This document summarizes an energy audit conducted at the BHEL CCDP electrical utilities in Trichy, India from January to April 2012. The objectives of the audit were to conserve energy, achieve commercial benefits for the user, and participate in India's National Mission on Enhanced Energy Efficiency program. Key electrical equipment audited included motors, pumps, cooling towers, lighting, compressors, and transformers. Several underloaded motors were identified along with proposals to install VSD drives, capacitors, and replace motors to improve efficiency. Compressor audits found leakage levels of 30-35% with proposals to arrest leakage to save energy. Lighting audits calculated ILER ratios to determine if areas were underlit or over

1. Energy Auditing the Electrical
Utilities BHEL CCDP
By
Renga Ramanujan C
Reg No. 01110548014
Guided by,
Internal Guide : External Guide :
Mrs. Gomathi E Mr. Ramakrishnan D
(Asst Prof Petrochemical Dept.) (AGM CCDP BHEL)
Anna University R&D BHEL
Trichy Trichy
1

2. Introduction
 A complete and comprehensive energy audit study
was conducted on the electrical utilities, BHEL
CCDP in Thiruchirapalli, in the months of Jan-Apr
2012
 Study was performed aiming the following
objectives. Conservation of energy, as a social
responsibility, as a commercial benefit to user
 Participate in the proposed, perform and achieve in
trade (PAT Scheme) under, National mission on
enhanced energy efficiency program
2

3. Objective
 Main objective of the project is to audit the
electrical equipment's and propose suitable savings
with paybacks
The following equipment's considered in Auditing :
 Motor
 Pumps
 Cooling Tower
 Lighting
 Compressor
 Transformer
3

4. BHEL CCDP(Combined Cycle Demonstration Plant) Trichy
 CCDP is an IGCC(Integrated gasification combined
cycle) plant type.
 Installed year 1984
 Total plant efficiency 58 %
 Capacity of the plant is 6.25 MW
 2.25 MW ( Steam Turbine )
 4.00 MW ( Gas Turbine )
 2.75 MW utilized by the plant and remaining power is
uploaded to the TNEB grid
4

5. IGCC (Integrated Gasification Combined
Cycle)

 Fig IGCC Plant Process
5

6. Gasification Reactions
 Exothermic
◦ C + O2 CO2
◦ C + ½ O2 CO
◦ C + 2H2 CH4
◦ CO + H2O CO2 + H2
 Endothermic
◦ C + CO2 2CO
◦ C + H2O CO + H2
 Incomplete Combustion of coal forms an gas called as syn-gas (CO+H2 ).
 Coal gas has the Calorific value(in CCDP) is ( 1030 Kcal/Nm3 ) .
 These gasification reaction is taken place in a gasifier which kept in an
high pressurized conditions.
6

7. P
L
A
N
T
P
R
O
C
E
S
S
D
I
A
G
R
A
M
7

8. TNEB Bill for R&D Side as on ( 06-01-2012 ) :
Statement of electrical energy consumption During the Month of DEC-
2011 in respect of HT SC.No.58 CCDP
SI NO Description Electrical
Consumption
In Units
01 CCDP 1,20,060
02 FCB 22,200
03 Welding research institute 38,300
04 Misc.Buildings,Street Lights 3,500
Total 1,84,060
Sanctioned demand in KVA 2000
Maximum demand touched in KVA during 1885.80
the month of DEC 2011
Power Factor 0.96 lag
Energy Supplied by TNEB 1,84,060 Units
Per Unit rate 6.76 `
Amount Paid to TNEB 12,44,245 `
8

9. Auditing Electrical Utilities
Equipment Audited
 Motors
 Compressors
 Cooling Towers
 Lighting
 Pumps
 Transformers

10. Motor Auditing Report
Important Data In Motor Auditing :
% Loading – Working Power *100
Rated Power
Were, Loading of an Motor Determines;
75 % Loading-
 All motors designed efficiency is under this loading % only.
 PF factor is in the range of 0.8 -0.9 at this % loading.
 So its necessary step in auditing the motor to measure the
loading percentage.
Efficiency-
 Efficiency is measured by the losses method ,this efficiency
plays the main role in energy consumption of the device.

