ENERGY AND MECHANICAL DESIGN ENGINEER CAREER

2018

ENERGY AND
MECHANICAL DESIGN
ENGINEER CAREER
CARLOS LOUCAO

ENERGY AND MECHANICAL DESIGN ENGINEER CAREER CARLOS LOUCAO

CONTENTS
1.1 ENERGY AND MECHANICAL SERVICES ENGINEER CAREER ............................ 2
1.1.1 Worked Projects ..................................................................... 2
1.1.2 Worked Systems ...................................................................... 3
1.2 Energy solutions design examples ...................................................... 4
1.2.1 Heat recovery and pump system .................................................. 4
1.2.2 Ventilation ........................................................................... 13

CARLOS LOUCAO 1
1.1 ENERGY AND MECHANICAL SERVICES ENGINEER CAREER

1.1.1 WORKED PROJECTS

 Technical reports and Feasibility Studies.

 Energy Audits, Energy Performance Contracts, Investment Grade Audit and WTA
 ESOS scheme energy efficiency audits and report production
 Commercial Buildings
 Public Buildings
 Hospitals
 Schools
 Public services
 Manufacturing Sectors
 Pharmaceutical
 Chemicals
 Automotive
 MDF Industry
 Cement
 Tyres
 Plastic Injection
 Food
 Ceramic
 Glass
 Steel/Iron
 Electronic
 Cork
 Wood

CARLOS LOUCAO 2
1.1.2 WORKED SYSTEMS

 Heat recovery and heat exchange

 Boilers
 Combustion systems
 Steam systems
 HVAC
 Combined Heat Power
 PV solar
 Refrigeration and Comfort cooling
 Ventilation and extraction systems
 Pumping system
 Compressed air
 BMS (energy management and controls)
 Lighting

CARLOS LOUCAO 3
1.2 ENERGY SOLUTIONS DESIGN EXAMPLES

1.2.1 HEAT RECOVERY AND PUMP SYSTEM

The below solution was presented as part of an IGA project at the automotive manufacturer
PSA on a guaranteed performance basis with an M&V plan.

Two solutions were presented to the client:

 Use the wasted heat in the incinerator flues to produce low-pressure steam.
 Use the wasted heat in the incinerator flues to heat the water from the painting
process

Both solutions were discussed with the client during the project meetings, who chose to heat
the water from the painting process.

Please note we have a lot more possibilities here, due to the high heat demand in the flues,
however, after meetings with the client I chose only present to the client two simple solutions
that the client showed a willingness to implement.

The solution was a heat recovery in order to eliminate the consumption of two natural gas
boilers.
Also, consists change the old water pumps with two brand new efficient pumps fitted with
VSD.

Two baxiroca gas-fired boilers providing hot water at 90ºc, via heat exchanger.

Boilers
Brand Baxiroca
Model CPA700
Year 2011
Power (kW) 796.5
pressure (bar) 5
Maximum temperature (ºC) 100

Table 1-Technical specifications

It was made a mass and energy balance on the input and output of the boilers.

CARLOS LOUCAO 4
 Temperature (ºC) O2 (%)
400 25

350
20
300
Temperature (ºC)

250 15

O2 (%)
200

150 10

100
5
50

0 0
13:01 13:11 13:21 13:31 13:41 13:51 14:01 14:11 14:21 14:31 14:41 14:51 15:01

Figure 1-Boiler 1 combustion analysis

Boiler nº1
Energy balance
kWh kJ/h %
Combustion Energy 253.4 912,413 98,30%
Inlet energy Air Energy 4.1 14,595 1,60%
Fuel heat 0.3 1,088 0,10%
Useful energy (Hot water) 196.5 707,324 76,20%
Outlet energy Flue energy waste 58.7 211,270 22,80%
Wall energy loss 2.6 9,502 1,00%

Table 2-Energy balance Boiler 1

CARLOS LOUCAO 5
 Temperature (ºC) O2 (%)
200 25
180
160 20
Temperature (ºC)

140
120 15

O2 (%)
100
80 10
60
40 5
20
0 0
15:20 15:30 15:40 15:50 16:00 16:10 16:20 16:30 16:40 16:50 17:00 17:10 17:20

Figure 2- Boiler 2 combustion analysis

Boiler nº2
Energy balance
kWh kJ/h %
Combustion Energy 248.1 893,235 98.50%
Inlet energy Air Energy 3.5 12,766 1.40%
Fuel heat 0.3 1,066 0.10%
Useful energy (Hot water) 219.6 790,434 87.10%
Outlet energy Flue energy waste 29.8 107,130 11.80%
Wall energy loss 2.6 9,502 1.00%

Table 3-Energy Balance boiler nº2

CARLOS LOUCAO 6
The graph below shows the close relationship between annual gas boilers consumption and
car production.

Figure 3-Specific consumption (Production VS Gas consumption)

Entry Exchanger Exit Exchanger ∆t

90 20
80 18
70 16
60 14
12
50 ∆T(ºC)
10
ºc

40
8
30 6
20 4
10 2
0 0
12:36
16:36
20:36
0:36
4:36
8:36
12:36
16:36
20:36
0:36
4:36
8:36
12:36
16:36
20:36
0:36
4:36
8:36
12:36

Figure 4-Heat Exchanger temperature

The above graph shows the temperature variance in the heat exchanger during the process.
One automatic valve systems control the flow inside of the heat exchanger by adding load loss
into the system.

