My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
19H - ALTERNATIVE ENERGY STUDY
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2019
>
03/05/2019
>
19H - ALTERNATIVE ENERGY STUDY
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2019 7:29:55 AM
Creation date
2/28/2019 7:24:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Public Works
Item #
19H
Date
3/5/2019
Destruction Year
2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
116
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
14 Job No. 2669.01 Water Systems Alternative Energy Feasibility Study <br />for the project. This would mean that perhaps the intermediate pressure meter was not reading accurately. <br />The original design submittal for the turbine showed a selection point at 8.0 CFS and 200 feet. Note, there are <br />two stages of the turbine in series, so the pressure -drop for each stage (100 feet) is added together to get the <br />total pressure drop of 200 feet. <br />Historical logs available for 2006 and earlier indicate the following typical operation points: <br />• MWD pressure at 165 to 190 psig. (average 177 psig) <br />• Mid pressure at 68 to 75 psig. (average 71 psig) <br />• System pressure at 60 to 69 psig. (average 64 psig) <br />• This corresponds to the generator putting out 130 to 165 kW of power output. (average 147 kW) <br />The pressure -drop in previous years averaged 106 psi through the turbine, or 244 feet of water, closer to its <br />design drop of 200 feet. This leads us to the conclusion that the head recovery system is not currently working <br />properly, as less head is dropped through the turbine than shown in the design or shown in historical operation <br />records. <br />It is assumed for this report that the observed operations represent the actual baseline operations for this unit. <br />The unit is about 32 years old and was rebuilt about 14 years ago. It is assumed that the inefficiencies in the <br />current operations represent the typical operating conditions due to the condition of the turbine, or its controls, <br />or the PRV's controls, and that this can be considered the baseline operation of the system. If the Agency has a <br />quick -fix and can lower the discharge pressure of the turbine back to about 71 psig, that can then be treated as <br />the baseline of operations for this project. <br />6.3 POTENTIAL PROJECT AT SA -1 <br />The proposed project for SA -1 is to replace the hydro -generator with a new unit, as illustrated in Figure 2. The <br />new unit would be designed around the parameters the original unit was built for. The original operation was <br />called out for a flowrate of 8 CFS. This is the flowrate that the unit is typically controlled to. <br />CITY OF SANTA ANA 19H-22 Newcomb I Anderson I McCormick <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.