Unit 6

Technical Design Portfolio
Whole System Design Suite

Taking a whole system approach to achieving
sustainable design outcomes
Unit 6 - Worked Example 1

Industrial Pumping Systems
July 2007
This Course was developed under a grant from the Australian

Government Department of the Environment and Water Resources as
part of the 2005/06 Environmental Education Grants Program.
(The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the
Commonwealth, and the Commonwealth does not accept the
responsibility for any information or advice contained herein.)
TDP ESSP Technical Design Portfolio: Whole System Design Suite
Worked Example 1 – Industrial Pumping Systems
Unit 6
Worked Example 1 – Industrial Pumping
Systems
Significance of Pumping Systems and Design
Motors use 60 percent of the world’s electricity. Of this percentage, 20 percent is used for
pumping. 1 Industrial pumping systems account for nearly 20 percent of the world’s industrial
electrical energy demand; this is no surprise, as most systems are running in continuous
operations for 18 hours per day or more.
With such a large amount of energy devoted to moving liquid from one place to another (a lot of
which is used to fight pipe friction and in many cases unnecessary changes in height and
direction), improving the efficiency of industrial pumping systems can make major strides in the
reduction of industrial energy consumption and hence greenhouse emissions. The benefits of
improved pumping efficiency include reduced reliance on both the electricity grid and renewable
energy supplies, and improved operational reliability. Furthermore, saving a single unit of
pumping energy can actually save more than ten times that energy in fuel. Due to the
inefficiencies of a mostly centralised electricity transmission system, 100 units of fuel input at the
power station are required to achieve 9.5 units of energy output at the pumping system. 2 But
the reverse is also true: saving 9.5 units of energy output at the pump could save 100 units of
energy at the power station. 3
Generally, smaller pumping systems tend to be more inefficient than large pumping systems.
Small pumping systems typically make up only a small fraction of the total cost of an industrial
operation and thus receive relatively little design attention. However, the significance of small
pumping systems cannot be overlooked. There are many more small- and medium-sized
enterprises than there are large enterprises. Thus it is likely that there are a lot more small
pumping systems than large pumping systems, especially since small enterprises almost
exclusively use small pumping systems and large enterprises use both small and large pumping
systems. Large pumping systems, in the order of kilowatts and megawatts that are poorly
designed and managed, can attract very high and unnecessary costs. Consequently, large
pumping system design is typically quite disciplined, with more attention paid to factors such as
minimum velocities, thermal expansion, pipe work and maintenance. Still, there are very few
pumping systems that wouldn’t benefit from Whole System Design.
1
Hawken, P., Lovins, A.B. and Lovins, L.H. (1999) Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, Earthscan, London p
115.
2
Ibid, p 121
3
Ibid, p 121
Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 2 of 21

Worked example overview

The following worked example provides a worked mathematical example similar to a well known
Whole System Design case study, ‘Pipes and Pumps’, which is briefly described in the below
extract from Natural Capitalism: 4
In 1997, leading American carpet maker, Interface Inc, was building a factory in Shanghai. One
of its industrial processes required fourteen pumps. In optimizing the design, the top Western
specialist firm sized those pumps to total ninety-five horsepower. But a fresh look by
Interface/Holland's engineer Jan Schilham, applying methods learned from Singaporean
efficiency expert Eng Lock Lee, cut the design's pumping power to only seven horsepower - a
92 percent or twelve-fold energy saving - while reducing its capital cost and improving its
performance in every respect.
The new specifications required two changes in design. First, Schilham chose to deploy big
pipes and small pumps instead of the original design's small pipes and big pumps. Friction falls
as nearly the fifth power of pipe diameter, so making the pipes 50 percent fatter reduces their
friction by 86 percent. The system then needs less pumping energy - and smaller pumps and
motors to push against the friction. If the solution is this easy, why weren't the pipes originally
specified to be big enough? Because of a small but important blind spot: traditional
optimization compares the cost of the fatter pipe with only the value of the saved pumping
energy. This comparison ignores the size, and hence the capital cost, of the equipment -
pump, motor, motor-drive circuits, and electrical supply components - needed to combat the
pipe friction. Schilham found he needn't calculate how quickly the savings could repay the
extra up-front cost of the fatter pipe, because capital cost would fall more for the pumping and
drive equipment than it would rise for the pipe, making the efficient system as a whole cheaper
to construct.
Second, Schilham laid out the pipes first and then installed the equipment, in reverse to how
pumping systems are conventionally installed. Normally, equipment is put in some convenient
and arbitrary spot, and the pipe fitter is then instructed to connect point A to point B. The pipe
often has to go through all sorts of twists and turns to hook up equipment that's too far apart,
turned the wrong way, mounted at the wrong height, and separated by other devices installed
in between. The extra bends and the extra length make friction in the system about three- to
sixfold higher than it should be. The pipe fitters don't mind the extra work: They're paid by the
hour, they mark up the pipe and fittings, and they won't have to pay the pumps' capital or
operating costs.
By laying out the pipes before placing the equipment that the pipes connect, Schilham was
able to make the pipes short and straight rather than long and crooked. That enabled him to
exploit their lower friction by making the pumps, motors, inverters, and electricals even smaller
and cheaper.
The fatter pipes and cleaner layout yielded not only 92 percent lower pumping energy at a
lower total capital cost but also simpler and faster construction, less use of floor space, more
reliable operation, easier maintenance, and better performance. As an added bonus, easier
thermal insulation of the straighter pipes saved an additional 70 kilowatts of heat loss, enough
to avoid burning about a pound of coal every two minutes, with a three-month payback.
Schilham marveled at how he and his colleagues could have over looked such simple
opportunities for decades. His redesign required, as inventor Edwin Land used to say, ‘not so
4
Ibid.

much having a new idea as stopping having an old idea.’ The old idea was to ‘optimize’ only
part of the system - the pipes - against only one parameter - pumping energy. Schilham, in
contrast, optimized the whole system for multiple benefits—pumping energy expended plus
capital cost saved. (He didn't bother to value explicitly the indirect benefits mentioned, but he
could have.)
Figure 6.1 shows the setting for the worked example, a typical production plant scenario where
a pumping system would be used. In Figure 6.1, a known fluid at temperature T must be moved
from point 1 in reservoir A to point 2 at the tap with a target exit volumetric flow rate of Q.
Between the reservoir and tap is a window (fixed into the wall) and a machine press (moveable).
Figure 6.1. A Typical Production Plant Scenario

Source: adapted from Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) 5 pp. 512, 522
Recall the 10 elements of applying a Whole System Design approach discussed in Unit 4 and
Unit 5:
1. Ask the right questions
2. Benchmark against the optimal system
3. Design and optimise the whole system
4. Account for all measurable impacts
5. Design and optimise subsystems in the right sequence
6. Design and optimise subsystems to achieve compounding resource savings
7. Review the system for potential improvements
8. Model the system
9. Track technology innovation
10. Design to create future options
5 rd
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 3 edn, Wiley & Sons, New York.

The following worked example will demonstrate how the 10 elements can be applied to pumping
systems using two contrasting examples: a conventional pumping versus a Whole System
Designed pumping system. The application of an element will be indicated with a blue box.
Design Challenge: Consider water at 20 ºC flowing from

reservoir A, through the system in Figure 6.1, to a tap with a target
exit volumetric flow rate of Q = 0.001 m3/s. Select suitable pipes
based on pipe diameter, D, and a suitable pump based on pump
power, P, and calculate the cost of the system.
Design Process: The following sections present:
1. General Solution: A solution for any single pump, single pipe
system with the given constraints
2. Conventional Design solution: Conventional system with
limited application of the 10 key operational steps for Whole
System Design
3. Whole System Design solution: Improved system using the 10
key operational steps for Whole System Design
4. Performance comparison: Comparison of the economic and
environmental costs and benefits

General Solution
Note: Appendix 6A contains equations and tables that are applied to the General, Conventional
and Whole System Design solutions in the following sections. They can also be applies to
similar pipe and pump systems.
Table 6.1: Symbol Nomenclature
Symbol Description Unit Symbol Description Unit

p Pressure Pa L Pipe length m
ρ Density kg/m3 D Pipe diameter m
g Acceleration due to 9.81 m/s2 Re Reynolds number
gravity
α Kinetic energy μ Dynamic viscosity Ns/m2
coefficient
V Average velocity m/s ε Equivalent mm
roughness
z Height m KL Loss coefficient
h Head loss m A Pipe cross sectional m2
area
f Friction factor P Power W
Figure 6.2 shows a typical single pump, single pipe solution, which includes the following
features:
- The system accommodates the pre-existing floor plan (window) and equipment (machine
press) in the plant.
- Reservoir A exit is very well rounded.
- The diameter of every pipe is D.
- A globe valve, which acts as an emergency cut off and stops the flow for maintenance
purposes, is fully open during operation.
- The existing tap is replaced by a tap with an exit diameter of D.

