I have a cooling tower; capacity mentioned in submittal that 450 ton. Centrifugal chiller capacity is 450 ton.

Very clear cooling tower is undersized. In the summer running two towers for one chiller. As per the same
document, the condenser flow rate is 1350 gpm and range 10F. Then capacity will be 1350*500*10=562 ton. I
don’t know what happened in design and selection time. I am planning to increase the capacity and improve
the efficiency of chiller. Stiil I have a confusion, why the design eng selected 1350 gpm for 450-ton chiller

It seems that the system designer was unaware of the first law of thermodynamics.

Specifically, a 450 ton chiller produces 450 tons of cooling. It needs to reject more heat than that because,
thermodynamics.

The energy that the chiller uses to make cold must also be rejected by the cooling tower.
This may be a case of a refrigerant ton (12,000 BTU/hr) vs a cooling tower ton (15,000 BTU/hr). Refer Ashrae
Handbook chapter 39 for backup.
The industry decided many moons ago to match the nominal capacity of cooling towers to the nominal capacity
of water cooled chillers, this having a 450 ton chiller matched with a 450 ton cooling tower. Why? I guess
because the IP system is not complicated enough!
I ignore nominal capacity on most products now and focus on the actual performance data from my selections
to avoid such confusion. Nominal capacities are at best ballpark accurate, at worst confusing and misleading -
as demonstrated in this instance.
The designer was lazy. He designed for 3GPM/nominal ton. Depending on local ambient it could have worked.
Have you verified the capacity with the manufactures rep selection tools?

I don't think your cooling tower is undersized. The cooling tower suppliers use 15000 Btuh to calculate
Equivalent chiller tons. In your example, 1350 gpm *500 * 10 = 6,750,000 buth. Divide this by 15000 = 450
tons or rather cooling tower tons. If you divide the result by 12000 you will get the tons of heat rejection.
(562.5 TR).

Best way is to check the chiller selection and cooling tower selection and check if the flows and temp in/out
match between the 2. Looking at tons will be confusing as the Chller tons and Cooling towers are based on
different calculations.
i re-checked the submittal and selection sheet.in selection sheet clearly mentioned 560 ton, but in submittal
450 ton.i think as "boss88" pointed is may be correct. but in actual practice. one chiller cannot run with one
tower. find the attachment..
It seems that the system designer was unaware of the first law of thermodynamics.

Specifically, a 450 ton chiller produces 450 tons of cooling. It needs to reject more heat than that because,
thermodynamics.

The energy that the chiller uses to make cold must also be rejected by the cooling tower.
This may be a case of a refrigerant ton (12,000 BTU/hr) vs a cooling tower ton (15,000 BTU/hr). Refer Ashrae
Handbook chapter 39 for backup.
The industry decided many moons ago to match the nominal capacity of cooling towers to the nominal capacity
of water cooled chillers, this having a 450 ton chiller matched with a 450 ton cooling tower. Why? I guess
because the IP system is not complicated enough!
I ignore nominal capacity on most products now and focus on the actual performance data from my selections
to avoid such confusion. Nominal capacities are at best ballpark accurate, at worst confusing and misleading -
as demonstrated in this instance.
The designer was lazy. He designed for 3GPM/nominal ton. Depending on local ambient it could have worked.
Have you verified the capacity with the manufactures rep selection tools?

I don't think your cooling tower is undersized. The cooling tower suppliers use 15000 Btuh to calculate
Equivalent chiller tons. In your example, 1350 gpm *500 * 10 = 6,750,000 buth. Divide this by 15000 = 450
tons or rather cooling tower tons. If you divide the result by 12000 you will get the tons of heat rejection.
(562.5 TR).

Best way is to check the chiller selection and cooling tower selection and check if the flows and temp in/out
match between the 2. Looking at tons will be confusing as the Chller tons and Cooling towers are based on
different calculations.
i re-checked the submittal and selection sheet.in selection sheet clearly mentioned 560 ton, but in submittal
450 ton.i think as "boss88" pointed is may be correct. but in actual practice. one chiller cannot run with one
tower. find the attachment..
I would not worry too much here. What you have is simply a written process description. They simply called
the cooling tower a 450 TR tower same as the chiller capacity. I don't think they even thought of mentioning
heat rejection in that description. What you need to look at the actual values which are on the selection sheet
from SPX and the chiller as well. Here it shows 1350 GPM at 93-103 and 86F WB which is correct for a 450 TR
chiller.

