an outlet diameter of 200 feet. The thermal design criteria for these towers would be identical to those used for the mechanical draft towers. Thermal performance u over the year would, however, not be the same. This is reflected in CILBERT ASSOCI ATES, INC.
25 Table 4 and Figures C-2 and C-2a. System electric power supply is shown in Figure D-3, which accounts only for power supplied to the cooling tower pumps. System operation would entail only the pumping of water through the towers. No control could be exercised on the towers. 8.4 FAN ASSISTED NATURAL DRAFT TOWERS - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPEPATION Fan assisted natural draft towers are structures of intermediate height which utilize a single or multiple fans to supplement the '{ natural draft capability of a relatively large diameter stack which affords less stack ef fect than does a natural draf t tower. The ( particular type of tower examined in this study would use a single, large diameter f an. Refer to Figure 5. To date, towers of this type have not been installed in the United States. Such towers have, horever, been used extensively in Europe. As with the circular mechanical draf t tower, this type of tower would provide high plume bueyancy in a relatively low profile. The single stack and added height of these towers over and above that of the multicell or circular mechanical draf t towers provides the ability to perform at a at relatively high percent of rated capacity with the fan out of service. The actual capability as a percentage of design is dependent upon ambient conditions. Winter conditions yield the maximum no-fan performance. Salt deposition from these towers is estimated to be I l similar to that from the circular mechanical draft tower. t ' Figure A-4 depicts a station arrangement with fan assisted natural draf t towers employed for Unit 3 in a closed circuit configuration. Figure B-3 is a diagrammatic representation of water flow through the CILsERT ASSOclATES. INC. l- +
26 system., Three towers of this type would be required for this alte rnative. The towers would each employ a 2160 horsepower, 82 foot diameter f an in a structure 171 feet high by 194 feet in diameter. It should be noted that these towers operate on a counterflow, I film type heat and mass transfer arrangement while the previously described towers employ a cross flow principle. The thermal l conditions' for which this type of tower would be designed are a cooling range of 17 F with a 14 F approach to a 79 F with bulb temperature. il Fan assiJted towers designed to meet these conditions would have peak and average performance as shown in Table 4. Specific performance !i .may be determined by referring to Figures C-3 and C-3a. The electrical I power supply is depicted schematically on Figure D-4. Operation of this system would be physically no more difficult than is a the operation of systems previously described. However, the combination O j of four pump pairs feeding three towers, each of which has both mechanical and limited natural draf t performance capability, suggests ?- a more careful analysis of off load operation. As water flow to the towers changes, the water loading over each tower would differ. Thus, the performance of each would be different. This, coupled with the dual natural / natural-mechanical draf t capability presents myriad off load operating characteristics. It is important to note that this would present no physical operating difficulty but rather would create a requirement for engineering to determine the proper ~ operating mode for a given load and: setoof at' ospheric conditions. m CILsERT ASSOCIATES. INC. .e, ,-- m,
27 8.5 SPRAY DEVICES - OPEN CIRCUIT OPERATION Various devices are available which perform the cooling task by spraying water into the air. The water is either pumped through nozzles or splashed by rotating discs or paddle wheels. In all such systems, the pumps, motors, discs or paddle wheels, and distribution system ara' mounted on pontoons or floats in the circulating water canals. The particular device selected for this study is a rotating paddle wheel spray system, depicted in Figure 6. l This particular means of cooling has been applied in relatively i small scale commercial cooling operations at a midwestern chemical J plant and on a pilot basis at the Alan S. King Plant of Northern t States Power Company. Sprays of other types have been used in r cooling operation in the Virginia Electric Power syr*em, the Public Service of New Hampshire system and the Commonwealth Edison system and on a pilot test basis in the Detroit Edison system. (The { preceding list of users is not intended to be all inclusive.) j l Figure A-5 depicts a station arrangement using rotor spray devices in an open circuit configuration. Figure B-4 is a diagrammatic representation of the water flow through the system. The particular selection made would utilize 175 floating spray devices. One rotor spray device requires 23 brake horsepower. Each would have attached a curtain extending to the existing canal bottom. The rotors and curtains, attached end to end, would form a canal division isolating Unit 3 flow from the flow of Units 1 and 2. The sprays would toss a portion of the Unit 3 flow into the discharge flow from Units 1 and 2. The remainder of the Unit 3 flow would travel to the Gulf .t CILsERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
.6 - ~ - - ' ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- 28 / of Mexico on the Unit 3 side of the sprays. The final discharge mixture of the Unit 1, 2 and 3 flows would be at a temperature no greater than the existing mixture from Units 1 and 2 alone except as qualified below. 'l The selection of the 175 modules was made as follows: Figure C-4 is an estimated performance curve comprised of data from Yables 5 and 6. The selections in Table 5 represent the 7-- i' number of cooling modules required to meet conditions prevailing either during the concurrent 2 percent warmest or coolest water and wet bulb s temperatures on a monthly basis given in Table 6. Since the existing ( ( discharge canal can accommodate only a single row of these devices, the selection must be based upon the physical length of the canal as well as the thermal criteria, i The discharge canal could accommodate a string of 175 modules by t extending its north bank approximately 1200 feet. The capability of the system, installed in this manner, would meet all the cool conditions, all but 2 percent of the warm conditions during March and somewhat less ,\\. than the 2 percent warm conditions during January, February, November and December. Examination of the monthly water and wet bulb duration data shows that the thermal conditions during as much as 50 percent of January, 30 percent of February, 20 percent of November and 30 ) percent of December are potentially more difficult to meet than the '\\. 2 percent warm March situation. Thus the remote potential exists that ' for 11 percent of the year the discharge water temperature would be higher for the combined units than for Units 1 and 2 alone. CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.~
29 It is important to emphasize and note carefully what is to be accomplished by this scheme. With all three units in operation the system would be required to dischargs water to the Gulf of Mexico at a temperature equal to that from Units 1 and 2 alone. Unit 3 has a temperature range of 17 F. Ur.its 1 and 2 present a combined range of 14.1 F. The combination of the discharges from Units 1, 2 and 3 would have a range of 15.5 F. Thus the system would only be topping 1.4 F from the circulating water discharge temperature at the design point. During 89 percent of the year the system would lower the temperature slightly more; during 11 percent of the year it would lower temperature alightly less (up tc 1.4 F less when not in operation) 1 In terms of heat discharged to the Gulf of Mexico, a 1.4 F temperature reduction at the outlet represents a lowering of the thermal load by approximately 9 percent. Conceptually, operation of the system merely entails running the proper number of modules to effect a net 1.4 F temperature reductica. Practically, the units would be run centinuously. These units would be powered as shown in Figure D-5. 8.6 SPRAY DEVICES - CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION The geometric configuration of the plant does not allow this mode of cooling. To isolate Unit 3 from the other two units, canals would have to loop north and around the switchyard, taking off from the discharge canal; or canals would take off directly east from the head of the discharge canal. A layout incorporating such a canal system and returning water to the end of the intake canal would cover a large area east of the plant with a labyrinth of waterways which is deemed unacceptable. CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
30 TABLE 5 Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Station Cooling System Study, Unit 3 Estimates for Floating Spray Units Number of Total Total 44 foot Length Total Gallons Hodules in feet of Brake Per Minute 2% Hot Conditions: Needed Modules Horsepower Sprayed i Jan.
- 4..'
18,788 9,821 682,000 Feb. 30E 13,552 7,084 493,000 r Mar. 175 7,700 4,025 280,000 Apr. 129 5,676' 2,967 206,000 May 107 4,708 2,461 171,000 t June 103 4,532 2,369 165,000 July 103 4,532 2,369 165,000 i Aug. 107 4,708 2,461 171,000 l Sept. 112 4,928 2,576 179,000 !( Oct. 146 6,424 3,358 234,000
- (
Nov. 218 9,592 5,014 345,000 Dec. 368 16,192 8,464 589,.000 2% Cold Conditions: Jan. 124 5,456 2,852 198,' u0 Feb. 129 5,676 2,967 206,000 Mar. 120 5,280 2,760 192,000 Apr. 107 4,708 2,461 171,000 't May 94 4,136 2,162 150,000 June 112 4,928 2,576 179,000 July 99 4,356 2,277 158,000 Aug. 103 4,532 2,369 165,000 Sept. 116 5,104 2,668 186,000 Oct. 116 5,104 2,668 186,000 Nov. 124 5,456 2,852 198,000 Dec. 129 5,676 2,967 206,000 i
31 TABLE 6 Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Station Cooling System Study, Unit 3 Thermal Conditions - Open Circuit Sprays Wet Bulb and Gulf of Mexico (Inlet) Temperatures Month 2% Hot 2% Cold WB Gulf T T H C H C Jan. 68 58.5 75.5 72.6 34 55.5 72.5 69.6
- r-Feb.
69.5 63 80 77.1 36 58 75 72.1 i Mar. 70 71 88 85.1 41 63 80 77.1 Apr. 70 77.5 94.5 91.6 51 71 78 75.1 May 73 84 101 98.1 60 79 97 94.1 '( ( June 75 87 104 10 1.1 76.5 85 102 99.1 July 77 88 105 102.1 71 87 104 101.1 Aug. 77.5 87 104 101.1 70.5 84 101 98.1 Sept. 76 84 101 98.1 67 78.5 95.5 92.6 Oct. 75 78.5 95.5 92.6 51 69 86 83.1 Nov. 70 68 85 82.1 40 60.5 77.5 74.6 Dec. 68 60 77 74.1 33 56 73 70.1 KEY: WB - Wet Bult temp., F Gulf - Inlet temp., F - Unit 3 discharge temp., F - Final temp. after spray C NOTE: Cooling Range (T -T ) f r 2% Hot and 2% Cold = 2.9 F. H C 4 4 6 4
e 32 Another approach might be to incorporate the spray canal between the intake and discharge canals with only sufficient capacity to eliminate the heat load of Unit 3. This is unacceptable since the remaining bypassed water from Units 1 and 2 would be discharged at a temperature higher than if it were lef t on once through cooling. [ 8.7 EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH BANK OF THE INTAKE CANAL - OPEN CIRCUIT COOLING This option does not affect the existing cooling situation. Its purpose would be to provide a barrier to the entrainment of shallow water south and east of the intake. A 3600' extension requires 59,200 cubic yards of material to be dredged. A 7200' extension i
- f requires 118,400 cubic yards.
i P I a ) GILBERT ASSOCIATE 5, INC. j
I 33 i r 1 9.0 SALT DRIFT
- POSITION Appendix E presents a reporc of a study prepared by Dr. Charles L.
Hosler and his associates at the Pennsylvania State University. The I report, incorporated in toto, examines possible salt deposition by cooling tower options considered not only for U it 3 alone but also n by options considered in Gilbert Associates, Inc., Report No.1846, f " Condenser Cooling System Study, Crystal River Units 1, 2 and 3." It is important when reading the report of this study to note that the drif t percentage for each option was taken to be the same at 0.001 s percent of the circulating water flow rate. Adjustments to the deposition rate are directly proportional to changes in the drift rate. li It is also Laportant to note that the salt concentration in the inlet to the system was taken to be 29,000 ppm. This is considered to be the highest anticipated makeup salt level; and, therefore, gives very l! conservative deposition rate estimates since the study assumes continuous operation at full load with this makeup concentration. Adjustments in this concentration will not yield linear changes to l deposition rates. Salt deposition rates from the spray cooling devices have not been ~ included.- In general, estimates of drift deposition may be assumed to cover a much smaller area than estimates based upon other options. However, close in rates will be higher. The complication of having the sprays set down in canals requires analytical techniques not available at this time. GILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC.