Figure 6.2. A typical single pump, single pipe solution

Source: adapted from Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998), pp512, 522, 800 6
The energy balance between point 1 and point 2 in the system is 8. Model the system
given by Bernoulli’s Equation (see Appendix 6A):
p1/ρg + α1V12/2g + z1 + Σ Pi/ρgAiVi
= p2/ρg + α2V22/2g + z2 + Σ fi (Li/Di)(Vi2/2g) + Σ KLiVi2/2g
Some simplifications and substitutions can be made based on the configuration of the system:
- p1 = p2 = 0 (atmospheric pressure)
- V1 = 0
- z1 = 0
- Since reservoir A exit is very well rounded, assume the corresponding component loss is
negligible
- Since the diameter of every pipe is D (constant): 7
• The cross sectional area of every pipe is A.
• The average velocity of the fluid in the downstream of the pump is constant and
equal to V2.
- The pipes are considered to be a single pipe of length L.
- Assume the pipe is completely full of water since there is no downward flow. 8
6 rd
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 3 edn, Wiley & Sons, New York, pp512,
522, 800.
7
A and V are dependent on D.
8
This assumption aims to omit two possible situations where air is present in the pipe. The first situation occurs when the portion of
the pipe nearest the tap contains air because there isn’t enough water to fill the pipe. In practice, this situation can be overcome by
turning off the tap before turning off the pump when shutting down. The second situation occurs when water and air share space in

- Assume that pipes are available in the lengths indicated in Figure 6.2.
- Assume that head losses through pump connectors, tap connectors and reservoir A exit are
negligible.
Thus, the energy balance reduces to:
P/ρgAV2 = α2V22/2g + z2 + f (L/D)(V22/2g) + V22/2g (Σ KLi)
The design variables to be determined are:

- Pump power, P
- Pipe diameter, D
The known variables are:
- ρ given in Table 6A.3 (Appendix 6A)
- z2 from system plan
- L from system plan
- KLi given in Figure 6A.4, Figure 6A.6, Table 6A.2 (see Appendix 6A)
V2 can be eliminated from the energy balance equation by substituting for functions of Q and D
using (Appendix 6A):
V2 = Q/A
and
A = ∏D2/4
Substituting and making pump power, P, the subject of the equation gives:
P = (8ρQ3/∏2D4) [α2 + f (L/D) + Σ KLi] + ρgQz2
The friction factor, f, is dependent on the Reynolds number, Re, (Appendix 6A):
Re = ρV2D/μ
Substituting for V2 gives:
Re = 4ρQ/∏Dμ
Where μ is given in Table 6A.3 (Appendix 6A). For a turbulent flow (Re > 4000) the equivalent
roughness of the interior of the pipe, ε, is required to determine f. The equivalent roughness is
given in Table 6A.1 (Appendix 6A).
We now have the relationship between pump power, P, and pipe diameter, D, in terms of known
variables for the system in Figure 6.2.
the pump at the same point (but don’t mix). This configuration is often referred to as a ‘channel’ configuration because of the
resemblance to a channelled waterway such as a river (open channel) or a sewage pipe (closed channel). Since water is denser
than air, water will occupy the bottom side of the channel and air will occupy the top side; and since all flow is either horizontal or
against gravity then, given enough water and an outlet for the air to escape (tap), the pipe will likely be filled with water.

Conventional Design solution

Select suitable pipes and pumps for the system
For water at 20ºC Table 6A.3 (Appendix 6A) gives:
- ρ = 998.2 kg/m3
- μ = 1.002 x 10-3 Ns/m2
Calculating Reynolds number:
Re = 4(998.2 kg/m3)(0.001 m3/s)/∏D(1.002 x 10-3 Ns/m2)
Re = 1268/D
The flow is turbulent (Re > 4000) for D < 0.317 m. A pipe of diameter D = 0.317m is much larger
than what would even be suitable for the system 9 in Figure 6.2, thus it is safe to assume that the
flow is turbulent. Since turbulent velocity profiles are nearly uniform across the pipes, we
assume α1 = α2 = 1.
For 90º threaded elbows Table 6A.2 (Appendix 6A) gives:
- KL4 = KL5 = KL6 = KL7 = 1.5
For a fully open globe valve Table 6A.2 (Appendix 6A) gives:
- KLV = 10
For the tap:
- KLT = 2
The energy balance equation becomes:
P = [8(998.2 kg/m3)(0.001 m3/s)3/∏2D4] [1 + f (30/D) + (1.5x4 + 10 + 2)]
+ (998.2 kg/m3)(9.81 m/s2)(0.001 m3/s)(10 m)
P = (8.0911 x 10-7/D4)[f (30/D) + 19] + 97.923
Suppose drawn copper tubing of diameter D = 0.015m was selected for the pipes. Substituting
into the Reynolds number equation gives:
Re = 1268.411/(0.015 m) = 84561
For drawn tubing Table 6A.1 (Appendix 6A) gives:

ε = 0.0015 mm
Thus:
ε/D = 0.0015/15 = 0.0001
Using the Moody chart, Figure 6A.1, Re = 84561 and ε/D = 0.0001 give:
f = 0.0195
9
The pipe diameter for the system in Figure 6.2 is likely no less than D = 0.01 m and no more than D = 0.05 m.

Substituting D = 0.015 m and f = 0.0195 into the equation for pump power gives:
P = (8.0911 x 10-7/(0.015 m)4)[0.0195 (30/(0.015 m)) + 19] + 97.923 = 1025 W
That is, for the system in Figure 6.2, if drawn copper tubing of diameter D = 0.015 m is used for
the pipes, then a pump of power P = 1025 W is required to generate an exit volumetric flow rate
of Q = 0.001 m3/s.
From ‘Water pumps pricelist’ (Appendix 6B) we can select a pump model:
Waterco Hydrostorm Plus 150 10 at P = 1119 W (1.5 hp)
From ‘Hard drawn copper tube (6M length)’ in ‘Kirby copper pricelist’ (Appendix 6C) we can
select a pipe:
T24937 at D = 15 mm (5/8 in)
Calculate the cost of the system

For copper pipe T24937 ‘Hard drawn copper tube (6M length)’ in ‘Kirby copper pricelist’
(Appendix 6C) gives a cost of $57.12 per 6m. Therefore the cost of 30m of copper pipe is:
Pipe cost = ($57.12 per 6m)(30 m)/6 = $285.60
For standard radius 90º elbows of 15mm (5/8 in) diameter J00231 ‘copper fittings’ in the ‘Kirby
copper pricelist’ (Appendix 6C) gives a cost of $2.34 each. Therefore the total cost of the elbows
is:
Elbow cost = ($2.34)(4) = $9.36
For a globe valve of diameter 15mm (5/8 in), interpolating a ‘components pricelist’ (Appendix
6D) gives:
Estimated globe valve cost = $13 (US$10)
For a tap of exit diameter 0.015 m ‘components pricelist’ (Appendix 6D) gives:
Tap cost = $6.70
Installation costs for 8hrs at $65/hr gives:

Installation costs = ($65/hr)(8 hrs) = $520
10
Waterco (2004) Hydrostorm Plus Pool and Spa Pumps. Waterco, p 2. Available at
http://www.waterco.com.au/brochures/ZZB0908_HydrostormPlus.pdf (accessed 11 July 2006). Waterco shows that this pump has a
3 3
max Q = 400 l/min, whereas we require Q = 600 l/min (0.001m /s). However, in practice, Q = 600 l/min (0.001m /s) would be an
unusually high flow rate for the system in Figure 6.2. Hence it is reasonable to ignore this relatively minor discrepancy because the
system itself is not entirely practical.