11. Efficiency vs Loading graph
Efficiency vs Loading
100
90
80
70
60
Efficiency
50 75-100 HP
30-60 HP
40 15-25 HP
0-10 HP
30
20
10
0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
loading

12. Power factor vs Loading
PF Vs Working Load
1.2
1
0.8
Power Factor
0.6 75-100 HP
30-60 HP
15-25 HP
0.4 0-10 HP
0.2
0
35% 45% 55% 65% 75% 85% 95% 100%
Full load-Amperage

13. Motor Details BHEL CCDP
 There are about 139 Motors running in
the Plant including motor and
compressor drives
 The loading % is calculated in all the
motors its found that 25 motors are
running in under loading conditions
among which 6 motors are high rated
Motors which has been taken and
efficiency has been calculated for that
Motors

14. Under-Loading Motors
Vibrator-4( Rated Power-7.5 kW)
% Loading - 38.667 %
Working Efficiency - 78.69 %
PF - 0.92
Belt Conveyor( Rated Power- 5.5 kW)
% Loading - 41.81 %
Working Efficiency - 80.13 %
PF - 0.88
Bucket Elevator (Rated Power-5.5 kW)
% Loading - 47.27 %
Working Efficiency - 78.52 %
PF - 0.85

15. Under loading Motors
Crusher (Rated Power-30 kW)
% Loading - 46.67 %
Working Efficiency - 77.02 %
PF - 0.92
Belt Conveyor(Rated Power-15 kW)
% Loading - 47.27%
Working Efficiency - 81.00%
PF - 0.86
Ash conveyor(Rated Power-3.5kW)
% Loading - 42.85%
Working Efficiency - 73.11%
PF - 0.48

16. Motor Calculations :
 Make: NGEF(vibrator 4)
Rated Power : 7.5 KW
Rated Current : 13.7 Amps
Rated speed : 1440 RPM
Insulation class : F
Duty cycle : S1
Designed efficiency ɳ : 88%
Number of Poles :4
Connection : Delta
Starter : DOL
 No Load (15% load setting)
Voltage : 415 V
Current : 5A
Frequency : 50 Hz
Stator resistance : 1.75Ω
Power : 1200 W
 Load (75% load setting)
Voltage : 415 V
Current : 12.5 A
Power : 2900 W
16

17.  Solution
Iron Loss with friction Windage loss
Pi + fw=Pnl-Pst.cu (Stator Cu loss)
Pst.cu= 3*(No load current/√3) 2*Stator Resistance
=3*(5/√3)2*1.75
Pst.cu = 43.75 W
Pi + fw=1200-43.75
= 1156.25 W
Stator resistance at working condition with respect to insulation
class
Stator resistance = (1.75)*(110+235/ 30+235)
=2.28 Ω
Stator Copper losses at Full load
Pst.Cu(FL)=(3*(13.5/√3)2/2.28
= 427.67. W
17

18.  Full load slip
Ns= 120f/p S= Ns-N/Ns
Pr= Rated power/(1-S) Watts
Ns--=120*50/4 = 1500 RPM
S= (1500-1440)/1500
S=0.04
Rotor Power Pr= 7500/(1-0.04)
=7812.5W
Power Input Pi=Pr+pst.Cu(FL)+(Pi+fW)+Pstray
= 7500+427.67+1156.25+0.018
= 9.531 KW
18

19.  Motor Efficiency:
% ɳ=Rated output/Power Input *100
= 7.5/9.531 *100
=78.69%
 Power Factor
PF=Pi/√3* Rated Voltage*Rated current
PF= 9.531*1000/√3*415*13.5
=0.968 lag
19