[ 34 E -r-4 10.0 SWITCHYARD WASHING Salt deposition on transformer insul? tors at the Crystal River Station has been a problem in the past due to natural background. Studies and preliminary designs of protection for the main and auxiliary transformers have been carried out for Units,1 and 2 only. The addition of cooling towers may not necessarily worsen the situation -f { or cause undue additional difficulty in the switchyard serving all
- r.
three units. However, this possibility does exist since salt deposition by the towers is in addition to the natural background. In the event that problems do arise or thet it can be shown beforehand
- s that a real danger to the switchyard does exist, then protective I
( measures would need to be taken. Such measures would include a complex washing system costing in excess of $1,100,000. h .( ,u CILsERT ASSOCIATES. INC. t'
35 11.0 MILESTONE TIME SPANS Detailed schedules were not prepared for each option since the overall period of construction plus design is relatively constant for each. In general it may be said that the entire effort, starting with design and ending in conumercial operation would take 36 to 42 months. Physical construction would take about 24 to 30 months while 1etati engineering and purchasing would require 12 to 18 months. These general guides do not include time for environmental studies and obtaining permits which may 1:e required before a detail design effort can be initiated. .t '6
- I
[ .i s l 1 CILsERT ASSOCIArES INC.'
4 8**-JX 4,mma-4 3a4m~s ms__abm2---* mas <&e sh -*-4 m- .L--
- 4. Am 3
ma
- m a -am
-.m=La-w - et w e4 h-ms m.e.,- w*.a,s -.a r I I I' l f i 1 3 4 i d ._ m A _e = a... _. _,. _ = _ ". _. ~. p -h. e. 7JP 7JTYT9F ' I'Pf f' ' " 'T '{]TT t f 1 i I 6 4M NM- _--- ' ' - - e. g I I I l I 5l,i i i ( i . 3 s& T eas 4 0t&Le A4 6E l t Ase 46 9 . ;-....ga....., 'F ~ T_ +- t i t i [ l i t I lf I i i i i j 1 l e t s 7! t 1 v..,. orsc as a s. st avo ve. i i [ AAI1kd185^ is alfM C } n \\ / 11 i l O W 6 g f 2 O .] l 4 2 4 f' e,....c..... ....o... I 1 J ) ..., s. a e Ae wav r f.DAGseeT o..... / y.. /........ a .u... < - E *%Ct44 RD& 17, _m u......., N .e 1 _ 5.oiew A-A sooni.e w.st i 1 g L
, -~ -, ~ 4 L d' ? l N 3 i. I..s....erh' f ..mm.-.
- 4. c.
l . f. /,'
- f'* -
O ~ ,.. s,,.. s 4 .m - + - rig,,,fl* g. Is6am sat #g = < def * =e,
- 'a
- L Ti['
]TTylT11r ,q,g,ggp, g ry. g p,, ,,,,,e-jg c a s o.* a = g2p. .g ete,.,..-j- . =..... .a.. c,, :,. g.y.-.-T - \\ Bb ] al A11a la _
- --- - - - - = = - -
- - - - - ---- = - - - - - - - - .. l.......f = =3 4 o l .1. l Ei '-M s. c4 l
- :n.., L.
....J.C......... f, g g,,g.. . I ::::::b. @. 's 2.__
- .=.u}
! _. _ _.. 1. ' ~' ~ l I -..ta. ..,v a.e i i alil1 tin.ul i ni 111,1,11,11 11. . i t i t. l... i. ..x,... r %e, ^ .... y ~- mma - ._ _ __=. m._ _t i-t _ _ _ _._. 1 J ?, 4i'* 31. g.: .'cs als l l 3.5 i v l 3 e e i N %J w 4 M L I I i 4 i i l t sa v., s.a.: re. w, e.m a i, L t. w \\ g j. / gll } v oama'--.e<==== t -<== *+-. ve. ..[............. te a 6 eta = m-*- ~"s'<'*** .=vsa Lavt. -w * ~_ ' i - - _i-; .. ~.......,.. JHt--A- ...a-c g !uma- %,%r - 1 p - 1, s...... a-a, s...... c.c -so........,.. A COOLING TOWER PUMP INTAKE ARRANGEMENT 1 FIGURE 1 ~ w g -g,.*
I, 4[ r .)1 - t
- y Ca E.CT R c. oC TC%L C.Q ev E a s, *.y cot.sce.s.T /5QttA.--- -
C:%Ow COUTQCA veu vC., m / - tW.>ousa s
- n.==_-._ \\ : l.b]
_"g i - ~ ~. _ covtisaL Q v.,, r a,%ven; a5c x - ,.p..g,__ p _A-/ 1, f 1 h.kT 4%z h__ [ \\. wpaw, w x.a
- 4..? ~tk NM h.m*.*. *
- b N.M.v,k.b,,~**M*.'h 7
.t : M**h D k*k ' **,1k ~i Mt.*SW"rY-1 ea t ... p m " +"r L"-* N +*~~ ~~~ +- F ~W t \\t
- + C,. ". - a -
,,. 1 D.. 4, g C.,c 5 kiack.N 1%.abek 4.O __ '.' - - -I u-u t 1*y'@ N$ % " - { h'f [l.4.,w+,M.! 'A'v.a. w t a f ' 2.C 4 .Mk k i.iN.' J.
- A M.I
\\ e, w .t. 1 @a JpA 1=aL 'I
- - kh i*%
D,.D '.* l W%;.NM; *3 g A"- t .ta 4 . \\ m&4%**r. l h5.E.c'}',_ l-f m -x s m.r o u u m u
- g N.A' f 4',im,NM
'i. MA;b
- * %y.wga; ;..:
a w-y " ;WW.= -gm
- *.MM u*,4MW.
+' ream.,. &S.,...4. %, ^p+%et* w.. m. hkb, -, y. g- ~' \\.e$ h W & T . '..W. V h. % N.J b N h a %.e6 d t ( N.d3. Y', y M. M....Ea.,a#, 5 h" 1 ". 2 . ) W.. '.,M'. "," ',,i.',.' ccy:a a,.sc t,.Tsc 4.cFS - r M,, Q'#. v". t, ". a cuv aa ,1 . i ,, g .m %YT.h.;. ~ .h$k_.., h,[" m e.,... .,u". .!.%. a. _ g m_, u t;1 p .,g.a-- i. u y o-.n o -.. g. O u..-g y y s y 3-.u .a g g,u u,y, n,;
- 4..,._
.u, y '.'g..,.i.I N ;%(. x 1.4 l.4', MdM,%L .> ;u, - 3 .- p <. 23 y- %.h. s <4... - s. L}
- 4. a 4...a, ',.4. i
L.
- a. ;.a.
h4.f.yL. ,,L i.a mj l.e .u.4 '.'a .1_. % A A'.u _ ' .;r __ C 5 .J' ' _ _ ' -' *-. L. ' L(, MMA _mJ C - - - k7 " Ak . ), A e. .:w %.i J i k. m (MT.Y",". S,.4. ',.'.".# - - =
- y g
,,t., ,. (. g ,..,..._. c.g... a j j 4,. h eL %.a 3., '... -.y .W s.cwac..tsc-uA. wA.. w.w 'L ' M A ?,... < =% q.4.. >- 4- % M?.x t w
- Q' h.. - "J.ma,q
.P L.J.%im.u. t., w t - 5 -- W .a U.QS+% %w.:a +. M. 4. a '4q., 4.74*% .o . NGWT EE Me@ ME A. e u,...,. m_ >.:.. . s. n - t. ~ gg; -i_. a u p _i .'.4.,.4. h g,, bhJ.* 4 1 .p7 5 b 7 ( .. L _h., _ .. r:.; 4 a::- i.-.- w s 3[x. [ic if, g n l
~ 7 { F' O F! o .\\ I: L i u ul I + t '4 m rl r' Fl@ e.a.v c-w w r hJa.? t,. 89m..faiQc 57%) y ' ~ q h ' il[ l. di c-saacoucce -_s4% C - wacuuv.cw aw vecur %vecur p 1d .331M 811EMM_D ' - ~ ' " * ' ' * ' - ' ~ .._...__.4r}gg gg\\\\\\gg g._ + F t Kik% ~ ~ I n,7 e 1 / /wT - -- ^~ ~ - : -_ _:_l ~~. . __ l -;f. U-m ai comes mo e c.,most. avo ~u w cuw.x. / -- ~we W 7_py: _9 7 ..1 i 1 N / ~ _ ~. = - ~ ,/_ y a. i)?' a: a r i i i s __ 7, 7 accc w c,oe:a ,r __.___,..y _. -- 4 ,i t,\\- r h h me Wh.ov o .+ 4 ( 4 __f[. " 'd
==g / y coucasra ~e.v i i pj... '. l / u?g - q.: 4 7g j b-l .,r .c g4 _ _.. .2 ,_r g _ u
- MULTICELL MECHANICAL DRAFT u2GM:I;'I'~dlifI _ _ _
C00LlHG TOWER ,p ~ -- ~ CQattt;cncu . FIGURE 2 W ad.v. % - Fm... G QM .--..-.n
. h: 1: s Nw ACCESS WALKV/AY i h / I =. l i / / r j f l STAIRWAY [ l l \\ 4 + h' t J j \\ a ) a i } \\ s \\\\ L l h.y N 4 i l 336" DI A FAN / \\ I / t-o-
- p
/ / A PL AN. VIEW -it 330.B' DIAMETER OUT TO OUTOF TOWER L m m a s m' w z e m k != M hym f ,m le = = _c r u = 4o, 3 Q,, r, C' c o. s a + t i r i gy .ex. I. f,'- a? Ff $5 t %v 7,: ' i 4 5 t. =, i E 5I rp. ( 7'rk. 3.. - k kc;rj [- b.s ~ "a 2 W .g fd^ I" ,iM _ xyf s ELEVATION e
I A'JT FAN DECK PRECAST OtSTRIBUTION DASIN 'g. PRECAST DISTRIBUTION FlufAE PRELAST LOU'/ERS .f f f .e sat tes I Y:E [ d ,,,..n. a n= g j I r gLggteg woggns Ni[=iiEi 'wL= PE***8ETE. F A*t0tta 0I Ik*g'[m'ak AO 1 8* i: , PSitait D 5fm 991C'e f tWC t' ' CE a#1LvCC __ paggAST F1hpg*3g f ~} W 't84L C*Tht?sN3 entgattyth n A .f.; 9 F nL[_tg 4 Q-g"'"" " ~ ) hg ., %h _ = =p} =.'=r .. m., ~...,~,..... m .[ Etw% Aloes i ' ssaA.%Drau oft c i cotow -m a a rtoa-* st'lt s fE'lUSE,rai sp.cs ? saa se KMDdT REMOVAL HATCH \\_- ^ =0%46 optmainst w&44 LivtL. I gm &? mw _ =, -. - - m \\ i i I cotourca sasue p,taggg,w roi ~ ~. - l i 3, g 3 Ic3r= c=qss2rencue k_ ^- A U 4 f - >aJ .x X/QA d, _1;' ' ~ - . C!RCULAR MECHAHfCAL DR AFT COOLING TOWER FIGURE 3 1 k
Reinforced-Verticalribs \\q\\ ) concrete shell [ i.- / i/ f i Diagonal Annular columns fiHorea\\ yof-wgfe, distribution basin 1* L.ouvers
- 6 Fill
.u: I 'g YYYkI d ! l b'"'" /\\ \\ { Cold-wafer co//ecting basin Cold-water return m NATURAL DRAFT COOLlHG TOWER FIGURE 4
e ? $h l b. Ejl Gh r 5 5 k~~n'ig I ? $t r e N tysm ?[iehV l}! l2/$ m(p[;/L n h 3 E E i b !l . :- q: g!' k[ 20 or V j 4p y2 en, \\- ( s 55 I -..k.... ;, k-Q,- e r w ' ou r> Uf a.h' ?t -sm 7 t d m 'y'-~..... 4, hI }gff, ylly,, m e 0 I? {$ j + 1,- y cg 2 ~ a iQ + e ~ Ildli.ai ! C ~, m sm, e = ~ll ~ 1 k 4 y=bf. ll, U i r !! il'l"ll = mi E' s w d ! e %' Le m Q ) g y' q' L 4 da'~L~i ShGy 'Q' s n $l Inl l 1 lj i.. u g -. al i f . lg$% l j f 't 1 l J II N! l O Nf v ng u $l r hE l n i i l r e i r 5 FIGUgg $
i ps i !I UJ 66 ,!j 7 li i E f J ;;- 0 i SI b=eW V fb $;l ', I / PA
- iY l i
@f W:; l l O L [ \\ u i 0 l j' F i !U O 10 ' b :g' I
- J g
I 8a 1 2 E l i; j l 0 0 i z p umn:c.3 -L ? U l j 'i i' O I' 5 J
- s D
B I
- i i
- x 1 '
- t 4
/ I:
- s.,
0 2 i - l d 0 J. j i [ I
- f i
I U j yj h g 0 y j >..s-of lt uO i f 0 h gu #g ge I R} 10 0 e I Fu d 0F 0 g; ) 3 gM O m by [ O u eh !/i 58 dg m g0 .I F z o L Y 0 0 0 } O H u U b.. O LO n %u Og I J i, 4; g I W h h O i n e h 04 Zgj i e d. e gj gL I i.9 Ub Y Z kh I,I zu J>0 -0 b Ug fj I o L SPRAY DEVICE FIGURE o L-
6 i i i. a,. 1 e. i APPENDIX A ARRANG1! MENT DRAWINGS , L.. 't l-t L. '{.' L b c GILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC.