For the Waterco Hydrostorm Plus 150 gives:

Pump cost = $616
Thus, the total capital cost of the system is:

Capital cost = $285.60 + $9.36 + $13 + $6.70 + $520 + $546
= $1451
To calculate running costs for the selected electrically powered pump, the following values are
used:
- pump efficiency for an electrical pump: 47% 11
- cost of electricity: $0.1/kWh (2006 price for large energy users)
For the Waterco Hydrostorm Plus 150 pump running at output power P = 1025 W, the monthly
pump running costs for 12 hrs/day, 26 day/mth are:
Running cost = ($0.1/kWh)(1.025 kW)(12 hrs/day)(26 day/mth)/(0.47)
= $68/mth
11
ESPA (2000) SILENT Series; TYPHOON Series: Swimming pool pumps: Instruction Manual, Monarch Pool Systems, p 2.
Available at http://www.monarchpoolsystems.com/manuals/PDF/Espa-manual.pdf (accessed 11 July 2006). This value is an
approximation based on the data given by ESPA for the Silent 75M.

Whole System Design Solution

Is the conventional solution optimal for the whole system? What 1. Ask the right
are the factors of the whole system that need to be considered? questions
The conventional design solution was suboptimal for two reasons:
1. The pipe configuration introduced head losses that could be avoided, and
2. The selection procedure for pipe diameter, D, and pump power, P, did not address the
whole system.
Redesign the pipes and pump system with less head loss
Items to consider:
7. Review the system
1
- From Bernoulli’s equation, Power ∝ Æ Increasing for potential
D4 improvements
diameter dramatically reduces power required
- Can the system be designed with less bends?
- Can the system be designed with more-shallow bends?
- Is it worthwhile moving the plant equipment (machine press)?
- Is an alternative pipe material more suitable?
- Is there a more suitable valve? Do we even need a valve?
Figure 6.3. An alternative, Whole System Design configuration, which accommodates for the
window and the machine press shown in Figure 6.1
Source: adapted from Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998), pp512, 522, 800 12
12 rd
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 3 edn, Wiley & Sons, New York, pp512,
522, 800.

Select suitable pipes and pumps for the system

Since the conditions at point 1 and point 2 in Figure 6.3 are the same as in Figure 6.2, and a
single pump and single pipe are used, the energy balance equation for the general solution is
applicable:
P = (8ρQ3/∏2D4) [α2 + f (L/D) + Σ KLi] + ρgQz2
For 45º threaded elbows Table 6A.2 (Appendix 6A) gives:

- KL4 = KL5 = 0.4
For a fully open gate valve Table 6A.2 (Appendix 6A) gives:
- KLV = 0.15
For the tap:
- KLT = 2
The energy balance equation becomes:

P = [8(998.2 kg/m3)(0.001 m3/s)3/∏2D4] [1 + f (24/D) + (0.4x2 + 0.15 + 2)]
+ (998.2 kg/m3)(9.81 m/s2)(0.001 m3/s)(10 m)
P = (8.0911 x 10-7/D4)[f (24/D) + 3.95] + 97.923
Suppose, instead, a drawn copper pipe of diameter D = 0.03m (double the diameter in the
conventional solution) was selected. Substituting into the Reynolds number equation gives:
Re = 1268.411/(0.03 m) = 42280
For drawn tubing 13 Table 6A.1 (Appendix 6A) gives:

- ε = 0.0015 mm
Thus: ε/D = 0.0015/30 = 0.00005
Using the Moody chart, Figure 6A.1, Re = 42280 and ε/D = 0.00005 give:
- f = 0.0215
Substituting D = 0.03 m and f = 0.0215 into the equation for pump power gives:
P = (8.0911 x 10-7/(0.03 m)4)[0.0215 (24/(0.03 m)) + 3.95] + 97.923 = 119 W
13 rd
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 3 edn, Wiley & Sons, New York, p 492.
Pipes of diameter 0.01-0.04m are available in a few different materials, including copper, steel and aluminium. Munson, Young and
Okjishi suggest that drawn metal tubing, such as the copper pipes incorporated in the conventional solution, are the smoothest of the
suitable pipes for the Design Challenge. Although plastic pipes are virtually frictionless, they are also generally larger than what is
required, starting at diameters of about 0.05m (1 in).

That is, for the system in Figure 6.3, if drawn copper tubing of diameter D = 0.03 m is used for
the pipes, then a pump of power P = 119 W is required to generate an exit volumetric flow rate
of Q = 0.001 m3/s.
From ‘Water pumps pricelist’ we can select pump model:

Monarch ESPA Whisper 500 14 at P = 370 W (0.5 hp)
From ‘Hard drawn copper tube (6M length)’ in ‘Kirby copper pricelist’ we can select pipe:
T22039 at D = 31.75 mm (1¼ in)
Is this the optimal solution for the whole system?
Consider the effect of other pipe diameters and pump powers

Other combinations of pipe diameter and pump power 15 that suit 3. Design and
the system can be selected in a similar way, as in Table 6.2: optimise the whole
system
Table 6.2: Pump power calculated for a spectrum of pipe diameters
D (m) Re ε/D F P (W)
0.015 84561 0.0001 0.0195 660
0.02 63421 0.000075 0.0205 242
0.025 50736 0.00006 0.0210 148
0.03 42280 0.00005 0.0215 119
0.04 31710 0.0000375 0.0230 104
14
Monarch Pool Systems (n.d.) Whisper Series: Swimming Pool Pumps, Monarch Pool Systems, p 2. Available at
http://www.monarchpoolsystems.com/products/Low%20Res%20PDFs/Whisper.pdf (accessed 13 July 2006). Monarch Pool Systems
3
shows that this pump has a max Q = 160 l/min, whereas we require Q = 600 l/min (0.001m /s). However, in practice, Q = 600 l/min
3
(0.001m /s) would be an unusually high flow rate for the system in Figure 6.2. Hence it is reasonable to ignore this relatively minor
discrepancy because the system itself in not entirely practical. ‘Water Pumps Pricelist’ also shows two other pumps – little Giant
Utility Sump 50500 and Flotec Waterfall/Utility FP0S1200X – that are better matched (with respect to power) to the system in Figure
6.3. However, these pumps are usually too small to be used in an application such as the system in Figure 6.3, and their flow rate of
Q = 76 l/min (1200gph) is too much of a stretch to simply ignore.
15
Only system with diameter up to D = 0.04m are shown. At higher diameters the power savings become small. For example D =
0.05 m gives P = 102W; and D = 0.06 m gives 100W.

Calculate the cost of the system

The capital and running costs for each pipe and pump combination are shown in Table 6.3. The
costs are calculated in a similar way as for the conventional solution. The efficiency of the
Monarch ESPA Whisper 1000 is approximated at 42% 16 and the efficiency of the Monarch
ESPA Whisper 500 is approximated at 40%. 17 The life cycle economic cost of each solution is
estimated as the net present value (NPV) calculated over a life of 50 years and at a discount
rate of 6%.
Table 6.3: Summary of system costs for a range of pump types and pipe diameter
Pipes and Total Life cycle

D Pump Pump Running cost
components P (W) capital
(m) selected cost cost
cost cost (-NPV 18 )
Monarch
0.015 $602 660 ESPA $357 $959 $49/mth $10,821
Whisper 1000
Monarch
0.02 $745 242 ESPA $331 $1076 $19/mth $4,873
Whisper 500
Monarch
0.025 $827 148 ESPA $331 $1158 $12/mth $3,480
Whisper 500
Monarch
0.03 $914 119 ESPA $331 $1245 $9/mth $3,112
Whisper 500
Monarch
0.04 $1126 104 ESPA $331 $1457 $8/mth $3,089
Whisper 500
Table 6.3 shows that the solution with D = 0.015m has the lowest capital cost by a relatively
small margin, but the highest life cycle cost by a factor of 2-3. Given the estimation errors in our
calculations, the life cycle cost for the solution with D = 0.03 m is about the same as that for a
system with D = 0.04 m. However, the capital cost is about $200 less and would therefore incur
smaller economic stress up front. 19 Hence, for the optimal pipe and pump combination for the
system in Figure 6.3 we can select:
ESPA Whisper 500 pump at P = 370 W (0.5 hp)
T22039 hard drawn copper pipe at D = 31.75 mm (1¼ in)
16
ESPA (2000) SILENT Series; TYPHOON Series: Swimming pool pumps: Instruction Manual, Monarch Pool Systems, p 2.
Available at http://www.monarchpoolsystems.com/manuals/PDF/Espa-manual.pdf (accessed 11 July 2006).This value is an
approximation based on the data given by ESPA for the Silent 30M.
17
Ibid. This value is an approximation based on the data given by ESPA, which shows a trend of decreasing efficiency with
decreasing power capacity.
18
Negative (-) values for NPV are actually costs.
19
Alternatively, the risk involved with spreading the system cost over a period where the economic situation can only be estimated
may be a greater stress than having to pay more up front. Consequently, in this worked example either solution is as good as the
other.