20. Payback and Proposals
Proposals
Installation of ʎ-∆ convertor
Installation of VSD Drive
Installation of reduced rating Motors
Installation of DE Controllers
Installation of Capacitors
Payback for Installing VSD Drive :
Motor Energy Costs Payback Period
saved/Year Saved/Year
kWh ` Months
Vibrator 4 16386 1,06,509 10.7
Belt conveyor 20184 1,31,196 4.1
Bucket Elevator 18600 1,20,900 4.8
Crusher 104682 6,80,433 2.6
Belt Conveyor 3 60240 3,91,560 6
Total 220092 kWh 14,30,598 `

21. Compressor Auditing Report
 The Compressor is an Least efficient device the compressor
is major electrical consumption device on the plant.
 The compressor air is used in an plant for the
Instrumentation air , service air ,an heatless dryer compressor
,and LPC for Gas turbine, Plant AC.
 The compressor audited to find out the leakage, Actual FAD
and the volumetric efficiency is calculated and the efficient
enviornment is proposed in this auditing
21

22. Data Collection
 Name Plate data
Design CFM
Rated Power W
Storage tank Capacity m3
Cut in Pressure kg/cm2
Cut off Pressure kg/cm2
 Measured data
Time taken by compressor to reach cutoff pressure sec
Loading and unloading time sec
 Calculated Data
% Leakage
Volumetric ɳ ; Isothermal Efficiency
Actual FAD CFM
Specific energy consumption Watts/CFM
22

23. Formula used
Correction factor = [(273+ambient air temperature)/ (273+temperature of
discharge air)]
Actual FAD (m3/s) = [(P2-P1)/P0 x (total vol of receiver / time taken) x
correction factor]
FAD (m3/hr) = FAD (m3/s) x 3600
FAD (Nm3/hr) = FAD (m3/hr) x (atm pressure / 1.013) x (273 / (273 +
ambient air T))
FAD (cfm) = FAD (Nm3/hr) x 0.588
Volumetric efficiency = (Actual FAD / Design value) x 100
Sp.energy consumption= (actual power consumption /actual FAD in cfm)
23

24. Compressor Auditing
 Instrument Air
Rated power : 37 kW
Design CFM : 162.5087
Actual CFM : 103.596
Specific Energy Consumption : 0.24 kW/CFM
% Volumetric ɳ : 63.75 %
% Leakage : 34.49%
 Service Air
Rated power : 90 kW
Design CFM : 528.1536 CFM
Actual CFM : 319.22 CFM
Specific Energy Consumption : 0.235 kW/CFM
% Volumetric ɳ : 60.47%
% Leakage : 31.70%
24

25. Compressor Auditing
 LPC
Rated power : 1.07 MW
Design CFM : 36034.56 CFM
Actual CFM : 29337 CFM
Specific Energy Consumption : 0.41 kW/CFM
% Volumetric ɳ : 67.54 %
% Leakage : 35.06%
 Plant AC Compressor 2 No’s
Rated power : 20 kW ; 20kW
Design CFM : 70 CFM ; 60 CFM
Actual CFM : 54 CFM ; 42 CFM
Specific Energy Consumption : 0.21 kW/CFM ; 0.21
kW/CFM
% Volumetric ɳ : 64% ; 64.7%
25

26. Proposals and Payback
Observation :
 Instrument ,service air compressors are installed in the air 1985 and LPC
installed in 1990 and Plant AC compressors installed in 1994.Its been
found that the Volumetric efficiency is around 60% in all compressors
represents the age doesn’t the performance of compressors.
 Problem exists in the leakage between the compressor and the receiver
tank.
Found out Leakage areas :
 Damaged Valve seperating the drier unit and service air
compressor.
 Leakage in pipe joints of pipes at the room corner ends leaving the
compressor room to the outside storage tank.
 Bypass Valve present near the tank were the pipe connceted to the
storage tank
For precision leak detection ultrasonic leak detectors are 26

27. Savings Analysis (With Leakage arresting of
20%)
Compressor Leakage Energy Waste Energy Cost saved
Savings
Instrumentation 34.39 % 84840 60000 3,90,000
Service Air 31.70 % 294600 247465 16,08,526
Total 3.07,465 19,98,522.5`
Units/year
27