7 a.k n h s y g, P + l s y. 4+ b 6 I e b. s I TT N-(;- M,%~ m L~ g *hes. 3. _a rai$,% _ _..M..! " ", _ -- =:_%_ ,c
- 1.L'k '
L.__ ...a.a,_ ~ 9 ' 'q;,-. 3 g.~,^ 4 ~ ^ - 4 -r i., j / /
- n;
.s / (' /- ~_ y s @"" q r pv n i t; , [ r .t m~ Ca **A. ~. _ .. ~...... err:1 -w -~ ~ u -o --/- N a i ~ -.. ww ec.a cm,m j l y g- = /, CA*b wmTDE ubW. D'- v %aa s w y'.w-J mj. aw w ,ue ."p '"**W s s~e,cu m a t:(, 7 ~ -* % ~ - = 2 - 2.ww.: %:,e. %st '- J'... _ et, s, ,,,.,,,/ M"fy R S ECT*ON 6-6 Jf f ** 0 em
- ,a m a-I st-cyou I
~ sce= =#3 v_ev e' @ MAN - I h '- - mm:..~ t em%.e / wm...w -e p \\-
- r# g m q.u nv saio" -
y .h-A --g g.~,- a ~~.# y w SMTh O'D[ $.li [by,U-!
- d. *j
%2 v.esr - www r zo .O . ~i.. 5<>:. I r e s-
p o .I W S o Ie e n e* m* *L a.- >.w. x-va~_%... _. _ _ _ _ .- 4 4* I l. d' e ,, -. -. - ~. - 1 ~ sNAm$.wi , a. - ,_ ~ y3 P m.im.ee T*4^% l Cf"a.% 7.mr :s"Jwtg+-e_-2
- ~. 4 -
-Mr.":t,tc ~,7 - =-- A t _._ _ ____m ru: v. ." r,., _m m~- =. _,, { i g-9 o.w = aw U-h,, % ~ w up._. a : -~ =-- =,=.>-> r. j _ - ~~%. ___ _._.;.;; k---, 3..m _. _., " - .. mF ~ >L,- a . A' <..,e., s 3 +-* h _. =s u nrAu. h]
- m-g
..I h I j 'l -G f '4 t h. l %-p e ,kh j-bi'l -.[. I, m__ 4 o r lp'Z Lg
- v....
j. (,'2 ~- I._. _.. 9; !k_d =>
- a. A, s,.,/ gp! '
- N., y, (9 f.)4+:..-._:.
1 f. s y x. . _ - _ _J ) s .- d W==: 5 di
- (
- "...~
' W.- ).. ~ &.-n lfjl? b_}~&m.- I; E p i D *., 3 5., V me R..~rk n i x, s-et .,_ I:.1 t h-saurean. ImeTheL%* ' STEWh A .=g W'2.':'"~ "J "~", $5 Y - ? ~ %j f. 3 'C.2 gj# :- [ \\. gg,,,,- LE = -=--
- c. ~_.m_.v.,.
- ',,: x.... '
=
s. mo ...e v. ,, 3,
- o. %.
s. u... .zo. 4 3 1 3 s s
- ' * ~ =
4 ww m . w_, /- {_ -i.-=
- -=="-~s
-ee c =_.,.c~...%.. .,m -== l ** DNT EbT1r
- "Wh 6Lt.
v..n . -w u.a ,a .a
- L OT PL he4 Cae ung_,.
.;I j......g' 3-e t av.% eg g no _.,_.e o..... .,_ _ a,g, 9 a-i g-car-3.. l r n,. _ 4 1 ~. .,e.. \\ e -c -. s g, -6 3 - &_--+- c,,.,,, ,L,e -. s__ e. 8%M ATte44
- u-
".} ..p w,w.. e.c-~~4.. e...., t} 7 '*~ ee. %. w ARRANGEMENT. CLOSED CIRCulT COOLlHG MULTICELL MECHANICAL DRAFTi ' COOLING TOWERS FIGURE A-1 L .~
/ ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ -t g, ver. r ~ - - ~ - ~ - _ ~ ~ _ g, _,,j :j-/m.% _ _ e sey _-..-._:=,, 959,.;3'& m m a m m. ^ }.' _3.,yf }y;,___._ _:: -===~== =_.=:= - - -=yq __ y gg=. Qs. p; -. _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ ' - ~ r r. ;, - =:=__- - ~ ~ ~ ~.:)
____,3-O,*---
I \\ \\ i \\ /# h /
- w t
s+ Mc s z' c.. ./ dE='I < V.. =, 4"y,Jn 2 7 "* ' ws,e cree =w. wee c ' w c., s. =ce,- ve r s e / y /.,,.. ,%^ 7w / uw er o- &.:.ev e ( w'.r.--=e~e ow a w_ E 4 / r c-~~. g ,3 ?Tri=.yiss '.3 2> x * ^ "'.' a g.--e=a t- ~7--pi, - .r .. = - -
- ,_s x
- e c.,3.m s j# tce**a3 NW~**** s =_e .zo -37.g m,. w s.,, F 4'- ~ _on .N s - :< w e: ec $3E-C T 1_@ I L oos % wiew - wAm mmAJmJr c-e- =e a.m% WATP E LkNT%. M&w *^ F / wa 18E J-p 't. .. /., 'y~ Ny. s % T W""i. i-- C w
- * -y[
c,cp m c.3 0 u:a e e si +- (*.,' FAN % %Ps E-D' i+C A. It-t1 ' I.O t
e -._, 3 f-6 \\ I O 1 ?! S' 6 ( n' a b x.< u. % r... m -. ~ -
- 2-to~..c ceo. _
_ _. -._ _ I L _ - i 4 s 1 3 , ew,,. c., l e' v o w -e w= ~~ _ _ = ~. - .m.. m.,_,,, '2 - G % ' cs,- 2-C 8'w.P W t,ue / C s a_%1 .*-_w,m.. se _~ x _m.m. s ' * ~ * * ' " * ' L-J_+ w g;;-.;;;;;,; m,Q N u..ge.,- m.._.7 g h, _E>a~ ra 'b=IvrT~.~5t :; - r;;.. 'Gcg(~0 ~ Z- = 1 -G 7: :.. ;; - ______W f _A _.s t A_ ~-
- m. m,
p [f, 3.; n.,37 _Q. _u..Ap .., a,. y ~-+-s* -
- 4
_< _ _ y _ - - p -.~. m.,m y; -- - ,a, r 7,.g.:._ --,_. g : w J t t -\\ e t 4b.i;y l -' ,723_ _ _ _
n.....
- Ld' "a"[
,.* 3 A :s d a ( !h (i p 7 1 -T;. c'1f -[,q =,e r-y i Vm_ _'7.aH! 2 * ---- p_j p p ;==- Q:_-;_---.2 .L y, y t - ph p [m. i = > y{ [I ip
- a. t.
f. y/m g ~s,2.: m _- a N.,,X. L Sp a = li 1 \\"~" I Q L;# T.d I JUb'a._ Ir .. N '1 h \\ ... 2) 1 9.% -. _o,.s 4: f l '{+{ L f / )p _vne=~L= h h "" k W " ^~. $ -.i f 0. - I, $ m .. JJ 7m 2. 7_~- b ? r -*.2 ski a e '^~*'*c'" Oo / f~s -) V i-7 vawho {. ~ = A -, f' YY8IFA, ; n.,~, k _ _._ L, 1G7ff,x% ,., '-.I_a , PP,,, >. ~. e n g --- -= ZWW.i ' m% e 5-" /
- F >**G=7 s~es M
ce.,. c. e,V, a' 's s c.:, e. m.~ v.,ec~_ s-m a- -,-e p c-oca .o w m v. c m -e x _v__g. _., [ O,. O x y. \\ fQ a :.y / i 1 I / ) , m.c. m e -~, l 2-ec C h ' O<.c . 1-Ctb j / ./ b, ~,.n-> n n~.. P e PgAN _2 r1:-'T*~ 72*' N.*.W~-- , = -. em e o .o
- n."W Da '*O,,._/
- st 1.t%6 Ti
- I.-~~g n.
t' _ -.. s. I-. r .l .t 3 %2 *~ . ~ 3 c... A ' m .) i*13 3 w.u ^ ,ess.- n _m m.e-a-g-- ARRANCEMENT 'LOSED CIRCUlT COOLING i C IULAR MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLING TOWERS s:lGU R E A-.4
m -s c. 4 s n y d v j_ -4 2 3 T T ._.e. ' ~ ~ * - - ~ - 7 y yy ~. - - _..N.*JM. _. - N- ~ t ,-f f ~ - - ~ 4 t. a F-
- 4..
4 5 o#*" 4 {.. 4 les T*.mb C Ap A6 ..p I s - w%n-o.e n %v.a. w av e st Laws / f,v,=,c,g eu,,3 .. - y. x n e.- . /. es.e=. n.s s ow - .,g - [ e6ev. een'.o. / -]\\. s g- - gepp w#+-, ry.%h c w neve we.w tw F' CA WATef. me,e% L f, s gggw 9 De ... _} - [*Y ".t. ,,~ g-nerw o -~ ~ - . too wi*es - _ NcmTMwe er
- -}
O L '. # *' i ~ rw w= v seenw too.% ~c=w va - . Osp e e A* Ase . WATy 4 LD%%b. ,, pagg.aqqose .s .e seen t w .~ ~.m .(- docacen we TT 39CTICM I: ..-- S.& CT ION 0-0 ' 08 ""** ""E F. s t 2" (% "T ?, J s. s .? ? ?: T. E I
-N o .O o
- 1 e
8 j Ir a WLav**
- L@."**FW. **.'. "2._oo
- o9_ _ _
._J l 4 8 E F e ~... -, I wee .. _c+ . _ _. ~ w.- 2 - 4'rk.- Ne .J C OOb**E fCh't F. P L **A_ s C# c..Z. ~ ~p %,[ g 3 9 34g m- - _ ' ] [ { _$,,_]4,g [4 " ~ -. _ r' / m s c .=~.m'._d;C LW wQM j p.... 1 / cm-.m m e.. _ ,,,,,,s .,.3 a ~ m..-u h..,1 aAa ] .T., . /,.e,3w ame, 4;gi 3 39.Jy . u.Ja3G u ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ u,. l f' / 'l ,f JJJA,P.A - '*****S g y,,g. g,, I w-e ..k_ J ' I "*'-- __L~ A' i V FnounAC+- l ..pt.. \\ g, ' ' ~~v=A j M &,, K. f,f= es Im h " '! " / rm" f " . *xeus..w.- -. l~
- r n
g% t, e..+ 4 e s \\ -l g-i f bu =slmzgj j '4 - s a .@.., ( P. C L [, l i s a s 3
- f. se,
- -- y.. i J l; 1 -- - fa;... p w g; ",myy_fe,~} X-w g i r.x y tooTAAtr STetur; M w h y Oh -di 8 )&^ C Y .[ f)# f u..s ("N,;z,Iy-.,. g.r.-y=. u - ~ ~ _3 _, ~ ~ - h% h o v%rh&TW pto* DTewCT Y,x par,,,p m %.h a.P
- t.A.P.