Summary: Performance Comparisons

A side-by-side comparison of the conventional design solution system and the Whole System
Design (WSD) solution in Table 6.4 highlights the substantially different results that each
approach achieves:
Table 6.4: Comparing the costs of the two solutions
Solution D Pipes and P Pump Total Running Life cycle
(m) components (W) cost capital cost cost (-
cost cost NPV)
Conventional 0.015 $835 1025 $616 $1451 $61/mth $15,129
WSD 0.03 $914 119 $331 $1245 $9/mth $3,112
The life cycle cost of the Whole System Design solution is about five-fold smaller than for the
conventional solution. Since the capital costs of both solutions are similar, it is obvious that the
cost savings for the Whole System Design solution arises from the lower required pumping
power and hence running cost. This example demonstrates the dominance of running costs over
capital costs – a relationship that is common for many resource consuming systems. The power
reduction was made possible by the inclusion of two additional steps in the design and selection
process:
1. Step 1: Redesign the pipes and pump system with less head loss, and
2. Step 2: Consider the effect of other pipe diameters and pump powers.
Step 1 optimised the system configuration and yielded system wide improvement, regardless of
the pipe diameter selected. Even with the same pipe diameter as the conventional solution (D =
0.015 m), the Whole System Design solution has a 28% lower pipes and components cost;
requires 36% less power; has a 34% lower capital cost; and comes in about 28% cheaper over
its life, as shown in Figure 6.4.
Step 2 optimised the pipe diameter and pump selection process. Notably, the larger diameter
pipes reduced the total required pumping power of the system. The second step resulted in a
further 82% reduction in power and 71% reduction in life cycle cost, as shown in Figure 6.4.
In total, the Whole System Design solution uses 88% less power; costs 79% less over its life;
and is cheaper to purchase and install than the conventional solution.

(a) Life cycle cost
(b) Capital cost and breakdown
(c) Pumping power

Figure 6.4. Comparing the effects of Step 1 and Step 2

Multiple benefits
A number of other benefits arise from designing the pumping
4. Account for all
system such that it is ‘short, fat, and straight’ rather than ‘long, thin measurable impacts
and bent’:
- More floor space is available – less piping covering the floors of industrial sites means more
space is available to work in, as well as improving the safety of the work environment.
- More reliable operation – less bends and valves in piping reduces the likelihood of parts
failing. Reducing friction in the piping means that less energy is lost to adding physical stress
to the piping system, thereby increasing the life of the system. Since less power is required,
the motor driving the pump doesn’t need to work as hard.
- Easier maintenance – with short and straight pipes, maintenance workers can get into the
system with relative ease, as opposed to negotiating a maze of piping in the conventional
solution.
- Better performance – A much greater percentage of energy used in the system is converted
into useful work. A system that is more reliable and easy to maintain provides consistently
high performance relative to conventional systems.

Factors to consider for larger systems

Extra considerations for larger pipes
The pipe sizes considered in this worked example can be installed and mounted without
restriction. However, a few notes should be made about larger pipes:
- A structure design permit may be required before mounting the pipe to an existing structure.
Attaining the permit may incur a cost.
- Large pipes are heavier and thus may require additional mounting support, which may incur
a cost.
- Pipes larger than about 0.05m (2 in) diameter may require stress analysis to account for the
effects of thermal expansion. Tables that suggest when stress analysis should be performed
are available. The tables usually consider pipe diameter and fluid temperature.
- Long straight pipes experience more wall stress than shorter, bent pipes. Systems with long
straight pipes can also result in higher forces and resulting moments on inertia on the fixed
nozzles of equipment, especially when the endpoints of the system are under pressure (say
in a tank as opposed to open air). In these cases, expansion joints and bellowed nozzles can
be incorporated to an advantage, with the key consideration being to make bends as smooth
as possible.
Site planning
In this worked example, it was assumed that reservoir A, the pump, and the tap were to remain
where there were. Sometimes, the location of such features is arbitrary, as in the ‘Pipes and
Pumps’ example in Natural Capitalism, 20 so their location can be governed by the piping system.
Other times, however, other factors can influence where these features as well as the pipes
should be located. For example, a pipe and pump system can share many resources with other
equipment and systems. These resources include shelter, electrical cable route, drainage
systems, and access ways for maintenance. Accounting for these factors is an example of Step
3, ‘Design and optimise the whole system’ and Step 4, ‘Account for all measurable impacts’.
Larger cost reductions
In this worked example, the small amount of required pumping power 21 did not lend itself to a
good demonstration of pump capital cost savings. Table 6.3 shows that even though required
pumping power fell by a factor of more than two between the solution where D = 0.02m and the
solution where D = 0.04m, the same pump was used for all solutions and hence the pump
capital cost was the same. In a larger system, the required pumping power falls over a larger
range for which there is a variety of pumps that can be selected.
Internal combustion engine powered systems
Some moderate sized systems use pumps powered by internal combustion engines (ICE). The
size of ICE pumps start at about 1.5 kW output power. They are usually cheaper to purchase but
more expensive to run than the equivalent electric pump. Consequently, moderate sized ICE
pump systems have even greater potential for cost savings.
To demonstrate, consider a conventional, ICE-powered system that requires 10kW of pumping
power. We have shown that Whole System Design can reduce the pumping power of a
conventional system by 88%. The 10kW conventional system can therefore be redesigned as a
20
Hawken, P., Lovins, A.B. and Lovins, L.H. (1999) Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, Earthscan, London.
21
The optimised whole systems design solution required the same amount of power (119W) as a bright incandescent lamp.

1.2kW system, which means the 10kW ICE pump costing about $12,700 22 can be replaced with
a 1.5kW electric pump costing $616. 23
Now, since the required pumping power is reduced by 88%, the running costs are then reduced
by 88%. Furthermore, an additional saving arises since the electrical pump is at least twice as
efficient as the ICE pump (20-26% 24 ) while the cost per unit energy is about the same for
electricity ($0.10/kWh for large energy users, $0.17 for domestic users) as it is for petrol
($0.14/kWh at $1.30 per litre).
Effectively, the lower power consumption of the Whole System Design solution makes viable
solutions that bring with them additional benefits and that are otherwise too expensive.
To calculate the cost per unit energy of petrol, the following values are used:
- energy value of petrol: 34 MJ/litre 25
- cost of petrol: $1.30/litre (2006 price at the pump)
The cost per unit energy for petrol is:
Cost per unit energy = ($1.30/litre)/(34,000,000 J/litre)
= 3.8235 x 10-8 $/J
Converting to units of $/kWh:
Cost per unit energy = [(3.8235 x 10-8 $/J)/(1 s)](1000 W/kW)(3600 s/hr)
= $0.14/kWh
22
‘Water Pumps Pricelist’ gives details for a 10kW (13 hp) Fire 02.5F13K2V pump.
23
‘Water Pumps Pricelist’ gives details for a 1.5kW (2 hp) Waterco Hydrostorm Plus 200 pump.
24
Evans, R., Sneed, R.E. and Hunt, J.H. (1996) Pumping plant performance evaluation, North Carolina Cooperative Extension
Service. Available at http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/evans/ag452-6.html (accessed 27 June 2006). This value is an
overestimate. The data is for an internal combustion engine only, and does not include any mechanical losses associated with the
coupling of the engine to the pump or the pump itself.
25
Moorland School (n.d.) Petrol, http://www.moorlandschool.co.uk/earth/petrol.htm (accessed 27 June 2006).