28. Lighting Auditing Report
 The CCDP Plant utilize Mercury vapor lamps (125 W &
400W),FTL 40W and rare Sodium vapour (250W) is used.
 The data has to be gathered is the length ,breadth and width
of the room and lux at different corners of room and average
lux is taken.
 With the gathered data ILER has been calculated and
propose whether the room is at underlight or overlight
conditions.
28

29. Formula Used
 Total Watts utilized:
With the help of power analyzer the total watts utilized by
the room is measured.
 Room Index:
Floor area (height-0.83)*(Length + Width)
 Watts/Square metre :
Total Watts/Floor area
 Actual Lux :
Average lux / W/m2
 ILER(installed
 load efficacy ratio) = Actual Lux /Target Lux
29

30. Lighting Auditing Report
 Lighting consumption data at different
sections
Gasifier Section - 105.36
units/day
Gas Cleaning System - 71.16
units/day
Coal yard - 84.42
units/day
Engineering Building - 46.72
units/day 30

31. Lighting calculations
 Turbine & Crane Hall:
 Length : 70 m
 Width : 30 m
 Height : 6m
 Average Lux : 92
 Target Lux : 50
 Number of workers : 32
 Total Watts Utilized : (400*21) = 8.4 kW
 Floor area : Length * Width
110*45 = 4950 m2
 Room index : floor area / (height-0.83)*(length +
Width)
4950 / (6-0.83) * (110 + 45)
= 3.48
31

32. Contd..
 Watts / Sq.m : Total Watts / Floor area
8.4*103 / 4950 = 1.7 W/m2
 Actual lux / (W/m2) : Average lux / W/m2
92 / 1.7
= 54.214
 Installed load efficacy ratio: Actual lux / Target
lux
54.214 / 50
= 1.08
32

33. Light Auditing
Place Area TotalWatts ILER
Gasifier Section 375m2 1.155kW 0.74
(Ground Floor)
Power house 2100m2 3.2kW 1.05
Turbine Hall 4950m2 8.4 kW 1.08
Control Room 600m2 2.24 kW 0.51
Pump House 1000m2 1.32 kW 1.004
Compressor 875m2 1.28kW 0.892
House
Stores and 2800m2 3.295 kW 0.93
Instrumentation
room
Reference room 600m2 920W 0.93
Gas Cleaning 400m2 2.12 kW 0.297
Ground floor
33

34. Proposals and Savings
 Turbine and Crane Operating Hall :
 This room consist of an two turbines(gas and steam turbine ) were
gas turbine operating in an steel guarded closed room and an condenser
with vacuum pumps and pumps from condenser to cooling tower and the
boost compressors of LPC and HPC in steel guarded closed room .32
workers are always present in the hall so the proper lighting is necessary
for this room
 Proposals :
The 21 No’s of 400 W high pressure mercury vapour lamps can be
replaced with 180W Induction lamp
 Energy savings = Total watts utilized per hour previously*
(operating hours) – Total Watts utilized in present*(operating
hours)
 Energy Savings / year = ( 8.4*4380 ) – (3.78*4380)
= 20236 kWh
 Cost saved / year = 20236* 6.5
= 131,534 ` 34

35. Proposals and Savings
 Gasifier section and gas cleaning section mostly uses
an Mercury vapour lamp in most of the places this light
can be replaced with induction lamps
 Street lamp is mainly an 125 W Mercury vapour lamp
which and 250 w sodium vapour lamps these lamps
can be replace with the CFL Lamps
 40W FTL lamps equals 18 W CFL so FTL lamps are
replaced with CFL Lamps
 Motivating green energy with Solar Street
35

36. Savings
Place Energy Waste Energy saved Costs saved
units with new `
settings units
Gasifier Section 8079 5885 38,255
Street lighting 58035 37120 2,41,312
Power House 14016 13889 90,279
Turbine Hall 36792 16556.4 1,31,534
Control Room 3205 2809.3 18,260
Gas Cleaning 35838 31130 2,02,345
Reference room 282 257 1671
Total 111331.69 723656 `
36