.= 's M.s o u \\;... w J L.L1J. 2.wstsens pa A*T C DCCwt blNyt a t
- e ak 6 s
_,,h_s
= _ % +
-.e.._ )- \\. ' f. . SGCTeones p - so~'*o u ca m
- t=.a wATam teveb ao o
W m ~e n, t, . _ - :...I2,,. ' 2 to en ee.nu DC A.t @ ter l
- AtNS.,t(t ey mgp s mov. *s-o*
a ar, .r. ~ ; ,,- r ARRANGEMENT CLOSED CIRCUlT COOLlHG NATURAL DRAFT. C00LlHG TOWERS -l FIGURE A-3
r - T .-j ~ -- - _. ~ ',.w ..--7., T,,, s. -% e ;( ...uw ,,-+w
- .~-**V
~;. .s > :-l**-- -- emw w+m w w ~--E m.w = w. t I _'J I -/ -3 s -W - -^S.'O 3 s fu..,.- --'. f 3, F.-, -" e l ,r p/ ,/. //. /- -/g 43f 'pr -'/, ,,'/ \\ s *p * ' ',/ .- : p-s , /-'/ AP' .-. /._. q.),< -co / q; c ; - g- - T v p ~ -j W k /^^ y. / / ~ 'f ^. g'l*' '1::,vai 'W t.? - W ' ' - s/ s/ ' 's, ; %g.~L - t - A.- /- y Y y}~ _ /~,1g f-- /-, ,--p/'~ - - -lp"f- ,4; ~--we f,sy'^'....-/,s/ p/ -= C = =4 A - f ,-Q5&$#W' s+.? -R ,f..=. y/,/ './ .n....~
- n. - s.
..i<~su
- v*
- e t vv
,e. 11 '. ,,,., = c.r. o. e t- %.t. _;. eme et-e-y 9
==~=~ c.. _ w. . 1 -t- . a *. ce 7: F. - r.w d ,P p e ',3 3 b p g' * # i ____ "Mk Sci " * "- / ~ e . _. -- 1 m.. -- m.x c - r -a n y -._,...m- - -. = - - e
- .g u,
,,y... m ..~oem ..,o. a n ~_ -s, c=. ( . c.c 2 % :evx J -.v -. n t w x s v,
- t =e e s.t._
j '* s'; w 9< T o* 3 - e t.e.w.c e ci s _,4 ( ~N, ' s a g r N. arp, e. n +s o s% g ~ 3 N to il r <.C c.riO*-4.C C) u xs.% M st g 4
fn_ Ne y g O -I .O o o. g-8 g f, a 4e. d a ..: ~.t..e -t X-sa.'~= 1.32-so~_ oomo .4 f .._~i 4 e 1 V b. . Man h e m,_,.o~ vm >AeAt I,2 w 2 w _..J_: n -- -- e,,c_s e w-._ y s.m.y c../. p - -- j j s-cc-.m --e r ~..r m a. em a,._ - r
- ,,q,=,,
if d 3 T~.__ _ _-..~~- m m __ _ c l1 2 4.. j:3,,agte, j----- ,.m ..., m.w.,&~;;; p .s x,
- n. v.,.
1..~ n
- ~
.^ t- s Q (j lr.5 ~ ?]NSIl-.h- ~ _
- g. 3 y,,
s - - - ~ ~ - ~. -a.,~~ ' f 1f [ .=3 r 5.=%c c m. - /, d {L^&T" A, 4 w.,[< T e.>' ._t6A' A ) \\, a n ~p---==__ y ,;.-..-.- p ~- 3 ., i., p I 'ij '=== o ..a .r ... i t,p'j !, ! *% m._ .( t b 'l lh==.2=# g " iQ '"^h_,,.wjiy O h w]- i O i_. _ t I 4 a_e --s 1 Y l "'1.,,., A-3, l g, m o-o-ooc. e p ,,_ a.w a-a .,.P %l Sj b.. .k b ~ .N. m mc-g.1 e -J.2..,c y o-m. fx _ : m_ w._ i u.- s ooc m ,,y, =y7f %~p s. /.' A'0's, ,M '
- s..N
-v w.~.,,-~ L,..,,_,,,, i-o u e,- #. w g -~ e ow-c =.. = -o -w. y,,,,,,,,,, _.y- / 1 e,c.,+. // .l- ..E S.O. =O=..----.2 -. ~a u. ^ 200 800 630 t i %glp '. . O,s*b r Avaewe O 20 40 60 r - W A* tit 19 wH., s.cr.o.ab- := - . <. v..co, - ~.
- L.-., 4, -
M. ' " -, ~.... -
- 2-
'Eas t 3 *Qf c re matsene n . gpg g.%gg'. cmax.s wa- ~ -. n .ss Y ARRANGEMENT CLOSED CIRCulT COOLlHG g FAN ASSISTED NATURAL DRAFT COOLlHG TOWE~ts - FIGURE A-4 ,1 .(
l ~ s g m. p ? M M OBR %%bO94 p._- ,e g/ **4Mee -4,s*8& n.... m ' M 3 F '" <r-M g
- m W 4:'
M H H p.g ( a **** ww '>2 2 2 w- ... g. , Y### ~ " ' F B r B r 1 E 8 l-wanas.6 est 4 - I 1- ,... w...... m g / w+uum < - c ; u.4 ++ s+ ~., a-,#y,q y t.--.--_,. +4& n 'A -gg'w;n-;, +.+e gf-- u,w _~ t.. ... _, ~ g ar-f ~ -. l.. y /,, ; ca NA ~ h 0 y p/
- l., W,>
7
- g
'N """ N /0 { st ' ' ' ' '. T i , j. 4. g 3 - lh - vj, Lse ngag.no .,as -.E e so.usue w
- ~ ~El '
5 , * ~ Mantoww.a'oetoeg w,4 ps.. c c JI wm .b a Q --m . 48 Sf1I124. A-A. [$ w
N o.! o O 8 6 d 5 I s, ____e,-..,.,se _.. -m, s. =v o .eo-oo,. In 1, b' o* I A i >Y ...,a -A l w_~.~-*._~~.,.*ci W ~ ~ - q_- ~, c,_ i ,,-e ~ s, a. - at e ca. J 5 es a v 22e^ l , u.. c om t _ --i_ py~~_. l uioo G'---~~,~,,..,,.-- 7- ~= m.m,,O * ' * -' ' n +. i + m,., a,, ; y:. _-- - ~'_~T ~ ~. --~.,~s 2 - ~ ~ ~ - - - ' - - - - - - - -, g r g;_., <,,...g..._]- g . o..c.
- p. mj_
_ 19. p,-___ __ y.a z. _.7.___ _ -_q p t, 3 4 y + ,a I !- (/ '.;y; / s , 5 r; s i - Sq 1 a 4:q _. %J ( ( 'j n. _..;;d-4' g.cm i _\\ , r -r -LC ~ns i m p g- \\ .f, ] ;d g t*
- i 4 "?
i _ kN)h -h, ]I .r. '. y,.g, i a -,. >^'[,_ g[. ...-..-_-w g: .+== = =.2f~- yg- '. ,,.fif_i g, _~j
- h w - - --
l /-p- ~ o% =c y, / .\\..W~. s4 b i w ms. k y,p y /_jgg i ,"jYf. g9-7 N (L s j
c
-~o... i n y-r 3 .G7'" a m....c.. / d< i -==~ r. -T <3 s/ s .h% 1 w. l / L.- 4 l-ly-7 i 4 i _._.__-._.._...= / mm m .......,..,_,e__,--.., o ~ 'A-- ._ t
- E:me ma*=='l~ N--$
m,.o s ~J ' ~ - -. l 4 A l l l f* g*= = c.. - w, t [~ ~~ ^ L._ - -- - -u, e + ~ r;.., { u A' ^\\1-m. '.v ,c.u lg - - r ,f ' ' J,. q~ ,- ; f.. -- s.., .x i S C T'GtLS E ARRANGEMENT t OPEN CIRCulT COOLING SPRAY DEVICES FIGURE A-5
s y.. P' Y c l I APPENDIX B F l FIDW DIAGRAMS r I L_ i i u :. 1 4 %.a CILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC. '^ r
1 ~ TF AS i LR R L D C E W C '7 I LO TAT L C UI G MN N AI U c. L R H o { _. 7_. _. y Oco FMC } 6 I [ . = _ _ } r i ~ j2 2 s oho J.$ S I DM l R T E / V L R S U P E As Ti C r W M I T i U DR O A T "G E R +9 I P V E R 'S L O D S Au G E o - U t 9 N S N T r 2 C ~ tt S SE T D 7 R oO INO T N' oO N a E V cB L UC U C g y A I f r D O _3 'G .f \\ 2 /, O- =. E' RA G L AN HA C C S I D f cg,L
2-G' o tA. CU LVE RT S %_y ' W ((G?:.= ". wm-==-& "p DISCH ARGE 'll C, ANAL /.;[ . ] J ~ ~ l '. l =. : a,<,- .c,=_=,s
- J COO L I N G TOWCR 4
-e BOOSTER PUMPS 'l 2 3 7 3 h M AT U R AL DRAFT 3 COOLIMG TOWER r-)(-) O .J al i UNIT 'h u[s / 3 7 CONDENSCR \\ / 2 I I E - 5' G' DI A. l CULYCRTS I _,l"i t>\\> .ll ~~. l.. Y z'; l' '\\ a q.l ? L. '-- T A', f/// ClRCULAR O @/ M E CH ANICAL DRAFT [. ' [ ? O l COOLING TOWER O g 22o ca (O 2 g i ep p.=y,g'=[d ,/ Ftow Di AcRAm 3 3 M4AE UP - - *- ggggt TWO NATUR AL DRAFT b ~~?TE 2-9'DIA. CULVERTS U M" TWO CIRCULAR [ MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLlHG TOWERS m
1 l1! TR FE D D A W E E R O T S T STR S DT m I FE S SI L G x SAW SA N a A RO ARI c DT UL A NTO i N AAO D ALG F AN FNC RI w E L E U O o RTAO t H F TNC N i I fi 1 f\\ 3 / ~ \\ i I i n 'A' I e A D 'B -{ M' "1$ ' t ,r D IA IA d D M D c r C 3 ( s 3 I l M l S T k7<O z oO3og A R S I S L R D T A Cv P R N t E M l' C A u Wu C j v oP '5 l c C w i A. T uR 2C N R E GE S R D NT N u 's S T IL 3E c S o o D o o T a 2 T (- R ^ CB I N f \\ E NO V UC lu ) =\\ c r } A b r ( y - r = t ) o i_ r s 's g f p / a E G TE R L K AL A A HA N T C N S N A I A I C DC p u Ex AM + g: L
1 0 y e! 30 b d 0 g O $0 w O 7 2 g; 2 eU o ud O J U2 L OW 20 D ~ w g L J m.- 6c: o$" j j pJ> /c f / 2Db =2* I2g u. l, r u..n f li. u s o a I 3l .w P -i {i 19 f 55 llg, 1I lj l;ll R l 'Oi i-a Z 0 w 0 '[ ~ 1 N0 I l / 4 hl ?: b1 f I h' f.- 2 V m e ( a g
- i f W
il I I Iq#h: i h .f (' I I ( ,l I j!yl ~ 1 l., Wr O t a i c i i aI f i = 6 I \\ ;t %I I); N 1m a Y g i i FIGURE B-4 )
A P APPENDIX C PERFORMANCE CURVES CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC. v- = =
PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLING TOWER I' 105 g i t 1 f i s. I i. . i i ! ! I I j 6 ! I i i,, i !i i 1 ! i 1 , r,4 ,4 i i! *
- I r..
f l t f f i 6 i 3 i i I 8 i i i , i ,,, 4 i ? i i t
- . I
! i. I f t i i i i !.i !.i' i i i i i ! i i i . ! i a i I I i !i!! l i i i i i i i i , i i ,E i i t I a e e i t [ l j 21
- F R ANGE i j
= 3 1 i i i sei i ! i i i i i 3 i i i i jri i i 6 4 6.. 4 I Q 95 ,,,f,,, j 17' i,,, a I if i #1 !i !iii i uJ 3. #'I [~ii! . i i i ! i ! ' n-i iii 13' 4 i ' i ' ' 2 ii#
- if i i,
f i r if i. It ! /. ,it i 4. i. i !# i it #ii. / i i + i ! E I i i i
- t i i t #
1 ! l I ! 1 ! t iil !/y f i i t ! F i i i I# i i !. ' i i # 1 s i ' ' ' ' ' ' ',[ < 90 ) f I l l a f f f I / ! t ? f f
- I IIM
!I i f i l A# I I f f 8 ? 8 g a _J sf f3 # 1 i i i !i i e ' O
- I
/r i a f . I i i l U t 1 / I i 6 e i i i i i I i i 6. 1 1 / l. i t i. i IJ i# l f l l { { t i ! i
- 1 d'a i
I i i 1
- I r ! l I !
i I a 85 .' > I ? ! #-'I f f./ t I f I f I f f i !. i t, I [ ! I J"# i i iii i e i ! 6,, i I i'I I i i 3 i 2#* i t i t ? i r i 2# ' 1 t i t ! 1 i i ' i i i >F! l 8 ! i 3 i ! i3 i t 80 '# ! _i i I ! i a i ! i i !! I i ! ' 3 i + a 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 WET BULB TEMPERATURE (*F) DE$lCN: 682,000 GPM HWT 108* F, CWT 91* F, WET BULB 79* F FIGURE C-1
PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLING TOWER 6500 ii 5 21* F RANGk + i i i i. A. i. i i I ! !l! i i !I i !