References
ESPA (2000) SILENT Series; TYPHOON Series: Swimming pool pumps: Instruction Manual,
Monarch Pool Systems. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available at
http://www.monarchpoolsystems.com/manuals/PDF/Espa-manual.pdf.
Evans, R., Sneed, R.E. and Hunt, J.H. (1996) Pumping plant performance evaluation, North
Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Accessed 27 June 2006. Available at
http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/evans/ag452-6.html.
Hawken, P., Lovins, A.B. and Lovins, L.H. (1999) Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next
Industrial Revolution, Earthscan, London.
Monarch Pool Systems (n.d.) Whisper Series: Swimming Pool Pumps, Monarch Pool Systems.
Accessed 13 July 2006. Available at
http://www.monarchpoolsystems.com/products/Low%20Res%20PDFs/Whisper.pdf.
Moorland School (n.d.) Petrol. Accessed 27 June 2006. Available at
http://www.moorlandschool.co.uk/earth/petrol.htm.
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 3rd edn,
Wiley & Sons, New York.
Waterco (2004) Hydrostorm Plus Pool and Spa Pumps. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available at
http://www.waterco.com.au/brochures/ZZB0908_HydrostormPlus.pdf.


Worked Example 1 – Appendix 6A

July 2007

Appendix 6A
Calculating the total energy balance
Symbol nomenclature
Symbol Description Unit
A Pipe cross sectional area m2
D Pipe diameter m
f Friction factor
g Acceleration due to gravity 9.81 m/s2
h Head loss m
KL Loss coefficient
L Pipe length m
p Pressure Pa
P Power W
Q Volumetric flow rate m3/s
R Universal gas constant 8.314 kJ/kmolK
Re Reynolds number
T Temperature K
V Average velocity m/s
z Height m
α Kinetic energy coefficient
γ Specific weight kN/m3
ε Equivalent roughness mm
μ Dynamic viscosity Ns/m2
ν Kinematic viscosity m2/s
ρ Density kg/m3

Calculating the total energy balance

There are 4 kinds of energy changes associated with fluid flow through a pipe and pump
system:
1. Pressure, kinetic energy and potential energy changes
2. Friction losses
3. Component losses
4. Pumping gains
1. Energy balance of a steady, inviscid (zero viscosity), incompressible flow in a frictionless

pipe system (an ideal system) is governed by the Bernoulli equation, which indicates that the
sum of the pressure, kinetic energy, and potential energy changes is constant along a
streamline. The equation is given in terms of heads:
p/ρg + αV2/2g + z = constant along a streamline
For uniform velocity profiles α = 1. For non-uniform velocity profiles α > 1.
2. Friction head loss for a fully developed, steady, incompressible flow in a single pipe is given
by the Darcy-Weisbach equation:
hF = f (L/D)(V2/2g)
The total friction head loss through all pipes in a pipe system is the sum of the individual friction
losses.
Calculating the friction factor, f, depends on the type of flow. The Reynolds number is used to
distinguish between laminar and turbulent flow:
Re = ρVD/μ
Reynolds number Type of fluid flow
Re < 2100 Laminar
2100 < Re < 4000 Transitional
Re > 4000 Turbulent
If the flow is laminar the friction factor is given by:

f = 64/Re
If the flow is turbulent the friction factor is a function of Re and the ratio ε/D, where ε is the
equivalent roughness. Table 6A.1 gives values of ε for various types of pipe.

Table 6A.1: Equivalent Roughness for New Pipes

Pipe Equivalent roughness, ε
Feet Millimetres
Rivited steel 0.003 – 0.03 0.9 - 9.0
Concrete 0.001 – 0.01 0.3 – 3.0
Wood stave 0.0006 – 0.003 0.18 – 0.9
Cast iron 0.00085 0.26
Galvanised iron 0.0005 0.15
Commercial steel or wrought iron 0.00015 0.045
Drawn tubing 0.000005 0.0015
Plastic, glass 0.0 (smooth) 0.0 (smooth)
Source: Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998), p492 1
1 rd
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) Fundamental of Fluid Mechanics, 3 edn, Wiley & Sons, New York, p492.

Figure 6A.1. The Moody Chart: Friction Factor as a function of Reynolds number and relative
roughness for round pipes – the Moody Chart shows the relationship between f, Re and ε/D
Source: Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) p493 2
2
Ibid, p493.

Alternatively, the Colebrook formula is valid for the non-laminar range of the Moody chart:
1/√f = –2log10 [(ε/D)/3.7 + 2.51/(Re√f)]
3. Component head losses refer to losses associated with flow though components such as
pipe contractions, expansions, bends, joins and valves. The component head loss through a
single component is given by:
hC = KLV2/2g
The total head loss through all components in the system is the sum of the individual component
losses. The loss coefficient, KL, depends on the type of component.
At a pipe contraction - where the upstream pipe cross sectional area, A1, is larger than the
downstream pipe cross sectional area, A2 - KL is given by Figure 6A.2 for a rounded inlet edge
and Figure 6A.3 for a sudden contraction.
Figure 6A.2. Entrance loss coefficient as a function of rounding the inlet edge
Figure 6A.3: Loss coefficient for a sudden contraction
3
Ibid, p499.

Figure 6A.4 gives KL for various entrance conditions, where A1 is assumed to be infinite.
Figure 6A.4. Entrance flow conditions and loss coefficient. (a) Re-entrant, KL = 0.8, (b) sharp-
edged, KL = 0.5, (c) slightly rounded, KL = 0.2, (d) well-rounded, KL = 0.04.
At a sudden pipe expansion, where the upstream pipe cross sectional area, A1, is smaller than
the downstream pipe cross sectional area, A2, KL is given by Figure 6A5.
Figure 6A.5: Loss coefficient for a sudden expansion

Alternatively, KL for a sudden expansion can be calculated using:
KL = (1- A1/A2) 2
Figure 6A.6 gives KL for various exit conditions, where A2 is assumed to be infinite.
4
Ibid, p500.
5
Ibid, p498.
6
Ibid, p500.

Figure 6A.6: Exit flow conditions and loss coefficient. (a) Re-entrant, KL = 1.0, (b) sharp-edged,
KL = 1.0, (c) slightly rounded, KL = 1.0 (d) well-rounded, KL = 1.0.
Table 6A.2 gives KL for flows through other types of components.
7
Ibid, p499.

Table 6A.2: Loss Coefficients for Pipe Components
8
Ibid, p505.

4. Pumping gains refer to energy from a pump. The pumping head gain for a single pump of
power P pumping a fluid at average velocity V through a pipe of cross sectional area A is:
hP = P/ρgAV
The total pumping gain over all pumps in the system is the sum of the individual gains.
Total energy balance in terms of heads for a pipes and pumps system is given by combining
the 4 sources of energy changes between point 1 and point 2 on a streamline:
p1/ρg + α1V12/2g + z1 + Σ hPi = p2/ρg + α2V22/2g + z2 + Σ hFi + Σ hCi
or
p1/ρg + α1V12/2g + z1 + Σ Pi/ρgAiVi

= p2/ρg + α2V22/2g + z2 + Σ fi (Li/Di)(Vi2/2g) + Σ KLiVi2/2g
Other useful equations

γ = ρg
ν = μ/ρ
p = ρgh
Q = AV
For a circular pipe: A = ΠD2/4
Comparing pipe 1 with diameter D1 and pipe 2 with diameter D2:
hF1/hF2 = (D2/D1)5
For a perfect gas: p = ρRT

Useful resources
Table 6A.3: Physical Properties of Water (SI Units).
Source: Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) p. 853 9
9
Ibid, p853.

Table 6A.4: Physical Properties of Air at Standard Atmospheric Pressure (SI Units)
Source: Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) p. 855 10
10
Ibid, p855.

Table 6A.5: Conversion Factors from BG and EE Units to SI Units
Source: Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) 11
11
Ibid.

Table 6A.6: Conversion Factors from SI Units to BG and EE Units
Source: Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H. (1998) 12
12
Ibid.

References
Munson, B., Young, D. and Okiishi, T. (1998) Fundamental of Fluid Mechanics, 3rd edn, Wiley &
Sons, New York.