37. Cooling Tower
 Cooling towers are heat removal devices used to transfer
process waste heat to the atmosphere. Cooling towers may either use
the evaporation of water to remove process heat or, rely solely on air to
cool the working fluid to near the dry-bulb air temperature.
Auditing the cooling tower:
While auditing the cooling tower
Data Gathered:
Hot water inlet
Cold Water outlet
circulation rate
Dry bulb and Wet bulb Temperature
electrical equipment's data associated with cooling tower
Calculated
Effectiveness of cooling tower
Make up Water Requirement
Pump working efficiency
37

38. Formula used
 Range (°C)
= [CW inlet temp ( C) – CW outlet temp ( C)]
 Approach (°C)
= [CW outlet temp ( C) – Wet bulb temp ( C)]
 Effectiveness
= Range / (Range + Approach)
• Blow down
= Evaporation loss / (C.O.C. – 1) m3/hr
• Make up water requirement
= Evaporation loss + Blow down loss m3/hr
38

39. Cooling Tower in CCDP
 The plant uses 2 cooling towers .
The cooling tower type used is the Induced draft counter flow
cooling tower.
Cooling Tower 1
 The water used to cool the external surface of condenser
Cooling Tower 2
 The water used to cool the gasifier
 Annual power utilized for cooling tower is 72 lakhs `
 Pumps 80%
 Fans 20%
39

40. CCDP Cooling Tower(1)
4.88 ϕ m 4.88 ϕ m 4.88 ϕ m
Calculated Values:
No of Fans: 4
No of blades: 3
Fan Motor: 15 KW
Range : 11oC
Fan Blades
3.6 ϕ m Approach : 5oC
44oC Effectiveness : 68.75%
Evaporation : 31.64m3.hr
Rate of Flow 1880 m3/hr Loss
Tower Frame: Treated timber
Blow down :10.54 m3/hr
Loss
8.39 ϕ m Connected :
Wet Bulb Temp: 28oC
Dry Bulb Temp: 30.5oC
Pumps
ACW1,2(45kW),
CW 1,2 (150
103.7 ϕ m 33o kW)
C HP Aux pump(30
125 ϕ m kW)
Fan : CT fans 40

41. CCDP Cooling Tower (2)
4.88 ϕ m 4.88 ϕ m 4.88 ϕ m
Calculated Values:
No of Fans: 4
Fan Motor: 20 KW
No of blades: 3
Range : 9oC
Fan Blades
3.8 ϕ m Approach : 8oC
45oC Effectiveness : 52.95%
Evaporation : 33.6m3.hr
Rate of Flow2440 m3/hr
Tower Frame: Treated timber
Loss
Blow down :11.196 m3/hr
8.50 ϕ m Loss
Wet Bulb Temp: 28oC
Dry Bulb Temp: 30.5oC
Connected :
Pumps PFBG 1&2
(75kW)
130 ϕ m 36oC MHD 1,2 (40 kW)
HP Aux pump(30
160 ϕ m
kW)
Fan : CT fans
3*15kW 41

42. Cooling tower pump analysis
 Cooling Tower -1
ACW Pump 1 & II
These pumps are working under interval basis if one pump operated other
been at stand by.
Flow 220 m3/hr
Measured flow 208 m3/hr
Head 40 m
Power consumed 55.47 kW
Hydraulic power 22.67 kW
Shaft Power 45 KW
ɳPump 50.38%
Power consumption /year 22180 units/year
42

43.  Cooling Tower -1
CW Pump 1 & II
These pumps are working under interval basis if one
pump operated other been at stand by.
Flow 800 m3/hr
Measured flow 235 m3/hr
Head 235 m
Power consumed 100 kW
Hydraulic power 49.6 kW
Shaft Power 76.65 KW
ɳPump 65%
Power consumption/year 400000 units/year
43