- # i !
1i i i 4 4 .. if i i 6 1 + i i t i i t i i i
- 1 i!,
I t i i i i 6M .. f. x.
- i.
. i i i i ! i i !. t i i f i.. ! i i i .i I t i i i i i i i ! i ii6, i i i, i - i I i r I t ' 6 i i ! ! i. i . ! i i i ! ii i !i i i i, e I I i i !( l 1 i i i I 25500 t a i i !i! o i i,. i i ii ei, ii;
- - 17
- i !4 i i m
i 4 .. i 1 uJ j. 4
- i e
, i i i i i, 4 ym I 1 r i I t ..u f ? ? !. ! i F f ' 8 . i i i, ! i i i ,. ! i i ti. i . i g N I . i I. t e i i i i i uJ e i ! [ j i
- i j 4 i i i
,. i, E5000 p. i, i i. r i., i., g ii ! i V'ie i t j. i i . i .j. i 2 r i. i i l l l 'l i i i r g 1 4, . i i i ..i o a. i ! ! i ! i ., e i!i , i 4 'l ! I l ! ! ! i I ' ! i $4500 i i ' ', i t i, i 1 i i !i i i i 1 ! i i i i i ii r, i . i I i i i t i r. 6 i i* t f i I I i i i I i i i i ?
- t i ;
4 i i i.. ., i i ' i i i i !. i 13*i, i i i ! ! t i ? i ! i i# i I r i i i ..i e, i i i ! i ! i! i . i i i i i i if. I i i I i i i. j t i! i i .e i i 1.. i i i ! ! I L 888 8 f i ! I l. ! ? I i LC 1 i ? ! t ? ! t i t ! i i i if I t i i '. i p, i i e i,. f, i i f 8 i* I } i I ' I ! ! ! ! l I i i i t f I '. i. I ! 8 1 i, i i ! i t i !. 4 i e i 4 i 3500 65 70 75 80 85 90 WET BULB TEMPERATURE - (* F) DE51GN: 682,000 GPM HWT 108' F, CWT 91* F, WET BULB 79'F FIGURE C-lo
PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR NATURAL DRAFT COOLING TOWER 110 4.. } }.j..__._] ~~ l I ~h I l ~~ ~ ~~ _..-H - i 100 r _I. 1 _4 . 1__4 .._1 i .. _;_._.._. 4.J i ..M, .{_ _k_. l j 25% RH _t. ..}. i __._p {__ i. i /,,e, 1, T{T' p-i .C 90 ~ -b' i "t' / i j 50% RH i ' i i - ' ~ I' '~7 'a_7' 5% RH I i 1 i .I i In ~ 1___4 1 /t i /! E iu i
- f.i y iff 100% RH
--~"- E I I A // t i,I I i !,i X, a i if ze i ii, 4 -.fe, 1 l l I i i, c i i z! 7r7y,;;., d 80 t.! i f i ,..1-, I ! ' i 3 i h fI/ g I I I l I I I !I ' I l i i f i ^ t i i i i / t i , i 1; 1 t i i i t 4
- 1 g# #
- ! i ii i it i
! t i O
- 1
'I i i! i i!i i ' I * /J ; / .1! a ! i. ! i O / l! l l !'.i' 70 ge .e, e i 4.i i M!/ / i i r i ! . t ! i i i ! ! 4. t I #1 if f .1 if 6 ! ' I!1 i
- I
/ / / !I i 1 I i ! I i ! t i ! i f.f f i i ii i + i / ;/// 1 i 4 - 4 i .[ //;F 3 i i Q 3 . 1 i I / / / 3 i 5 r . i e 29 4 i i 1. ! i '7"' 60 /// f i i f ! ! 8 ! t t t i i e i t
- _M
- [
I k f ! iI I !iI I 8 i! f f i l i ! I i Ibl [ ll l l ll i !i i i . i 1 i 4 , i i [// 'I ! i! ! i i! I t 8 7 ~i i r tI ' i i l - !. i ! ii iii i i! ! i ! ! I i li! !. I i I !' !I I i! ! ! !I ! i I 'i 1 i ! ! i i ri .! i i ! ! $0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 WET BULB TEMPERATURE (*F) DESIGN: 341,000 GPM HWT 108' F, CWT 91
- F, WET BULB 79
- F/50% RH r
i FIGURE C-2
PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR HATURAL DRAFT COOLlHG TOWERS 4-t H - b' + + W-+--- t t t4-6-F 4 +t-i--- t1 4-TtM' ttt+- t tt ti i j - m ~4 - +4d-M-9" 44 1 1 j t b{- ffi- 'lli iy f -} T- ' lY- +P--di? - t 4*' t t + h, t-n -i i fl ] } { {- I j t 4 t t-t Me e r 1-T+m + 8 4 i I -t i ' . tt -t-t t g,, g . _i_'. 5500 -4 .a -4 g_r_. . I. ;' M. *,- } ._.y p._._ 4 9 ,7 p -_{_- .4.._ .. _._4 i j ;g. ._..._.+...._. L,.; j ; p9 47_. g 7 ._4 4 ' $ ',_.4 ; - p 4p_- 4.._...e b - F ;i
- ; g;ja
.2 i
- ,y T-ti
.i;r i i - t-- < + -- t-- 4., Mj; .i i i&- 5000 i i i f., ii j ii
- 4\\
.ii i.. ni t ! i 1 i lI ! J_ W' ' J._4l!!
- +t
! {.# n. ' ' ai__ il3 ! ii i!' !L I ' ? i _y_ i i 1 .t i i. i e, ,.f.,! /, i, ' ? I i i i/ ! i 7 T1 i ! 14, i ! !i i. n, > + t / i i i i ,i gi! L: /! T, i! ! f f I : ! i I. l, i ! t 4500 i / ' '
- i' i
! I i 'I ~ i l '. i i i ii I t i / i! / r i i t...A ! i :. si ' i t.# i r . i 1/ i if !ii i ! y! 1 !, ! t 6. /! /t II i - i #; i. t i 3# 6 . i 8 1 2 / 8'e riI / y' i i r. i iD2 i Q- /I e / i iiii i i7. i. !i , i O ! 'I i / i/ ! i i1 i # i t i ~_ i _ 4_1 e. I 1 'I I' i/ ri! 3 i 4. ii I t /! /t ! ['f, i i . i i ! i i z o a i /i /! ! i / ! i i,! i , i i i i. i ! P 4000 ~ I' / 'i I' i i i
- - i ~
i ' 4 i i. i ! *+ i !- /1
- /. !
/r i.r . ! # t . i.. . i I i.. E ! ?[ I i i /t ! I j ii/ j[ ] i If i i { j i. i i. i i .( i j ii O g /: /;, i ; , j ; k. !i!. I i.f iii if; i i j i i ii / r II/ i i,I f 1 i i i i !
- i i i i
.i l ! i i 11 .6/ .. - 1 . i. ii.. i i i,. I, 1 3w /ii! I I i./ . i f.. i ,, ii ' i I /i i t/ i / i;. i j i I i ii l . i ! ;/ 6 / !/ t ! . i! ! i _.f_ ' i Ai /,i ! i i i ! i 16i 6 , i ' i ( 3500 ' i _/1 1 / i i i !/ i i i i 4. / /i. , / i i ii i i i i i
- i
! i / I! [i i 6 6 i . i 'I i i i i i i I s / / i i i i / i if i fit. /> j !!/ isc ii i 3000 I i i r ei i i e i,, i i, e, i. ,iit i i ! i i.! !! i i! i i i, i i, i I.l. 6 ! i i! i i ! i i i ! ii i i i
- . i I i
, i, i 3 i i i ii. 4 j i i,. , i. ! l I ! I 4 l I 5 ! l ! i t f ! -I I I l I! . l I I i 6.! l !. i 6 l }, j } i i i, I i I ! ! i e i i ii i 4 ,i
- jii,
. i e ' i ii I ! ! e i i i. ! i i !.i e ii ii, . i i ! i i, i ' 2500 30 40 50 60 70 80 N WET BULB TEMPERATURE (*F) l DESIGN: 341,000 GP'M l HWT 108*F CWT 91* F, WET BULB 79' F/50% RH FIGURE C-2a
s PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR FAN AS$1STED NATURAL DRAFT COOLING TOWER e 110 I ? t i ' i i ! I l i I t i! !i 6 I i i i i !. i! l! I ii !I a ! i 6 i I i i 6 i t i i i
- i '
i i i. . E i i i i 6. i . i i e . t i r i e e i 8 8 i t l t f f I. I i i 6 t i i ... i 6. -. i i i i i i 22* F RANGE Z i ! I ! i . ' '1 i i i I ii 1 i' ', . r i 100 i ! f. ~ 17 4 . i i i i ! i, ,, !r. !i ,, i i.. i ! i ! i i . i i ! # 1/ 3 / 12, i ii i i l t ! t. i, i ! t # i fr 'If 1 l i i i . 4 ./ i :/Jfi I i !i6 l. { i i i i i i /. /, ifi.i ' I ! s'"! ! / I I 3 I i Af ? 8 i e i i i i W 6 t t t i i# l ! # i#i i 5 90 t i + ! t i
- t I if i !
f.!i E i
- i
. +
- ' !i#'i'I ii i
. sr! 1 ! fr i? t ' ' i 6 i i e t 6 i i i e K ! I fI i i ! t 66! ! t f, j i i f f w i 3 it i i , f !, f i,if,i! .i i i .. i n.
- i. !
i f,i if i !.f i i ; , i I i e i !f I i ! i i i i f 1 i if,ii fii , s W i - i i
- _fi,
!.f i .f.,,, ' ' i i , i i, >i-, !. v.iii p.i ,if i.! ! t E i ' i 4 i f l I /". t ff {
- i i
.e I ' i i ! if i t 4 ! e i . ! iI t i e ! I ' ' I iM t ! i i fi e P 'I . < 80 i r /! i iii .,, i i, 3 ii? Iii ! 7 i ! i i s i i i i ei. .. r .. W a i 7 i ii i#- f f . e i,,. .i i i ! i i .a
- i,
. ti e i i o i iz i /i u i
- i 4 i i
f, ,i 4 4, i i 4 i I - I 1 / 8 i i ! l t ! ! ! l ! ! I ! l 6i,! ! i ! I 6 i I i i ! l# 1 i e i i i i i i i ! a i i,. se i i i 4 i i 7o />6 i i J i i ! i ! t t J t l I , i i t t i i l { e i' i i i i i. i i ! i i i i i i t I t. ! ? I i t e i i ! I i i i 4 i. l i i i i . ! 6 i . t i j i i , i, i i i i i i i r 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 WET BULB TEMPERATURE (*F) DESIGN: 682,000 GPM HWT 110* F, CWT 93* F, WET BULB 79' F FIGURE C-3
-I PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR FAN ASSISTED NATURAL DRAFT COOLlHG TOWER 12 -{. 4.i t t.4 <: 25% R.'H'. 4 4.gt.. & 4_r.+i. ; + t, +t...-4 + t. 4 t.i.F...__4. +4. t. p. A4-p 4 4 t4 4-t 49,.4..if4,4 t + ..._44-...d -+. +.iff1.... _ + _. _ ._4 h -f-f. e -4 1 - - f 5 4-+ - +d _ 4 4 $ ie + { [ l ;g-j 4 f.f f _4 - j. &- j.. p 4, L j t i-t t -- 4 4 - j_-4-f -7+97.[ t i..-l.+_j 4 , 7 3 h. 4 + ++ tf i j :.. + tt 4f .j Jp.+ .4 4 p;a 4 4_;_p_4*j p_j_qj pp g+i1j y. f.;4 p..j.i, a.. . 7_f 4,, p4g .-f p.