This is a very old selection so I guess it is an existing project which is in operation. Now if you are trying to say
that you are not able to operate the plant with 1 chiller + 1 towerand need 2 towers for that, that is a different
issue (technical) and discussion. From a selection point of view, your datasheet is correct. From an operation
point of view, you might not be able to operate 1 tower with 1 chiller but that would be more a technical
investigation you need to look at. Probably better to call SPX Dubai for that.

One more note: if you look at the heat rejection capacity on SPX selections, be aware that they adjust it as
well for specific heat and specifc gravity (BTUH = (Flow) X (Range) X 500 X (Specific Gravity) X (Specific
Heat)) so it will not be exactly 15000 btuh. This is why you have 6716.1 MBH vs 6750 MBH. Evapco uses
15000 BTU and BAC does not provide this value on their datasheet (i guess to avoid the confusion between
chiller tons and cooling tower tons)
Re-reading your posts and documents, you have two nominal 450 ton towers with two 450 ton chillers and one
common condenser water system at a total of 1350 gpm. It looks like the single cell tower was run at 1350
gpm. You have a condenser water issue. Should the tower data have been run at 675gpm?
In my opinion DrRTU, they have a total of 2700 GPM in the system with each tower handling 1350 GPM and
each chiller receiving 1350 GPM condenser flow. The Selection Datasheet actually is for the design point for 1
Cell and it shows 1350 GPM. Now if they have installed different towers and have only a total of 1350 GPM for
the 2 chillers, they will have a chiller issue. This will be 1.5 GPM/TR or about 19F delta T on condenser.
Although the Chiller is a 2-stage, I doubt it will take it especially if it was selected on 3 GPM/TR initially. I am
on the opinion that they a total of 2700 GPM in the system as per their process description and tower selection
and the data was provided per cell rather than for the total system.
What exactly is the problem here?

Is the issue that for some reason the original design decided to use an air wet bulb temp of 86 F (30C)? Was
this too low? Even in July and August this doesn't seem to go above 25C so it's not that. I can't read the
assumed RH but assume it's still valid.

So is the tower simply not working well because the fans are broken or some other issue?

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

Bos88, I agree 2700 gpm is needed but read the second paragraph, the wording sounds like 2 single cell units
makeup to be the “tower” with motorized valves. With a common header they should have stated total flow.
DrRTU, I guess we need Moideen to clarify what is exactly the problem on his system.

In reply to LittleInch, the 86F WB is actually correct for this part of the world. Actually it can get even higher
some days. The RH on the cooling tower selelction is 50% by default. SPX Marley uses this value only to
calculate the estimated evaporation loss.
Your document is dated 2008, so the system has possibly been in operation for over 8 years. Lots of things can
change in 8 years, fouling, process changes, configuration changes, etc.

You stated that you need both towers to cool 1350 gpm, but you've not said how far off the performance is,
i.e., what temperature delta does a single tower achieve, whether both towers are working the same, and
whether the conditions are consistent with the original design.
see the graphic...in uae some time wet bulb reached 89F. so 86F is common wetbulb design concept in gulf
countries.

As per the site info, past years two tower and two pumps need to work for 460-ton chiller. Otherwise, it will
trip on high discharge. flow rate of one pump is 1350 gpm( total 2700)Recently, I noticed and involved in
this case.at glance in submittal, the tonnages is 460-ton cooling tower, so I thought tower is undersized, and I
contacted its contractor who installed the system. I was told there are same issues from beginning. Now all
building owners are very cautious in energy saving. Part of this I rechecked and later found spx selection found
the total heat rejection is 562 ton. Anyway I suspect the fills and fan blade angles might be something
wrong…next month we will teardown the tower and will be checked…..