Worked Example 1 – Appendix 6B

July 2007

Appendix 6B
Water Pumps Price Lists
Pumpshop
http://www.pumpshop.com.au/
(Accessed 11 August 2005)
Model Power Flow Port size Price

Silent 50 370 W 40 mm AU$376.42
Silent 75 550 W 40 mm AU$389.18
Silent 100 750 W 40 mm AU$401.94
Hurlcon

LX300 0.33 hp 320 l/m @ 30kPa AU$497.42


Whisper 500 0.5 hp 40 mm AU$330.99
Whisper 750 0.75 hp 40 mm AU$343.97
Whisper 1000 1 hp 40 mm AU$356.95
Speck

Magic 8 0.75 hp 160 l/m 40 mm AU$376.42
Magic 11 1 hp 220 l/m 40 mm AU$389.18
Waterco

Hydrostorm Plus 150 1.5 hp 50 mm AU$616
Hydrostorm Plus 200 2 hp 50 mm AU$662.20
Hydrostorm Plus 250 2.5 hp 50 mm AU$708.40
Hydrostorm Plus 300 3 hp 65 mm AU$839.30
Hydrostorm Plus400 4 hp 65 mm AU$985.60

Northern Tool and Equipment

http://www.northerntool.com
Little Giant Utility Sump
Model Power Total Head Flow Port size Price

505000 180 W 26.3 ft 1200 gph @ 1 ft 1 in US$79.99
Flotec Waterfall/Utility

FP0S1200X 180 W 1200 gph 0.5, 0.75, 1 in US$99.99
FP0S2300X 275 W 2300 gph 0.5, 0.75, 1 in US$119.99

Izumi

SMD-50HX 4 hp 50 ft 2000 gph 2 in US$1149.99
850 gph @ 33ft
SMD-80HX 5.5 hp 50 ft 2000 gph @ 33ft 3 in US$1349.99
NorthStar

5.5 hp 187 ft 6960 gph 2 in US$599.99
SE 80 EX 6 hp 102 ft 15376 gph 3 in US$419.99

Gorman Rupp

2P5A 5 hp 200 ft 7200 gph 2in US$499.99
2P5IR 6.5 hp 200 ft 8200 gph @ 20 ft 2in US$629.99
Davey

AK280 6 hp 302 ft 4800 gph 1.5 in US$999.99
AK282 9 hp 332 ft 7200 gph 1.5 in US$1799.99

A.Y. McDonald
http://www.aymcdonald.com/
Fire

02.5F13K1V 13 hp 250 gpm 1.5 in US$10523
02.5F13K2V 13 hp 250 gpm 2.5 in US$9612
02.5F13K3V 23 hp 250 gpm 2.5 in US$11844

COPPER FITTINGS
45˚ Elbows
NEW PART NO. OLD PART NO. SIZE (in) PRICE
J00117 F20000 3/8 3.90
J00122 F20001 1/2 5.01
J00125 F20002 5/8 5.19
J00130 F20003 3/4 9.57
J00131 New - R410A rated 3/4 9.67
J00135 F20004 7/8 9.69
J00136 New - R410A rated 7/8 9.74
J00141 F20010 1 11.35
J00145 F20005 1 1/8 12.03
J00146 New - R410A rated 1 1/8 11.82
J00151 F20012 1 1/4 16.82
J00155 F20006 1 3/8 16.03
J00156 New - R410A rated 1 3/8 15.79
J00165 F20007 1 5/8 16.26
J00166 New - R410A rated 1 5/8 27.55
J00172 F20008 2 1/8 20.16
90˚ Elbows - Standard Radius
J00096 F21001 1/4 2.98
J00106 F21002 3/8 3.18
J00111 F21003 1/2 2.01
J00231 F21004 5/8 2.34
J00236 F21005 3/4 3.28
J00237 New - R410A rated 3/4 5.67
J00241 F21006 7/8 3.38
J00242 New - R410A rated 7/8 6.32
J00246 F21007 1 5.45
J00251 F21008 1 1/8 5.01
J00252 New - R410A rated 1 1/8 11.35
J00256 F21009 1 1/4 13.92
J00261 F21010 1 3/8 11.70
J00262 New - R410A rated 1 3/8 15.07
J00266 F21015 1 1/2 15.25
J00271 F21011 1 5/8 16.36
J00272 New - R410A rated 1 5/8 27.55
J00276 F21017 2 40.30
J00280 F21012 2 1/8 38.63
J00290 F21013 2 5/8 72.81
90˚ Elbows - Short Radius
W02003 F21040 1/4 2.88
1024-0606 F21041 3/8 4.04
J00017 F21042 1/2 1.79
J00026 F21043 5/8 1.89
J00042 F21044 3/4 3.28
J00051 F21045 7/8 2.22
J00062 F21046 1 4.34
J00066 F21047 1 1/8 3.58
J21048 F21048 1 1/4 8.41
J00072 F21049 1 3/8 8.79
J21053 F21053 1 1/2 15.20
J00077 F21051 1 5/8 13.81
59 J00082 F21052 2 1/8 27.95
Copper Tube & Fittings
COPPER FITTINGS
90˚ Elbows - Male X Female
J22002 F22002 3/8 3.38
F22003 F22003 1/2 3.38
J00315 F22004 5/8 3.38
J00320 F22005 3/4 3.90
J00325 F22006 7/8 4.79
J22007 F22007 1 7.12
J00330 F22008 1 1/8 9.80
J22009 F22009 1 1/4 14.40
J00335 F22010 1 3/8 15.47
J22011 F22011 1 1/2 31.78
J00340 F22012 1 5/8 18.59
Tees
J00476 F23001 1/4 1.56
J00491 F23002 3/8 2.01
J00512 F23003 1/2 2.79
J00530 F23004 5/8 2.88
J00562 F23005 3/4 4.57
J00592 F23006 7/8 5.79
J00606 F23007 1 7.80
J00617 F23008 1 1/8 13.92
J00621 F23012 1 1/4 12.69
J00625 F23009 1 3/8 18.59
J00635 F23010 1 5/8 34.10
J00645 F23011 2 1/8 46.43
Reducing Tees
NEW OLD SIZE (in) IDxID PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. LINE BRANCH
1049-060605 F23113 3/8 5/16 11.38
J23108 F23108 1/2 1/4 16.29
J00516 F23102 1/2 3/8 3.08
1049-080810 F23107 1/2 5/8 13.36
J00536 F23103 5/8 1/2 6.27
F23110 F23110 3/4 1/4 29.00
J23104 F23104 3/4 1/2 11.02
J00601 F23105 1 1/2 15.02
J00596 F23106 1 3/4 15.02
P-Traps
J00381 F24001 5/8 23.27
J00386 F24002 3/4 25.82
J00391 F24003 7/8 32.51
J00396 F24004 1 1/8 52.55
J00401 F24005 1 3/8 61.91
J00406 F24006 1 5/8 89.85
J00411 F24007 2 1/8 156.22
Prices effective 1st January, 2004 All prices exclusive of G.S.T.