- } r +- *4 1' **+
+- t - i -4 rv- + + + +- t 6 .t--g' f.- j_4-+ 7 y q ' t-1,p- +1_-944. 4_4 49jp.-._{ 7 9 { -- t 7 7 +- 7 .--+_p _p.4.. . ; '. j . p 'i M'I ~ * ' " ~" i i IT W I*' ^ 11 4A-pt.q 1_a_. 4__v. t .. j u p;.. a 442 __.p4_a_; 4_ q y, ppj t -tv,t t+tf --+- *t if"+ *,-*h-' i ;4 T-*, T - m.,!--f,i -t t-t- j ; t- ~ l 4' *I--'r~'* ' - + - --'ifti ,1 T M T t-- ,'7 t tt';;,, -t-h6 t-t- --I, Q -t r rd j*i i Ti-i i
- +-+-
i t i,1-t -t-t r i- -t t r-50% R.H.'-t ' t .+4.4 - _ t, .-4 '.4_+'_ 2_ i i i .a '..._1.5.A4 E' ~i li
- i. 'lI i{
- k. _h. b- *-t g-'_q;! _ _
.pp__,. p 4 }.. 2.. ;. - 4 +r.- - _, _....._._,_..-+4 i_._t r-T- N b kYi ..f i. *...I- _-i E-i
- k E
. T -t ~ o i 1 1 _a,u. .- + l.-l ! ; 1_ 44! _pv.{-4_ = 10 i z -4 '. ar. ._t. 41 y ., ; t._ +:.. J i! a. + ' t_t t _L;_ _t ., 4 4 _ 4. L ;_,_..aja _;n__;t_I t'4_. a4...a:: Q .1.a_ t. S l! ;j 'll? Ilii 4+r+-+l y r-+4 ;, , i i~i, i,+f F-+J - f44'- 75 7. R.H.' * '
- T"t +- ---f t-* T --,
O
- ~
~+Mt - - + -te i-i i "+ *
- z I*
l i i i ! ib j ' +- M '5 N- ' - t -+* 1--*-. +r f ? * ~-- ; +4+----+ , !..s_ . ' -_4 i- - j - L'U...,., ,,i 4_t 7}.7 s.L ae - - + - + + -- - * - + - ' - - + - 4 L_;>... 100% R.H. c i 9 ~ 5 i iI $ l ! l-d M -+4" i--di45[i i t-4 6 A-i4 t i +" -- ii -- i T-**MW* WtT ~t T + t t-t + *-"---e t-+-- i; i i sb,T iT C i ~ Q g, >-" d 4 T tu i i/ r ' 4 ! ii i i
- 4 t -t "tM !--M i
~ ~'-"~7(! ! i t i . i t---t -di-T+t* ~+T t -- ' i z i if t,. i [*-(ii !!I[ l i !N'*d ! [! ili -M+-~tttt ittr-i, I t ~ ' +Tt-TT + + ~ i f, r ii .T i i1
- i; 3
8 K i m ! um,, !+H-4:i i i ;- g-tt ++-+-t+tt-!, ~t e F ,t -tT; i iit +-+ -H i. it f7 ~ ' i5, f,, [. i ii iT+i-- tM ,iii ~~ P ri -tT-t tti i i i h t-- T i-+>- *, ~~ 'T-*T - i i <f i i i r i, i i# i i i i.! f.i
- !j "-
i l lh l;! j , !...t_j aa..+ -p+.a _. 4 -H_ i M;i! i ai,^ ii i i iii --TYi; i;l1 tYt i ; i fE + f +! t-d
- i!,i ii i i r
i i ii- 'Ti t t j-M, -7~ i i i i i !, ? --- *-+ N i i i ++- t --* 7 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 INLET WET BULB TEMPERATURE (*F) DESIGN: 682,000 GPM l!..- HWT 11'0'F, CWT 93* F, WET BULB 79' F FIGURE C-3a
I ESTIMATED PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR SPRAY DEVICES 110
- 9.. '.
._4_.._+. .}.. 4,. + 9 7, u.
- i..
~.+L_._ f.
- p..
4. { p.- ,._{_ .._..j.... - {.- .L.4 -4 __C_. }. 4 - + - -f T ' u. }_-. .. r-4 I t' _ 4.. r --}}t-t,- } I jj'l
- 4. _
{... 1. _ y i }' ..f 4 - i446 _t._., _-f_._.. .p .}...j. yj. t 7,j J ;. J,. 4 .{-}.--j_..-+-y.py _.h. __- _..._......J. 4.- 9ff.{-,1 {
- 4...
.{ j j j i;;4 t__. 1 -,.j. } J-.. m ---_j f.-.-4-}j-..YT*t' _j i4 41;; }.
- i.,
-4 ' I' '; Ll - 1'j t f t t-' I-a: .q: . _ __--,L t*1 - + ' i '
- 75. TWB.
- i.
4 '.. -. jb ' ' M 70 T + 3 t* t-i-- ^4 ~-t
- A'
' A b t 90 = 6s - - hj, -t-:;g+mi-lp g ^4 /ye. k. m, 4 t-
- f ti+
n. i:.-t ; +i 134_' 4 4.p_9_. I i t- -+4 + - - -, - lE ,t44.. _4 u. [ 1 j.. .4 4 --hhf- [l ... I_d. ._. 79 W i-. y-p +. 7 .p y 1 9_ 7.{_, i. p j... _ g -t+ H - 4+H li ! -+ --+ t H - - ' %+ t 4 e+ - *L+t - + + - - --- - t-+?k -- ~j T- '"--+ t-** 7 ~t ? +
- -~? ? t-+
-t- - t+ -+-+-t+-
- 1 7 + -- t-~
- p
- ^ - t-t t ~ t-f t : - 1 7 t-+ - t+t t-i, i-tt--
- i 4
~!g' TT-+-f-+ t-+* f t-+ 7 t- * ~p' t 1 *' D t i t'" 7 ?" '~*!t"- * * *
- O
, b.p.~--l i l ' "4 4.~.".1 }.'.. _ -'-- f ' O b~ f ' ' t h hiyl ti t-t - t-I- ? * -' i 4 +-* J i I-
- t
+ +-- t-4 + + 4 -+- -+ w,4 -.j...t r" L. 1, '- t - " 1. 4 i; _f .l 7 1 y .+m,p.+ + w y. , m +}_4 p _4..44.e 4.-- -- k ', 4[ l f{ j'l 4 ' 14-. j. i - +..--4 7_4 4..p j-7.,-j 4-4. p .4 +., -. +. L 01 --,- --... a 7 + 4
- 4. w +.
- /~- ii!,
i3 -,,k, i.k,,t-"-i. F 1i t-' +r Q. ,i - t *[-i T,. + -4 1- =i -+ H-t t w. ,i ,o !I 1 _1. 4 i.. 4.Q, l l {.1.i - 4,-9_7. -j-iQ4-1 - y-f 7 7, _9 - +- +- 7 7 4- - f--6 tt j --y- { - + l l _ih . j f l.hN ~. +. ii t-60 70 80 90 100 110 120 HOT WATER TEMPERATURE
- F ESTIMATED SPRAY DEVICE PERFORMANCE AT CONSTANT WATER FLOW.
LINES OF CONSTANT WET BULB TEMPERATURE. NOTE: PERFORMANCE l$ ESTIMATED, NOT SUPPLIED BY MANUFACTURER. Fl0URv
- 1
W' E F A
- ,v
.s APPENDIX D ELECTRICAL ONE LINE DIAGRAMS 4 i ~ s-i I i-i j. l' CILBERT ASSOCIATES. INC. N-
f" ' .W-E =25: W a a.". Ea* -25 ed~E a2=c wah
==s ~~n g i .B. W W c.-- w. -.5 3 c'l C 2 O ~ f\\ e ed1 e n N M N ua-NN. E523 " S o.=. E o = ~ En D n = = m S. E 5 O y 5, kSS = d. E 1 I O ^ N5 f T g -j = R= "3 =
== W 3.. aa = OWN l 3C = a n 1 7C n 5 R= "E O n V l a i H3501 ELECTRICAL ONE LINE DIAGRAM MULTICELL MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLlHG TOWERS FIGURE D-1
s t SEf Sus 3fATlon DNE L 8K 1200 A I)ACB 250 MVA 13.8 KV m 1200 A 1200 A ) ACB ) ) ) )ACBS 250 MVA 250 MVA > TYP. 4 PUNPS Cu <>- 2-3/C 250 BCE s 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 3500 BHP i TOBER 2 WW 13.8 KV/480 V IDENTICAL TO 3000 KVA OIL TYPE TOWER )4000A s n E 480 V Cro ,8n$m m > TYP.13 F4NS -errr oymgm 1-3/C 5o$mQ
- 500 BCE m.gy a m O$3E8 8"Q>no>
m r-mF~g 200 BHP U a
SEE SUBSTATION DHE LINE 1200 A 1 )ACB 250 MVA 13.8 KV m 1200 A ) ) ) )ACB'S 250 MVA > TYP. 4 PUMPS ( ) 2-3/C 250 MCM [ [ "*oz j i ) ) Abbh5 V lV kbhmO 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 3500 BHP LE*g;s o o 5 m' g 4
EEE SUBSTAT10N ONE LINE 4 ( ) -- 2-1000 NCN 1200 A 1200 A 250 NVA \\ )ACB j 250 MVA ACB 13.8 KV 13.8 KV w m 1200 A 1200 A ) ) ) )ACB'S ) ) )ACB'S 250 MVA 250 MV7, g > TTP. 4 PUNPS > ; YP. 3 FANS 2-3/C 2-3/C 500 NCH s 250 ECN s 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 3500 BHP 2160 BHP 2160 BHP 2160 BHP n L k 0 nbN"I sCgr n c z En
- g O Z m q m e > c
- o g
U O eyn
- U r
.cg O A
230 KV SUBSTATION L/y W 230 KV/13.8 KV y% 8.0 MVA 2-250 NCM
- )
PER PHASE 1200 A ACB 250 MVA 13.8 KV m 1200A ACB 250 MVA 0 ) 3000 AMP FRANE 2500A TYPICAL 480V 3 y 4 UNIT l 600A SUBSTATIONS 1600 AMP FRAME 480V 600A MCC $Mm 70 AMP h5CE I 225 AMP FRAME c -< z n 4 SCC =o ma "mo2 TYPICAL l-4/C 0$Fn 4 &no> g;
- 2 "gF MOTORS I
40 HP w J s l
c i
- ( '
APPENDIX E Report by Dr. C.L. Hosler Pennsylvania State University
- r^
i. l 4 ., s GILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC. P w 7
-..z,
- p5
+ f - ~, ^p, -t ' ql. A D @~ I g 5 c 1 1j' i
- y:
. A COMPAnIFO: OF S!LT PALt.0UT RESULTT!G ~ FROM EIGilT POSS1 ELE CCOLII:G TOWF.R ARPR CDIE!![S i FOR CRYSTAL RIVER U:11TS 1, 2 A"D 3
- t-1 '*
p k a eg-1 ( p J. Submitted to Gilbert Assoc. . i 1,. ': s- [. August 15, 1974 t I-t(. 1 i .,);. '. in 6 1 ~ i-- ..C.'L. Hosler and J. Pena .l j,,
- i.