44.  Cooling Tower -2
PFBG pump I & II
Both pumps are running.
Flow 450 m3/hr
Measured flow 420 m3/hr
Head 40.7 m
Power consumed 91.9 kW
Hydraulic power 46.58 kW
Shaft Power 74.9 KW
ɳPump 62.11%
pump consumption/year- 367600 units
44

45.  Cooling Tower -2
MHD I & II
These pumps are working under interval
basis if one pump operated other been at stand by.
Flow 75 m3/hr
Measured flow 66 m3/hr
Head 100 m
Power consumed 48.316 kW
Hydraulic power 17.985 kW
Shaft Power 40 KW
ɳPump 44%
pump consumption/year- 193264 units 45

46.  Cooling Tower -2
HP Aux Pump
These pumps are working under interval
basis if one pump operated other been at stand by.
Flow 25 m3/hr
Measured flow 20 m3/hr
Head 250 m
Power consumed 36.8 kW
Hydraulic power 13.625 kW
Shaft Power 29.91 KW
ɳPump 57.5%
pump consumption/year- 147200 units
46

47. Proposals
 Water used is found to be contaminated ,will cause slates
on the surface condenser. maintainance of water solid
levels is necessary
 Tower frame in cooling tower 1 is damaged its
recommended to works on damage or install an new
cooling tower frame
 Cooling tower pumps all pumps except ACW and PFBG
pumps are operated just above 50 % its recommended to
install high efficient pumps around 60-70%
47

48. Payback analysis
 Reduction of make up water by changing the tower
frame
Power consumption on Hp Aux is greatly varies
Old Energy consumption : 73,688kWh
New Energy Expected : 40,256 kWh
Annual Energy Saved : 200592 kWh
Annual Cost Saved : 13,03,848
Payback period : 8 months
48

49. Installing an efficient pump
 By installing efficient pumps 2% of current energy consumption is
reduced.
 Old consumption 362644 units
New consumption 362644*0.8 =290115.2
Cost saved=(362644-290115.2)*6.5 = 4,71,438 `
Investment = 7,50,800
Payback = 19.11 Months
Energy and cost saved
By Repairing Tower Frame : 13,03,848
Installation of efficient pumps : 7,50,800
Cost Saved /year in 2054648 `
Cooling tower
49

50. Transformer Auditing report:
 Transformer :
 BHEL CCDP Uses 2 transformer which has been
installed as per the norms of TNEB,as CCDP is
sanctioned with 2000KVA demand
 Transformer 1 - 500 KVA
 Transformer 2 – 1500 KVA
Transformer is an static device hence the losses are
low.
While performing performance analysis of an
transformer these data to be find out,
Losses(Both No load , Load Losses)
Best Loading
Power factor management 50

51. Transformer Audit
 1500 kVA Transformer
No load loss - 1.32 KW
Full Load Loss - 8.5 kW
Total loss - (NL Loss +FL Loss*(Act KVA/Rated KVA)
3.21 KVA
Operating hours - 9hrs
Currently loaded -42.13%
Calculating Annual Loss during Working Days:
Loss-(3.21*9)*300*1.85 =10833 kWh/Annum
Calculating annual loss during Non-Working days
Loss-(3.21*12)*365*1.32=10128.75 kWh/Annum
Total 12 month Transformer loss-10833 + 10128=20961 KVA/Annum
Present Energy utilization from TNEB – 964,952 kVA/Annum
29% lossed in transformer
51

52. 1500 kVA Best loading
Best loading-√(no load loss/FL loss)*Rated kVA
= √ (1.32/1.85)*1500
= 766.94 kVA
= 51 %
500 kVA Transformer
No load loss-1.05
FL Loss - 6.5
Total loss - 15.507 kWh/day
Currently Loaded – 39%
Annual Loss during working days – 5815 kVA
Annual loss during Non Workin – 4704 kVA
Total loss in years - 9653 kVA
Best Loading % - 40.91% 52