moideen (Mechanical)
(OP)
29 Nov 17 04:51
In the original design concept, is one of the chiller a standby? or both are supposed to run. Now I wonder in
summer how do they cope with load if they have to run 2 towers for 1 chiller and the 2nd chiller needs to start
as well?
If you are getting 89F wet bulb, you will end up with 96F condenser so the chiller might trip and the VFD might
not like it either (refrigerant cooled or water cooled type).
If the issues were there from the beginning, why nothing was done to rectify it when the equipemnt were still
under warranty?
From the pictures, I can see the plant is surrounded possibly by wall? you could simply have a case of hot air
recirculation which increase the inlet wet bulb. Also you need to look at how they control the fan (if on VFD)
with respects to condenser setpoint.
I will help if they have logs of wet bulb, condenser water temp....at the time when they experience tripping.
In my opinion you should contact Marley have them do an inspection of the site.
Bos88:yiua are correct,tower is surrounded by wall, it also in planning to make ventilation for tower area.here
one chiller is standby.ct fan is controlled by vfd, but here vfd manually adjusted to full speed.
It does look like the system doesn't have much spare in it so any small thing going wrong or out of range (WB
temp > 86F, water flow rate not 1350 gpm, fans and systems damaged, dirty or not operating at full speed,
non ideal air inlet paths, possible re-circulation of hot humid air) will get to such a level that your chiller can't
reject enough heat and trips on one CT.

Lots of things to check...

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

Cover the basics first with known data. 1. Hire a balance contractor to measure the condenser water flows.
Inspect all strainers and pressure gauges first. Verify sump inlets and header nozzles. Run thru combination of
pumps. The 6” is undersized for 1350 gpm - tower isolation vlv may not be fully open. 2. Work with SPX rep to
inspect tower. Fan and fill must be correct. Verify rpm at fully HZ at drive. 3. At full chiller flow, utilize flow and
temps at tower & chiller. Run thru chiller and tower flow combinations.

Consider also adding cooling tower discharge cowl to discharge exhaust above the wall enclosure to avoid
recirculation of discharge to intake. Confirm also that the distance between the wall and cooling tower is at
least equal to the height of the cooling tower fill.
i have a related question. not this tower. another tower brand MEZAN, it's fills are splash fills. is it possible to
replace it with film. because film fill is very efficient compare to splash fills.
Start a new post - it gets very messy otherwise and add some more data, drawings, photos etc

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

I checked actual water flow with a water flow meter, job done by a company whose main activities are water
balancing in the chilled water system, found the flow rate is maximum 600 gpm through one pump. Design
1350 gpm!!!
When running two pumps, flow rate of each pump comes down to 300 gpm; I suspect the problem may be
any restriction in suction side. still checking..................
I don't think the restriction will be on suction side as this is essentially at atmospheric pressure.

Sounds to me more like someone got theirs sums very wrong when working out the required differential head /
pressure required or there is some sort of blockage / partly open valve somewhere in the system.

The obvious ones to check are:

Is the electrical supply what the motor needs ( Voltage, frequency etc)
Are the motors going the right way around?
Is there any VFD drive?
Is there a blocked filter somewhere?
Is the water level correct in the tower collection pond?

Back in your post of 29 Nov you said the pump trips on high discharge. High what? Pressure? temperature?
Amps?

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

LITTLEINCH:The obvious ones to check are:

Is the electrical supply what the motor needs ( Voltage, frequency etc)-OK
Are the motors going the right way around?-WHAT YOU MEAN
Is there any VFD drive? NO
Is there a blocked filter somewhere? NEED TO BE RE-CHECKED, SUCTION SIDE FILTER AND FILTER

Back in your post of 29 Nov you said the pump trips on high discharge. High what? Pressure? temperature?
Amps? HIGH DISCHARGE PRESSURE

If the motors are three phase supply, then depending on how you wire the motors will depend on which way
around they spin.

There is usually an arrow on the motor or pump (or both) showing which way they should rotate. When you
start and stop the pump you can normally see which way the motor rotates. It is an easy thing to check but a
centrifugal pump will work in both directions, but be much less effective the wrong way round. It's not
common but does happen.

The degree of lack of flow is a lot and the only other thing is whether someone has mistaken a requirement in
metres head for a requirement in feet or some other sort of gross error if it's not a mechanical issue like a
blockage or partially closed valve.

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

Little Inch: I will recheck the direction of the pump. you are correct that there is no possibility for any
blockage. Because ampere is correct as per the motor nameplate.

You also need to start measuring pipe sizes and lengths and number of elbows etc to be able to calculate what
the differential pressure needs to be at either 1350 or 2700 gpm and then compare it to your pump curves.

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

LittleInch :very true, i have no cad drawings to measure the length and count the number of fittings. Planned
to take the measurement physically on site. Thank you
pump flow direction is correct, name plate kw is 18.5 and amps draws 30A.
Well then you need to work out if the original design was incorrect or the pump size incorrect for your 1350
gpm.