'g 's0 k.' 1 b
- g.
a 4 _,,c., s, ', '$ Jf v _y ^"" W,pI
- Introduction The purpose of these calculations is to determine the salt deposition rate at Crystal River, Florida, for four different types of cooling towers:
Type I Multicell mechanically induced draft Type II Natural draft T Type III Circular mechanically induced draft Type IV Fan assisted natural draft The calculations were made following the method of C. Hosler, J. Pena, and R. Pena (Journal of Eng. for Power,(Trans. of the A.S.M.E.) Vol. 96, p. 283, July 1974). In thf method, the influence of the evaporation of the drift drop is considered and the trajectory of the drift particles is assumed to be determined by their fall velocities and the wind speed. In Appendix I* there is a summary of the method and also results { that show that the inclusion of the turbulent diffusion of the drift I particles does not necessarily improve the accuracy of the result. Tower and Operatioral C: aracteristics For the purpose of the calculations, the following information is required: a) Tower height m b) Updraft velocity at tower exit ~. eAppendix I is a reprint of the paper presented by J. Pena and C. Hosler at the " Cooling Tower Environment Symposium", March 4-6, 1974, University of Maryland. 1 (
1 c) drift mass fraction d) drift drop size distribution e) plume height i f) flow of cooling water 3) salt concentration i All these data are related to the type of cooling tower and how it is operated; except the plume height that depends also on the meteorological i conditions. The following data for the tower height, updraft velocity, plume height, and drift mass fraction were adopted for the calculations. Tower Type I II III IV Tower height (ft) 59 450 67 162 Updraft Velocity (ft/sec) 23.3 16.6 233 166 Maan Plume Height (ft) 600 2000' 1200 1500 (Unit 3) Mean Plume Height (ft) 600 2000 1500 1500 (Units 1 +.2 + 3) -5 j Drift Mass Fraction 1 x 10 lb/lb .Since different manufacturers will guarantee different drift rates, .these calculations were done for 0.001% only. Actual depocition rates can be obtained by multiplying by the actual rate divided by 0.001%, or to obtain a desired or permissible deposition rate the drift rate to be ~ specified can be obtained by dividing the desired deposition rate by the rate shown and multiplying by 0.001%. i
f The drift drop size distribution varies with the type of tower. The values we have adopted are for: Types I and III-The distribution measured at Oak Ridge Tower by Skofner and Thomas: Rad. (um) % Mass a 50-75 57.5 76-100 20.0 101-125 12.7 126-150 6.8 151-175 3.0 Type II - The distribution measured at Keystone Power Plant Plume f by the Penn State University aircraft: Radius (um) % Mass 25-50 10.3 51-75 20.6 s 76-100 26.8 101-125 19.6 s, 126-150 13.4 151-175 9.3. Type IV - The distribution for this type is assumed to be Radius (um) % Mass 25-50 67.8 51-75 16.6 76-100 8.9 l 101-125 4.5 126-150 1.5 151-175 0.7 4 L_
is based on information provided by the Zurn Co. Flow of Cooling Water At Crystal River, the flows for the three individual power plants are: Unit 1 Q = 310,000 gpm Unit 2 Q = 330,000 gpm Unit 3 Q = 682,000 gpm When the three units are in operation, the flow will be Q = 1,322,000 gpm. The salt concentration is expected to be C = 2.9 x 10 ppm. Neteorological Data '? For Crystal River, we have used the climatological records of Tampa
- in order to obtain the information about wind and humidity.
The wind data are shown in the following table. Frequency Mean Wind Speed Direction (%) '(mi/h) I N 14.0 9.1 NE 16.5 8.8 E 17.5 8.5 SE 10.5 8.7 -L S 10.5 9.3 SW 8.5 9.6 W 10.0 10.0 NW 3.5 10.2 Cala 3.0 0-3
- Decennial Census of U. S. Climate - 1951-1960, U. S. Dept. of Commerce m-
\\. The humidity range frequency changes with wind speed. calm periods only) For winds up to 4 mi/hr (which includes the we have Relative Humidity Range Frequency 90-100% 35% 65-98% 55% 0-64% 10% For winds > 4 mi/hr we have i Relative Humi61cy Range Frequency f 90-100% 20% 65-89% 50% 0-64% 30% and this frequency applies for all the wind directions. Results i - The results of the calculations are shown graphically in Figures s 1 to 9 where lines of equal deposition rate expressed as 1bs/ acre year have teen superimposed over a map of the area. Figures 1, 3, 5, and 7 show the salt deposition rates where only Unit 3 is in operation and Figures 2, 4, 6 and 8 when all the three units are in operation. Figure 9 gives the salt deposition rate for a Type I tower when 4 ppm and the three units are connected. the salt concentration is 3.5 x 10 != lm / 'b e In order to draw conclusions from these graphs, one must bear in mind that for all cases it was assumed the same drift mass fraction. The salt deposition rate is proportional to the drift mass fraction, so the results shown in Figures 1 to 8 can be adjusted by using the appropriate value of the drift mass fraction for each tower type. These values r may come from available experimental measurements or estimates by the tower builders. 4 f 't I k 1 Ik e '(. l l '
r YANKEETOWN INGLIS O o o O / 00 50 25 10 350 O , 300 oRED LEVEL l X g 200 CRYSTAL BAY ~ g 1 Odg CRYSTAL RIVER ,l ,3 O ' I mile ' TYPEI MULTICELL MECHANICALLY INDUCED DRAFT C = 2.9 x 104 ppm FIGURE 1 5 DRIFT RATE 0.001T. Q = 6.8 x 10 9pm DEPOSITION IN LB/ ACRE /YR i-
n. f 3 e { ? B 17 t W f i, P FIGURE 2 [ (Deleted) 7-t. t 3i L L I? i L .n h M'n s,- gy, ath .q. =m- - wr -m v ce- - ' ~ ' ~ - * * " " ~ ' ' ' ' ' " " ~ " ~ " ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ ' " ~~
YANKEETOWN LEIS o o 1d o O' 47 25 15 10 5 / 30 l 40 i X f ( . RED LEVEL j 50 i CRYSTAL BAY CRYSTAL RIVER m j 9 (T I r$ile TYPE 11 NATURAL DRAFT C = 2.9 x 10 4 ppm FIGURE 3 Q = 6.8 x 105 9pm DRIFT RATE 0.001% DEPOSITION IN LB/ ACRE /YR
mm { o. i-1 i tit I i,f )! 8 FIGURE 4 1 (Deleted) Y s-w a t l. 1 r b ee 1 j. I i s 1 i t }. ^
YANKEETOWN tNGLIS o o I l o O 67 80 50 20 ) u O ,15 0 RED LEVEL X' 00 ~ O CRYSTAL BAY O m o CRYSTAL RIVER m Nn k e i I ITlile ' TYPE Ill CIRCULAR MECHANICALLY FIGURE 5 INDUCED DRAFT DRIFT RATE 0.001% C = 2.9 x 104 ppm DEPOSITION IN L8/ ACRE /YR Q = 6.82 x 105 spm
9-l' 9 .I. FIGURE 6 (Deleted) i O E E t 5 l i. 't. I I f
\\ 0 i l YANKEETOWN lNGLIS o o I O 0 0,1 O oRED LEVEL \\ O 40 CRYSTAL BAY 0 r CRYSTAL RIVER g. 3 (\\ t a f ' I mile
- i FIGURE 7 TYPE IV FAN ASSISTED DRIFT RATE 0.001%
NATURAL DRAFT DEPOSITION IN LB/ ACRE /YR C = 2.9 x 104 ppm 5 Q = 6.82 x 10 gp, l I
n._-,-_.- ). l ' s-i l' i k FIGURE 8 i (Deleted) ? 3 i s:-. N-. r J lE71aN - TWEN wye ~t n n
O + f l = FIGURE 9 (Deleted) i I s M i
f9 4 t t I t ~ APPENDIX I t i . t 2 I i
- )--
i l-1 h 4. I 1 ie Influence of the Choice of the Plume Diffusion j i i'. Formula on the Salt Deposition i. 1 l Rate Calculation ~ J t f i ^ { I I P .j ' E .4 .l' by 14 r. t s i 1, 4 4 I I- .J. A.' Pena and C. L.'Hosler 1 i e e 5 {8 s + e-f s'.$
- .g
s t -- [ r s, 'T 4 +.: c. ~ s 8 N ^- -. L ^~ (,..: ,-_.e,..
- a.,
.__....._...:_._..m,,;..,_,__,,___,,..._,__,_,,.,_.,
1 1.0 The Nature of the Problem The forecast of the salt deposition rate from cooling towers operated with salt water can be approached as a dust deposition problem where the particles (drift drops) have a variabic fall velocity. The diffusion of a dust plume ha,; been studied by various authors and several solutions have been proposed (1) (2) (3) (4) (5). I The fall velocity of the drif t drops changes because of the evapora-tion they undergo in the air outside the cooling tower plume. A' complete analytical solution for the instant fall velocity is possible, but too laborious. A simplified way to assign average fall velocities to the drift drops was proposed by Hosler et al. (6). If we agree.to use this scheme for determining fall velocity we have then to decide what formula is to be used for the diffusion of the plume. The decision cannot be made by comparison with observational values because these values are not yet available; therefore any choice has to be made on the basis of physical reasonableness. The forecast of the salt deposition rate is made to help to solve an engineering problem. The problem is to build a salt water cooling tower which will dissipate all the heat required and, at the same time, deposit salt-over the country side at a rate lower than that considered detrimental to the environment. We have tried not to choose the better model but simply to find out how much difference there is in the final results when different models are applied to the same data.
2 2.0 Fall Velocity o_f, Drif t Drops In all the formulas for the plume diffusion the fall velocity is a constant. If the particle size distribution has A class intervals it means that A equations have to be solved and the results added up. In the case of drif t drops for every drop size and relative humidity an average fall velocity can be defined. Therefore the number of equations to be solved would be A times the number of different humidity conditions. In order to reduce the total number of equations Hosler et al. (6) have proposed to limit the number of humidity conditions to three. Their proposal can be summari::ed as follows: A drif t drop of ' radius r, is in equilibrium with a humidity environ-ment H, which depends on the salt concentration. For an environment with H < H, the drop will evaporate to an equilib-rium size radius r, after t, seconds during which the drop falls the distance 't* h, = v(t) de (1) In (1) the value of t, is given by e r dr t = (2) ' r, G (S + i,(1,"c)) ' ( * #) where S = - 1, is the supersaturation. For evaporation S < 0; G is a s function of the temperature and in lesser extent of the pressure; at q -0 -1 atmospheric pressure and 20*C its value is 1.22 x 10 cm sec f(Ra, Pr) is a ventilation factor which is a function of the Reynolds and Prandtl numbers and intervenes only when the drops are larger than 10 pm radius (Squires (7)).
3 Finally i is the Van' t Hoff f actor, e is 'the concentration of salt in the drop, M and p the molecular weights of water and haC1. The function v = v(t) can be obtained by step integratior. of: r dr = [G(S + 1 _" )) f(Re, Pr)) it (3) and v = v(r) given in Figure 1. In this figure the fall velocities of water drops in the range 25 < r < 500 pm radius are experimental values obtained by Beard and Pruppacher (8). The fall velocity of drift drops is obtained by multiplying the value from Figure 1 by the drop density p. t For smaller drops the fall velocity is calculated assuming Stokes flov l l 6 v = 1.2 x 10 r [cm/sec) (4) where p is the density of the particle. The calculation of v = v(t) shows that it can be approximated by v, + v, y= (5) 2, where v, and v, are the fall velocities of the drop-of radii r, and r,. According to (5), egaation (1) can be written h, = v t, (6) Values of h,for different r, humidity and initial salt concentration are shown in Figure 2 where the salt was assumed to be NaC1. These values have been obtained for a temperature of 20*C. For other temperature be-tween 0* and 30*C the values in Figure 2 must be multiplied by the $ given in Table 1. For Nacl solution drops when the humidity H < 0.76
4 i i i a i i so OO E ~ N cr OOO o .. o e, N o i T E O
- 1.
o N u) O o S 5< m bo x
- o O
o w U N 3 o 9 x ~' O o a s n' O n o N b o* A O 9 2 N. O O O g o [ i i t t t I O o o O O, Q O Q n ~N O (i.ocsw)A.!.lco73A'ily_4
Table 1 Temperature correction for h,
- C 0
2.03 5 1.62 10 1 34 15 1.15 20 1.00 25 0.89 30 0 76 '1 a l
6 i i i i i / H=00% /p / / / / /
- i 1000
/ 3 H =70%[ ~ j 7 E / /' / / / z 9 / / / D / =50% ~ ~ H / x / / / 2 / / / / / H =30% / / w / / l / u. / / l l l f / / ~ ~ o M / l / / \\ / / \\ e / / / / w / / / j / /,/ ,/ 10 0 - / / / / / ~ l / / / I / / / / / 7 / -- C= 5 x io-3 / / / / - C = 5 x t o-2 ~l / / / ~ / /,/ / 50 100 150 200 250 300 ro DROP RADIUS (pm) 1 Figure 2. Height of evaporation of drift drops. 1. <s 'i.