Recommended list prices only and subject to change without notice. This document intended for use as a price guide only. Hot Ideas - Cool Solutions 60
COPPER FITTINGS
UNIONS
J00677 F25001 1/4 0.74
J00692 F25002 3/8 0.87
J00702 F25003 1/2 1.79
J00716 F25004 5/8 1.79
J00736 F25005 3/4 2.88
J00756 F25006 7/8 3.38
J00781 F25012 1 3.48
J00811 F25007 1 1/8 5.13
J00830 F25013 1 1/4 5.12
J00851 F25008 1 3/8 7.58
J00855 F25014 1 1/2 11.37
J00876 F25009 1 5/8 8.91
J00906 F25010 2 1/8 14.81
J00926 F25011 2 5/8 18.59
REDUCERS ID x ID
NEW PART NO. OLD PART NO. SIZE (in) IDxID PRICE
J00686 F26001 3/8 x 1/4 1.89
J00697 F26002 1/2 x 3/8 2.11
J00708 F26003 5/8 x 3/8 2.98
J00709 F26004 5/8 x 1/2 2.88
J00726 F26005 3/4 x 1/2 4.12
J00730 F26006 3/4 x 5/8 3.38
J00740 F26007 7/8 x 1/2 4.12
J00746 F26008 7/8 x 5/8 4.57
J00751 F26009 7/8 x 3/4 4.79
J00770 F26028 1 x 3/4 6.01
J00786 F26010 1 1/8 x 1/2 5.79
J00791 F26011 1 1/8 x 5/8 6.01
J00796 F26012 1 1/8 x 3/4 6.01
J00801 F26013 1 1/8 x 7/8 6.57
J00841 F26014 1 3/8 x 7/8 8.24
J00846 F26015 1 3/8 x 1 1/8 8.24
J00866 F26016 1 5/8 x 1 1/8 9.14
J00871 F26017 1 5/8 x 1 3/8 10.02
J00891 F26018 2 1/8 x 1 1/8 17.04
J00896 F26019 2 1/8 x 1 3/8 17.04
J00901 F26020 2 1/8 x 1 5/8 18.59
J00915 F26021 2 5/8 x 1 3/8 27.84
J00911 F26022 2 5/8 x 1 5/8 24.84
J00921 F26023 2 5/8 x 2 1/8 38.63
J26024 F26024 3 1/8 x 2 5/8 41.22
61 Hot Ideas - Cool Solutions Prices effective 1st January, 2004 All prices exclusive of G.S.T.
BUSHINGS OD X ID
NEW PART NO. OLD PART NO. SIZE (in) OD(M)xID(F) PRICE
J00930 F27001 3/8 x 1/4 1.89
J27002 F27002 1/2 x 1/4 1.99
J00936 F27003 1/2 x 3/8 2.98
J00940 F27004 5/8 x 3/8 2.88
J00946 F27005 5/8 x 1/2 3.08
J27006 F27006 3/4 x 1/2 3.87
J00956 F27007 3/4 x 5/8 3.58
J27008 F27008 7/8 x 1/2 4.67
J00961 F27009 7/8 x 5/8 4.57
J00966 F27010 7/8 x 3/4 4.57
J00975 F27011 1 1/8 x 1/2 6.76
J00976 F27012 1 1/8 x 5/8 5.45
J00981 F27013 1 1/8 x 3/4 6.01
J00986 F27014 1 1/8 x 7/8 9.80
J27015 F27015 1 3/8 x 5/8 7.15
J00996 F27016 1 3/8 x 7/8 10.35
J01006 F27017 1 3/8 x 1 1/8 9.02
J01021 F27018 1 5/8 x 7/8 10.14
J01026 F27019 1 5/8 x 1 1/8 9.46
J01031 F27020 1 5/8 x 1 3/8 14.36
J01042 F27021 2 1/8 x 1 1/8 20.04
J01046 F27022 2 1/8 x 1 3/8 18.59
J01051 F27023 2 1/8 x 1 5/8 18.59
180˚ BENDS
NEW OLD SIZE (in) PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. ID CENTRES
J28001 F28001 3/8 1 1/4 6.46
J28004 F28004 5/8 2 8.94
J28005 F28005 3/4 2 1/4 15.00
J00462 F28006 7/8 2 1/2 16.69
F28007 F28007 1 1/8 3 16.89
J28009 F28009 1 5/8 4 3/8 29.00
F28010 F28010 2 1/8 5 1/8 47.18
Y-PIECES (SWEAT)
NEW OLD SIZE (in) PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. ID (A) ID (B)
J01186 J01186 1/2 3/8 12.28
J01187 F28101 5/8 1/2 29.62
J28102 F28102 5/8 5/8 26.22
J01188 F28103 3/4 5/8 29.62
J01190 F28104 7/8 5/8 28.17
J01191 F28105 7/8 7/8 32.18
J28107 F28107 1 3/4 35.36
Recommended list prices only and subject to change without notice. This document intended for use as a price guide only.
Hot Ideas - Cool Solutions 62
SOFT DRAWN COPPER TUBE
NEW OLD CONNECTION OD WALL THICKNESS ROLL LENGTH PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. (in) (mm) (mm) GAUGE (m)
T32263 C22S316 3/16 4.76 0.71 22 30 80.00
T32336 C20S14 1/4 6.35 0.91 20 30 114.18
T32522 C20S516 5/16 7.94 0.91 20 30 140.99
T32662 C20S38 3/8 9.53 0.91 20 18 102.27
T32930 C20S12 1/2 12.7 0.91 20 18 115.18
T33090 C20S58 5/8 15.88 0.91 20 18 163.00
T16850 New 5/8 15.88 1.02 R410A rated 18 170.00
T33294 C20S34 3/4 19.05 0.91 20 18 176.00
T76198 C20S78 7/8 22.22 0.91 20 18 255.17
ACR TUBE
NEW OLD CONNECTION OD WALL THICKNESS ROLL LENGTH PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. (in) (mm) (mm) GAUGE (m)
T59422 ZC20S14 1/4 6.35 0.76 21 15.24 57.32
T55745 ZC20S38 3/8 9.52 0.81 21 15.24 85.98
T54136 ZC20S12 1/2 12.7 0.81 21 15.24 97.67
T52079 ZC20S58 5/8 15.88 0.89 20 15.24 136.83
T63721 ZC20S34 3/4 19.05 0.89 20 15.24 149.08
HARD DRAWN COPPER TUBE (6M LENGTH)

NEW OLD CONNECTION OD WALL THICKNESS PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. (in) (mm) (mm) GAUGE
T92029 C20H14 1/4 6.35 0.91 20 25.68
T56847 C20H38 3/8 9.53 0.91 20 37.73
T22527 C20H12 1/2 12.7 0.91 20 41.39
T24937 C20H58 5/8 15.88 0.91 20 57.12
T16870 New 5/8 15.88 1.02 R410A rated 62.00
T88072 C20H34 3/4 19.05 0.91 20 61.31
T16855 New 3/4 19.05 1.14 R410A rated 73.00
T13862 C20H78 7/8 22.22 0.91 20 88.04
T23515 New 7/8 22.22 1.63 R410A rated 149.25
T60658 C20H1 1 25.4 0.91 20 96.95
T73971 C20H118 1 1/8 25.58 0.91 20 105.34
T14569 New 1 1/8 25.58 1.83 R410A rated 202.00
T22039 C20H114 1 1/4 31.75 0.91 20 122.62
T15237 C20H138 1 3/8 34.92 0.91 20 138.34
T91987 C18H138 1 3/8 34.92 1.22 18 178.29
T75980 New 1 3/8 34.92 2.03 R410A rated 279.00
T15644 C20H112 1 1/2 38.1 0.91 20 149.35
T32921 C20H158 1 5/8 41.28 0.91 20 162.46
T16865 New 1 5/8 41.28 2.41 R410A rated 373.00
T94960 C18H218 2 1/8 53.98 1.22 18 275.64
T31976 C18H258 2 5/8 66.68 1.6 18 407.45
63 Hot Ideas - Cool Solutions Prices effective 1st January, 2004 All prices exclusive of G.S.T.
PAIRCOIL - PRE INSULATED COPPER TUBE
T99515 PC1438 1/4 & 3/8 20m roll 262.57
T99525 PC1412 1/4 & 1/2 20m roll 328.77
T99535 PC1458 1/4 & 5/8 20m roll 444.60
T99545 PC3812 3/8 & 1/2 20m roll 400.47
T99555 PC3858 3/8 & 5/8 20m roll 472.18
T99565 PC3834 3/8 & 3/4 20m roll 546.10
T99575 PC1234 1/2 & 3/4 20m roll 606.78
COPPER SADDLES
CSL025 T14001 1/4 0.52
CSL031 T14025 5/16 0.52
CSL037 T14002 3/8 0.52
CSH50 T14003 1/2 0.52
CSH062 T14004 5/8 0.59
CSH075 T14005 3/4 0.52
CSH087 T14006 7/8 1.05
CSH112 T14007 1-1/8 1.88
CSH100 T14020 1 0.66
CSH125 T14021 1-1/4 1.88
CSH137 T14008 1-3/8 1.69
CSH150 T14022 1-1/2 1.85
CSH162 T14009 1-5/8 1.88
CSH200 T14023 2 2.02
DCS502 T14010 1/2 x 1/4 1.05
DCS623 T14011 5/8 x 3/8 1.15
DCS-753 T14024 3/4 x 3/8 1.78
Recommended list prices only and subject to change without notice. This document intended for use as a price guide only.
Hot Ideas - Cool Solutions 64
CAPILLARY TUBE IN ROLLS
NEW OLD LENGTH ID OD PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. (m) (mm) (in) (mm) (in)
30CAP0.66X1.72A T12001 30 0.66 0.026 1.72 0.68 136.00
T12020 T12020 100 0.66 0.026 1.72 1.22 182.00
30CAP0.80 T12002 30 0.8 0.031 2.06 0.081 141.00
30CAP0.90 T12003 30 0.9 0.035 2.18 0.086 146.00
T12004 T12004 30 1 0.039 2.28 0.09 140.00
30CAP1.10 T12005 30 1.1 0.043 2.16 0.085 140.00
30CAP1.20A T12006 30 1.2 0.047 2.26 0.089 143.00
30CAP1.30X2.58A T12007 30 1.3 0.051 2.58 0.102 193.00
30CAP1.50 T12008 30 1.5 0.059 2.28 0.111 158.00
30CAP1.62 T12009 30 1.62 0.064 2.94 0.116 215.00
30CAP1.78 T12010 30 1.78 0.07 3.1 0.122 225.00
100CAP1.78X3.10 T12025 100 1.78 0.07 3.1 0.122 434.00
30CAP2.04X3.44A T12012 30 2.04 0.08 3.44 0.135 232.00
CAPILLARY SERVICE PACKS