CARLOS LOUCAO 7
 Pump Curve Installation Curve (current) Installation Curve (nominal)
60

50

40
H (m)

30

20

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Q (m3/h)

Figure 5-Pump Curve

Figure 6-Electric pump consumption (24hrs)

CARLOS LOUCAO 8
The tables below show the heat energy in both incinerators flues used in spray painting tunnels
process.
 Auto painting Stage 1

Auto painting stage 1

Energy Balance
kWh %
Combustion heat (Incinerator) 876 70.10%
Burner Combustion 311 24.90%
Inlet
Inlet air ( Incinerator / burner ) 62 5,.0%
Energy
Fuel Energy 2 0.10%
Total 1,251 100%
Flue losses 639 51.10%
Burner Losses 35 2,.0%
Outlet Wall losses 73 5.80%
Energy Real used energy 439 35.10%
other losses 65 5.20%
Total 1,251 100.00%

 Auto Painting stage 2

Auto painting stage 2

Energy Balance
kWh %
Combustion heat (Incinerator) 555.3 0.666
Burner Combustion 1 97 0.116
Burner Combustion 2 131.9 0.158
Inlet Power Fuel Energy 0.8 0.001
Inlet air ( Incinerator) 45.5 0.055
Inlet air (burners ) 3.5 0.004
Total 834 100.00%
Losses by the exhaust gases 398.7 47.80%
Losses by the burner gases 24.1 2.90%
Losses by the walls 50 6.00%
Outlet Power
Heating the product of Energy 327.8 39.30%
other losses 33.4 4.00%
Total 834 100.00%

CARLOS LOUCAO 9
The Proposal:

The boilers are kept for safety, peak period and non-painting periods.
The proposed system is controlled by a BMS system controlling the VSDs and temperature sensors on the
pumping system.

CARLOS LOUCAO 10
The draft schematic below is part of my excel sheet, It was used during the calculation process, but is not
present in the audit report:

Figure 7-Part of sheet of excel

Figure 8-Pump Curve (new pump)

CARLOS LOUCAO 11
Using a constant range of temperature with the aim to give dynamic flow control over the
system, can be achieved the consumption in the graph below.

Figure 9-Electric Power Proposed

Electricity Natural gas Total

kWh/year €/year kWh/year €/year €/year
Current
63,280 7,041 2,707,749 119,717 126,758
Situation
Proposed
12,485 1,389 506,486 22,393 23,782
situation
Economy 50,795 5,652 2,201,263 97,324 102,975
Investment (€) 321,250
Payback
3.1
(years)
Table 4-Payback

CARLOS LOUCAO 12
1.2.2 VENTILATION

The energy reduction solution below was proposed in one IGA project at Cement industry, it’s a simple
energy reduction recommendation but quite accepted by the clients.

During the work process, the ventilation systems with filters go since the clean stage to a dirty stage, it’s
possible to give a dynamic flow control over the system, with two simple pressor sensors linked to a control
system and fitting the motor with an inverter.

CARLOS LOUCAO 13
 Motor
Brand SIEMENS
Model -
Power [kW] 75
Current [A] 134
Cos φ 0,9

Frequency [Hz] 50

Tension [V] 380

Speed [rpm] 2,970

Fan
Brand SOLYVENTEC
Model 0
Flow (m3/ h) 39,000
Pressure (Pa) 2,600
Speed [rpm] 2,060

Filter
Brand DELTANEU
Model V270
Number of bag filters 162
Compressed air consumption (m3/h) 67,5
Flow (m3/ h) 39,000
Test pressure (Bar) 12
Work pressure (Bar) 6
Filter Area (m2) 270

Table 5- Technical specifications

CARLOS LOUCAO 14
 Figure 10-System schematic draw

Maximum 48,7 kW Average 46,4 kW Minimum 2,7 kW

60

50

40
kW

30

20

10

0
0:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00

Figure 11- Fan electric consumption (24hrs)

Project Value Actual value

Q(m3/s) 11 4
P(pa) 2,600 4,552
Ph(kW) 28 18
η 63% 34%

Table 6-System values

CARLOS LOUCAO 15
 5000
4500 Actual
4000
Maximum
3500 Average
Minimum
3000
∆Pa 2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0

Figure 12-Filter bags lifetime

Average work point Clean Filter Dirty filter

5000 Actual Value
4500
4000
3500
3000 Project Point
2500
Pa

2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Figure 13- System VS Filter bags lifetime

∆PFilter (pa) Load loss (pa)

Minimum 981 3,286
Average 1,177 3,482
Maximum 1,471 3,776
Actual 2,247 4,552

Table 7- Filter bags lifetime

CARLOS LOUCAO 16
 Filter lifetime (50 hz)
P(pa) 3,286 3,482 3,776
Q(m3/s) 8.3 7.6 6.5

Table 8-Filter lifetime

Actual Estimated
Q P P (kW)
Estado Q (m3/h) P (Pa) Consumption consumption
(m3/s) (kW) Average
[kwh/year] [kwh/year]
Dirty
6.5 23,397.9 3,776
Filter 46 34 269,446 206,440
Clean
6.5 23,397.9 3,286
Filter 22.5

Table 9-Actual VS Recommendation

Electricity
kWh/year €/year
Actual 269,446 21,161
Propose 206,440 16,212
Economy 63,006 4,948
Investment (€) 20,256
Payback (years) 4.1

Table 10-Payback

CARLOS LOUCAO 17