7 (being H = (100) relative humidity) the drops must evaporate to dry salt particles. Observations by Junge (9) with drops of 5 pm radius indicate that the drops remain as such in a state of unstabic equilibrium between H = 0.76 and some point around H = 0.40 to 0.50. Recent experiments with larger drops (*) indicate a behavior in agreement with the theoretical predictions. A height of dessication h can be defined for the transition from d the drift drop of radius r, to the salt particle of radius rd i 'td h = h, + v(t) dt (7) d <te Because the value of the integral in (7) is only 5% of h,we will consider I h : h, (8) d The small v.:1ue of this integral is related to 1) e -D D and 2) d e e the average fall velocity in that transition is small. That a drop can or cannot reach its equilibrium. size will depend for each numidity and salt concentration on the height h the drop must fall r when leaving the visible cooiing tower plume. As a first approximation h can be taken as the height of the plume r l' calculated by some of the formulas proposed by Briggs (10) and Hanna (11). If the influence of the fall velocity of the drops is to be considered, then a vertical velocity profile inside the plume has to be determined. Formulas by Briggs (10) and Hanna (11) can be used, or following Hosler et al. (6) a linear vertical velocity profile can be assumed.
- Unpublished data - R. Pena and J. Pena (1973).
[ 8 The comparison of h with h, will tell about the degree of evaporation r a drift drop can achieve in a particular environment humidity. For h < h, the drop will never reach the equilibrium size radius r, r and its average fall velocity e will be larger than v defined in (6). For h <h we will take r e v = v, (9) and the error will be: 7 h c=[(v,-v,) (10) e so that the real fall velocity is given by h v = v, - [ (v - v,) (9') e For h, > h, the drop will fall the distance h, with the fall velocity v as 'given by (6) and will continue the distance h - h, with the fall r velocity v,. In this condition we consider v = v, (11) i and the error will be h v c=p,(,2 v,) (12) r so that the real fall velocity will be: i Y ^ v-e
9 / h v' - v v=v,+ ( ) (11') 2 The humidity conditions arc divided in three ranges: 1.0 > Hy > 0.90 0.90 > H2 > 0.65 0.65 > H 3 The choice of H = 0.65 as the limit to produce a salt particle by evap-oration of the drif t drop is somcwhat arbitrary, but it is intended to take care of eventual supersaturated states in the final stages of the drop evaporation. In H we take always y y = v, for !l (13) e h Theerrorinvolvedbythischoicewhen[>1isgivenby e h v -y c = (v, - v,) - [r ( ) (14) 2 where v, is the fall velocity for a drop in equilibrium at H = 0.95. The value of v, can be obtained from Figure 1 entering with the drop radius I as given by r = 0.49 r* (p* c )1/3 (15)
- 0.95 where e, is the salt concentration in g salt /g solution and p, the density of the drift drop.
This formula is accurate within 5%. For H we have 2 [h 3 <1 v=v (16) 0.90 e n t e.
10 O i and for I [h i- >1 y=v (1 ) 0.76 i The values of v and v can be obtained from Figure 1. The radius f 0.90 0.76 of the drops are given by 0.90 = 0. 39 r, (p, c,) (18) r r (19) 0.76 = 1.479 r, (p, c,) r For H3 [h <1 Y=v (20) 0.76 e [h >1 v=v (21) d e The value of v can be obtained with Figure 1 or formula (4), being-d = 0.775 r, (p, c,)1/3 (22) '( r d
- 4 i
11 3.0 Drift Drop Trnnsport The plume diffusion depends on the assumptions made on the character of the air motions. For turbulent motions we have two types of solutions. The first represented by all the formulas derived from the Sutton's theory and the second based in the classical theory of turbulence as proposed by .Bosanquet et al. (5). One of the attractive features of Sutton's theory is that the atmos- { pheric conditions are considered in the equations. Of course for a long time average, the average atmospheric condition has to be used. Adaptations of Sutton's formula for a dust plume have been proposed by several authors (1) (2) (3) (4). One common characteristic of many solutions in to replace the effective plume height by a variable height i h* = h, - x ( (23) where v is the particle fall velocity, u the wind speed and x the distance to the source. This has the effect of a downwind tilt of the center line of the }. diffusing particles. To allow for the depletion of the plume concentra-l tion through deposition Baron et al. (3) have proposed a correction factor applied to the image term in the Sutton equation. This factor was given an explicit form by -(Csanady) (5). The solution by Bosanguet et al. (4) does not allow for atmospheric stability changes but cakes into account the variation of the vertical diffusion coefficient with height. ^' In the absence of turbulence, or when the vertical components of the turbulent motions are smaller than the particles fall velocities, w
7 12 the particles trajectory can be.better determined by the instant fall velocity and wind velocity. According to Van der Hoven (12) the turbulence can be ignored when ~ the particles fall velocities are l'arger than 1 m sec Because some of the drift drop fall velocitics are in this range, Wistrom and Ovard (13) have proposed a mixed solution. Turbulent dif-fusion for particles with r < 100 pm and balistic trajectory for the larger f particles. The use of the trajectory technique will give correct values for many of the drift drops sizes and with an increased error for the smaller sizes. Hosler et al. (6) have proposed to use the trajectory technique for the whole range of drift drops. This approach obviously introduces a certain amount of error in the calculations. Taking into account the purpose of the calculation what is important I is how much the results with the trajectory technique differs from the others. i. - (. .'.r
l l 13 h.0 Comparicon of Different plu.me Modele i e In order to conpare different diffusion fomulco we have calculated the salt deposition rato for a sector'of h5' and c6nctant vind cpeed. The fall velocities vere chosen according to the scheme shown in Section 2. [ Tw'o of the fomulas take into account the turbulence and the other assumes no turbulence. For the turbulent diffusion one fomula is derived from Sutton's theory and the other was proposed by Bosanquet et al. (5). The first takes into account the gravitational setting of the particles and consider no reflection \\ of fallen particles and it was presented in a A.E.C. report (2). The j j average deposition for a long period of time over a given sector was c3aculated following Holland (14). b $ Qr (h - x f) (W,j)H " at 8 C 2 n/2 "U - 2 2-n ,ux C, x where W is the salt deposition rate, $ the frequency humidity, b frequency of vind direction which blevs toward the sector, a azimuth angle in radians. o I x the distance to the source in m. Q the strength of the source in [h),h,effectiveplumeheight(m)vfallvelocity,uvindspeedboth in m/sec. C vertical diffusion coefficient and n diffusion parameter. 2 i The formu~.a by Bosanquet, Carey and Halton (5)'is 1 0.0031 b $ Q, j i. F(f.f) (25) L W r 2 bH being r
1k +2 h (U * *) 0
- u F (f,
~ e (26) = p where T indicates the gn=a function of (#-) and n is the average coefficient of vertical spreading (n = 0.05). Finally the formula for the deposition rate assu=ing no turbulence, is according to Hooler et al. (6) b$4T A (W#j) .(hri) (hrk) = (27) 2 2 Wu, (V,2) (y,) 2 i k. y 3 where the subscripts r and r indicate the extremes of the class intervalt g k of the drift drop of radius r), and T is the to.tal nu=ber of points of the compass. The data con =on to all the procedures were c = 0.03 = 0.19 h = 200 m u = h.7 m sec-1 H2 b = 0.125 = 0.20-H i 4 3 Q = 178 x 10 mg Nacl */see T =8 q
- t.
r,(pm) % mess .50 - 75 57.5 75 - 100 20.0 4 100 - 125 12.T n 125 - 150 6.8 150 - 175 30 a
15 From these data we obtain 15 different fall velocities, therefore for each model a nu=crical summation'of the fifteen solutions has to be made. For the particular case of equation (24) we have obtained separate solutions for the following values of n and C, which represent different 't atmospheric stability conditions C, n i strong inversion 0.60 0.045 neutral 0.25 0.095 instability 0.17 0.17
- i
- (
In a real calculation the solution will be a linear combination of these 3 solutions. The calculation was made this way to see how,much the salt deposition will differ for particular atmospheric conditions. The results are shown in Figure 3 and it appears that the differences are not significant. ?x . k [ l l l LL h I' w. j l i
r_. ~' 5.0 A BOSANQUET et al. o HOSLER et al. 4.0 ^ 8 '" 3.0 n =0.60 m, o E 1 cp E 6 i 'o 2.0 - o 5 l.O ' = 0.17 o O.O t t t i I 2 3 4 5 1 DISTANCE (km) l Figure 3. Comparative results for three different plume models. y i ^^ - -^-^-------
17 r. 5.0 Final Remarks The results in Figure ~3 indicate that all the models predict the salt deposition rate within a factor of 2.0 and therefore any of the models will give useful results if we take into account the purpose of the cal-culation. The mass distribution used in these calculations would make a f difference in the spread between the curves in Figure 3. For a drop size distribution with larger drops the trajectory method would be given a greater weight. For smaller drop sizes including turbulence would give l t more accurate results. Experimental observations are necessary to test the models and at the same time, improvement is needed in the way some vital data, as drif t i drop size distribution and total mass fraction drif t, are obtained. The uneven quality of these data could be improved by critical examination of the techniques used and the adoption of uniform procedures. Another way to improve the models is to include the natural cristo-itation, which is expected to modify the fall velocities of the drif t drops and therefore the pattern of the salt deposition rate. 4
18 REFERENCES 1. Chamberlain, A. C.: Aspects of travel and deposition of acrosol and vapor clouds. Britich Report AERE-HP/R, 1261 (1953). 2. Meteoro3ccy and Atomic Enerrv. U.S.AECReportANCU-3066(1955). 3 Baron, T., E. Gerhardt and H. Johnstone: Dissenination of aerosol particles dispersed from stacks. Ind. and M. Chem., h(11), 2h03-2408 (19h9). h. Csanady, G.: Dispersal of dust particles from elevated sources. Austr. Journ. g Physics, 8_, 5h5-550 (1955). 5 Bosanquet, C., W. Carey and I. Halton: Dust deposition from chimney stacks. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 162, 355-365 (1950). l 6.
- Hosler, C., J. Pena and R. Pena: Detemination of salt deposition rates from drift from evaporative cooling tover.
Transactions of,ASME f 4 in press. i 7 Squires, P.: The Browth of cloud drops by condensation. Austr. Journ. Sci. Res.,_2J_, p. 59 (1952). ~ 8. Beard, K. and H. Pruppachcr: A determination of the ter=inal velocity and dras of smE vater drops by =enna of a vind tunnel. J. Atmos. ~~ Sci., 26,, 1066 (1969). 9 Junge, C.: Die konstitution des atmospharischen aerosols. Annin Met., j P. 1 (1952). ~
- 10. Briggs, G.:
Plume rise. A.E.C.' Critical Review Series, U.S. AEC-TID-2L635 j (1969). a-
- 11. Hanna, S.: Rise and condensation of large cooling towers plumes.
,J, g j Appl. Meteo., 11,,, T93-799 (1572).
- 12. Van der Hoven, I.:
Deposition of particles and Bases. Meteorolorv and Atomic Enermr. D H Slade Ed, U.S. AEC, p. 202 (1968). 13 Wistrom, K. and J. Ovard: Cooling tower drift, its measurements, control, and environmental effects. Ecodyne Cooling Products Co. (1973).
- 14. Holland, J. Z.: A ceteorological survey of the Oak' Ridge area.
U.S. AT.C_ Report ORO-99, p. Sho (1953). m .-}}