NEW OLD LENGTH ID PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. (m) (mm) (in)
SP1 SP1 3660 0.66 0.026 17.05
SP2 SP2 3660 0.8 0.031 17.05
SP3 SP3 3660 0.9 0.033 17.05
SP4 SP4 4270 1.1 0.043 17.05
SP4.5 SP4.5 4270 1.2 0.047 19.88
SP5 SP5 4270 1.3 0.051 17.05
SP6 SP6 3660 1.4 0.055 17.05
SP6.5 SP6.5 3660 1.5 0.059 22.67
SP7 SP7 3050 1.62 0.064 17.05
SP8 SP8 3660 1.78 0.07 17.05
SP9 SP9 2750 1.9 0.075 17.05
SP10 SP10 3050 2.04 0.08 17.05
SP11 SP11 3660 2.24 0.088 17.05
VIBRATION ELIMINATORS
NEW OLD TO FIT COPPER TUBING (in) O/ALL MAX PRICE
PART NO. PART NO. ACTUAL NOMINAL FLEX TUBING LENGTH WORKING
OD ID ID (mm) PRESSURE kPa
VAF3 VAF3 3/8 1/4 3/8 210 3102 48.51
VAF4 VAF4 1/2 3/8 3/8 229 3102 48.51
VAF5 VAF5 5/8 1/2 1/2 248 3102 55.00
VAF7 VAF7 3/4 5/8 3/4 286 3033 78.00
VAF8 VAF8 7/8 3/4 3/4 292 3033 78.00
VAF9 VAF9 1 1/8 1 1 330 2620 95.00
VAF10 VAF10 1 3/8 1 1/4 1 1/4 375 2758 132.00
VAF11 VAF11 1 5/8 1 1/2 1 1/2 432 2758 189.00
VAF82 VAF82 2 1/8 2 2 508 2690 326.00
VAF83 VAF83 2 5/8 2 1/2 2 1/2 610 2344 660.00
Prices effective 1st January, 2004 All prices exclusive of G.S.T.

65 Hot Ideas - Cool Solutions Recommended list prices only and subject to change without notice. This document intended for use as a price guide only.
Tell

Worked Example 1 – Appendix 6D

July 2007

Appendix 6D
Water Pumps Price Lists
A.Y.McDonald
http://www.aymcdonald.com/
Globe Valve 2021 Swing check valve 2050T
Diameter Price
½ in US$6.53
Diameter Price ¾ in US$8.19
¼ in US$8.72 1 in US$11.47
3/8 in US$8.72 1 ¼ in US$16.46
½ in US$9.20 1 ½ in US$22.67
¾ in US$10.91 2 in US$35.25
1 in US$16.26 2 ½ in US$71.17
1 ¼ in US$26.37 3 in US$95.94
1 ½ in US$32.53 4 in US$158.49
2 in US$56.11
Angle Sillock 2014
Diameter Price
½ in US$3.93
¾ in US$5.05

Wet Earth
http://www.wetearth.com.au
PVC Ball Valve Threaded Brass Gate valve
Diameter Price
15mm $30.94
Diameter Price 20mm $40.66
15mm $3.82 25mm $49.98
20mm $4.35 32mm $57.18
25mm $6.10 40mm $88.94
32mm $7.55 50mm $108.25
40mm $12.96
50mm $16.01
Bronze Ball Valve Tap Brass (Hose Cock)
Diameter Price Diameter Price

15mm $11.02 15mm Male $6.79
20mm $13.39 20mm Male $7.48
25mm $19.23
32mm $32.79
40mm $45.57
50mm $66.92

Galvanised Hex Nipple Galvanised Threaded Elbow
Diameter Price
15mm $1.08
20mm $1.59
Diameter Price
25mm $2.39
15mm $0.96
32mm $3.42
20mm $1.34
40mm $4.78
25mm $1.85
50mm $7.24
32mm $2.78
40mm $3.73
50mm $5.46
Galvanised Threaded Socket Galvanised Threaded Tee
Diameter Price Diameter Price

15mm $0.93 15mm $1.54
20mm $1.31 20mm $2.18
25mm $2.01 25mm $3.45
32mm $2.78 32mm $5.09
40mm $3.39 40mm $6.38
50mm $5.16 50mm $9.58

Brass Hex Nipple Brass Female Tee
Diameter Price
15mm $1.39
20mm $2.08
25mm $2.92 Diameter Price
15mm $3.52
20mm $5.09
Brass Elbow
Diameter Price
15mm Female $3.52
20mm Female $5.36
20mm Male/Female $4.39

Unit 6

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Unit 6

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Technical Design Portfolio

Whole System Design Suite

Unit 6 - Worked Example 1

This Course was developed under a grant from the Australian

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 2 of 21

Worked example overview

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 3 of 21

Figure 6.1. A Typical Production Plant Scenario

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 4 of 21

Design Challenge: Consider water at 20 ºC flowing from

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 5 of 21

Symbol Description Unit Symbol Description Unit

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 6 of 21

Figure 6.2. A typical single pump, single pipe solution

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 7 of 21

The design variables to be determined are:

P = (8ρQ3/∏2D4) [α2 + f (L/D) + Σ KLi] + ρgQz2

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 8 of 21

Conventional Design solution

For drawn tubing Table 6A.1 (Appendix 6A) gives:

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 9 of 21

P = (8.0911 x 10-7/(0.015 m)4)[0.0195 (30/(0.015 m)) + 19] + 97.923 = 1025 W

Calculate the cost of the system

Installation costs for 8hrs at $65/hr gives:

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 10 of 21

For the Waterco Hydrostorm Plus 150 gives:

Thus, the total capital cost of the system is:

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 11 of 21

Whole System Design Solution

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 12 of 21

Select suitable pipes and pumps for the system

For 45º threaded elbows Table 6A.2 (Appendix 6A) gives:

The energy balance equation becomes:

For drawn tubing 13 Table 6A.1 (Appendix 6A) gives:

Thus: ε/D = 0.0015/30 = 0.00005

P = (8.0911 x 10-7/(0.03 m)4)[0.0215 (24/(0.03 m)) + 3.95] + 97.923 = 119 W

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 13 of 21

From ‘Water pumps pricelist’ we can select pump model:

Is this the optimal solution for the whole system?

Consider the effect of other pipe diameters and pump powers

Table 6.2: Pump power calculated for a spectrum of pipe diameters

D (m) Re ε/D F P (W)

0.015 84561 0.0001 0.0195 660

0.02 63421 0.000075 0.0205 242

0.025 50736 0.00006 0.0210 148

0.03 42280 0.00005 0.0215 119

0.04 31710 0.0000375 0.0230 104

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 14 of 21

Calculate the cost of the system

Pipes and Total Life cycle

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 15 of 21

Summary: Performance Comparisons

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 16 of 21

(a) Life cycle cost

(b) Capital cost and breakdown

(c) Pumping power

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 17 of 21

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 18 of 21

Factors to consider for larger systems

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 19 of 21

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 20 of 21

Prepared by The Natural Edge Project 2007 Page 21 of 21

Whole System Design Suite