53. Proposals
 Currently the 1500 KVA is running under
42% loading but the best efficiency 51%
its recommended to increase the loading
%
 Install 20 KVAR cpacitor.
53

54. Power Factor Management
Apr-11-0.85
May-11-0.67 NEED For PF Correction
Jun-11-0.78
AVG PF : 0.8 lag
Jul-11-0.77
Aug-11-0.8 Converting KVA to KW
Sep-11-0.9 640*0.8 = 512 KWh
Oct-11-0.88
With 0.9 PF
Nov-11-0.76 640 *0.9 = 576 KWh
Dec-11-0.92
Jan-12-0.96 64 units saved per hour
Feb-12-0.78
Mar-12-0.7
Apr-12-0.8
54

55. PF Correction
 1500 KVA Installed with 150 KVAR to maintain 0.8 PF its recommended to increase from
0.8 to 0.9
 From BEE book PF correction table to maintain 0.9 Multiply with 0.266
Avg 640 kVA drawn so 640*0.266-170 kVAR Required further 20 more KVAR needed
 1 kVAR costs 700 rs
 20 kVAR costs 20*700
 Investment on Capacitor = 14,000
 By installing 20 kVAR 6040 KWh is saved
Cost Saved = 6.5*6040 = 39260`
 Payback = 14000*12 / 39260
= 4.27 Months
55

56. Transformer Summary
 Costs Saved
PF Correction - 39,260 `/year
Increase Loading % - Increasing loading from
42 % to 51%
56

57. Pump Auditing
 The Main data to be found out during
pump auditing is
Hydraulic Power
Shaft Power
Pump Efficiency
For calculating these data's
Flow Rate
Head
Power Consumption
Is measured
57

58. Pump Audit
Formula Used :
 Hydraulic (kW) = Q x Total Head, (hd – hs) x xg
1000
• Pump shaft power= Hydraulic power X ɳ Motor
 Pump efficiency, ɳ Pump = Hydraulic power
Pump shaft power
Were
Q-Flow Rate m3/sec
H-Head m
- Density kg/m3
g- Acceleration due to gravity m2/ s
58

59. Auditing Calculations
Motor name plate details: (Liquor Pump –Quench Column)
Make :Kriloskar
Power : 75 kW
Current : 128 A
Speed : 2970 RPM
Insulation Class : F
Duty : S1
Voltage : 415 V
%ɳ : 85 %
Pump name plate details :
Make : VK Pump industries
Type : Triplex Plunger
Capacity Q : 61 m3/hr (or) 0.016944 m3/sec
Head : 238 m
Speed : 2970 RPM
%ɳ : 57.5 %
59

60. Datas
 Motor consumption details :
Power input Pi : 86.34 kW
Motor working ɳ: 80%
Pump :
Capacity : 59.8 m3/hr (or) 0.016611
m3/sec
Density of liquid : 1000 Kg/m3
Gravity : 9.81 m/sec2
60

61. Calculations
Pump calculations (with measured values)
:
Hydraulic power = Q*H*ρ*g / 1000
= 59.8 * 238
*1000*9.81/1000
= 38.78 kW
Pump Shaft power = Motor input * motor ɳ
= 86.34* 0.80
= 69.08 kW
% Pump ɳ = Hydraulic power*100 /
Shaft
power 61

62. Pump Report
 Auxiliary Boiler Feed Pump:
Hydraulic Power = 3.374 kW
Shaft Power = 9.3 kW
Pump ɳ = 36%
 Auxiliary Boiler Hot water Feed Pump:
Hydraulic Power = 310.92 W
Shaft Power = 712.5 W
Pump ɳ = 43%
 Auxiliary Boiler FO Injection Pump :
Hydraulic Power = 85.247 W
Shaft Power = 172.5W
Pump ɳ = 49%
62

63. Pump Report
 DM Plant back Wash Pump:
Hydraulic Power = 3.345 kW
Shaft Power = 6.885 kW
Pump ɳ = 49%
 DM Plant Drinking Water Pump :
Hydraulic Power = 1.002 kW
Shaft Power = 2.002 kW
Pump ɳ = 50.08 %
 DM Plant Make Water Pump:
Hydraulic Power = 546.075 W
Shaft Power = 1.258 kW
Pump ɳ = 45%
63

64. Condensate Pump
Capacity Q : 30 m3/hr (or) 0.00833 m3/sec
Head : 100 m
Hydraulic Power =7.685kW
Shaft Power =15.309 kW
Pump ɳ = 50.02 %
Proposals:
These pump working at the 50% efficiency so
increase the efficiency to 65-70% Will reduce
the power consumption
64

65. Savings and Payback
 Liquor pump:
 Rated flow : 61 m3/hr
 Flow Measured : 59.8 m3/hr
 Power consumption : 86.34 kW
 Pump current Efficiency : 56 %
 Motor current efficiency : 80 %
 Annual working hours : 6000
Proposals:
The pump is working under the 56 % Efficiency,
Replacing the pump with the 70% Efficiency will decrease
power required hydraulic power, hence reducing the power
consumption
Proposed Power consumption : 76 kW
One time motor
Implementation cost : 68000 `
65

66. Payback:
Annual Energy Savings: (Present power – Expected power) * Annual
working hours
(86.34-76)*6000
62040 kWh
Annual power cost savings : Annual energy savings * cost of 1
unit
62040 * 6.5
403260 `
Payback period : One time implementation cost*12
/Annual power cost savings
68000*12 / 403260
2.4 Months
66

67. Savings in Pumps
Pump Energy Cost Return of
Savings/year savings/year investment
Auxillary Boiler 10318 kWh 67067 ` 9.3 Months
Feed Pump
Back wash Pump 4200 kWh 27300 ` 17 months
Condensate 11340 kWh 73710 ` 7.5 months
Pump
Liquor Pump 62040 kWh 403260 ` 2.4
Total 87898 kWh 5,71,337 `
67

68. Conclusion
 On auditing the electrical utilities of the
plant I am concluding the project with
savings summary
Motors - 220092 kWh
Compressor – 307465 kWh
Lighting – 111331.69 kWh
Cooling Tower – 316099 kWh
Transformer – 10000 kWh
Pumping – 87898 kWh
Total 736786.69 kWh saved
/year
68

69. Bibiliography
 Bibliography
 Handbook on Energy Audit and Environment Managementby Abbi
 The Codes Guidebook for Interiorsby Sharon Koomen Harmon,
Katherine E.
 Kennon
 Technical Guide of BHEL CCDP Plantby Mithoshi Ken Shu
Wang,Yaspal
 singh and Karthikeyan.
 Hispanic Engineer & IT- Winter-Energy Auditing magazine.
 Keeping the Lights on: Nuclear, Renewables and Climate Change-
Great
 Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environmental Audit
Committee
 Investment Grade Energy Audit: Making Smart Energy Choices-
Shirley J.
 Hansen, James W. Brown 69

70. Bibiligraphy
 Handbook of Energy Engineering-Albert Thumann, D. Paul Mehta
 Energy Management-Dr. Parag Diwan & Mohammed Yaqoot
 Turbines Compressors And Fans (4th Edition)- S. M. Yahya
 Reciprocating Compressors: Operation & Maintenance-Heinz P.
 Bloch, John J. Hoefner
 Lighting dimensions: Volume 20-Magazine
 Lighting Retrofit and Relighting: A Guide to Energy Efficient Lighting-
James
 R. Benya, Donna J. Leban
 Pump User's Handbook: Life Extension-Heinz P. Bloch, Allan R.
Budris
 Variable Speed Pumping:A Guide To Successful Applications-
Magazine
 BHEL CCDP Electrical equipments Installation Data- Departmental
Copy
 Cooling Tower Performance-Meera Bai,Lakshmi and Naryan
 Manual on coating and lining methods for cooling water systems-
Dr.Chandrasekaran
70

71. 71