BTW it is very unlikely that two equal pumps in parallel will actually do 2700 when sized for 1350. The only
way is if the pressure loss through the chillers is a large part of the pressure losses and the second one only
comes on line when more flow is required.
You seem to have narrowed the issue down to water flow rate not being what was anticipated.

What are you planning to do next?

Based on your 18.5 kW nameplate, the head should be around 60 feet for the pump (1350 GPM). Using 15
Feet for tower, 20 feet chiller, that gives you about 25 feet for the piping/valves.
LittleInch: i checked the chilled water drawings, cannot see any piping issues. 8,10 and 12 inch pipes is
suitable as per the design flow. 8"@ 1350gpm head loss 2.8ft/100ft,10@2700 is 3.3ft/100 ft. please see the
drawings attached
The drawing shows the pumps to be rated for 1700 GPM. Typo?
Bos88 :but in shedule and chiller capacity, pump urve....shows 1350 gpm.
Nice schematic, but no lengths there or how many elbows, tees etc there are to calculate an equivalent length

Also no pump curve.

And no anticipated losses through the chiller in operation

The schematic shows 4 pressure gauges.

What are the pressures when running?

What is that strange looking DRV? Just a drain valve or something else?

Have you tried isolating the other pump(s) when operating to ensure you're not getting reverse flow past a
leaking NRV?
As per my preliminary calculation of pump head, i found around 70 ft of head required. see the excel sheet
attached,i will go to site to check any fittings pressure drop i missed here.
the pressure in/out condenser is 20/5 psig. DRV fitted at discharge side of the pump.
What are the pumps designed for right now? I couldn't find in the thread above.
Pumps should be 1350 gpm each.

The pressure in out of the pumps will be interesting.

From the data above, the pressure out of the pump looks like circa 20 psi (about 45 ft head)
Also a 15 psi head loss across the condenser is around 30-35 ft, which is a lot more than your 15 feet in the
spread sheet

If the inlet line is higher than the cooling water pond and or some way away, you risk getting cavitation if the
pump inlet filters start to clog up.

I didn't see any sign of the filter DP in the calculations?

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

LittleInch: strainer fitted before the pump inlet line.i recalculated after visiting the site. some value assumed
like DRV , Nno data with me. as per the new calculation around will reach 77 ftof head.i put 1350 gpm throut
the circuit. is it correct? and if you have fitting loss chart,please share here.
Along the line of LittleInch's comment, I would be wary of the effect on NPSH by having the strainers on the
inlet to the pump. if there is not enough static pressure at the pump inlet then your risk cavitation. with this in
mind, for cooling tower installations you normally want to have tower and the pump as possible. Your pumps
will have a minimum NPSH requirement.
What is the elevation difference between your pumps and the tower basin? If you have 10+ feet you are
probably ok.

If there are NPSH issues, I would put side stream filtration on the tower basin (with basin sweepers) to clear
out large debris then install an inline strainer AFTER the pump to take out small debris. This is not the normal
location for a strainer, but if you have NPSH issues then it is the best you can do.

Key points - How accurate is your 15 ft for the condenser? Your previous post said 15 psi differential which is
30-35 feet?

Your power at 40 BHP = 30kW appears to be higher than your pump motor ( you quote 18.5 kW

Can you post the pump curve please?

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

condenser design sheet that the pressure drop is 40pascals(5.8psig or 14feet). i put only the design value in
calculation, but the actual drop is 15 psig.bhp calculatioed as per the new head that 78*1350/3960*65%=40
BHP. please see the attached pump curve
lukaiENG : as to the past site info, there was no any cavitation issues, because the tower is prperly water
treatment and regulatio cleaning of suction strainer. i checked the impeller, there is no any sign of
cavitation,and not any report of pump failure.
it is new info that the design pressure drop of condenser is 114kpa,see the attached sheet, my previous info
from Mitsubishi dealer that was only 40 pa. But condenseser 3 pass style, so the existing condenser pressure is
ok consideiring the design drop, also head is also increased to 105ft /hd
condenser selection attached

Pretty simple in the end. Your pump is too small for the system you have. If you could run the pumps in series
it might work but really it is simply an undersized pumping design.

Remember - More details = better answers

Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

Little Inch: yes, finally confirmed, i am on the way to replacement of only one pump first, then I will check the
performance difference...

If you can rig up some temporary pipework to connect two pumps in series it will prove the point but a bigger
pump and motor might need new cables and new switchboard/ motor starter as well.

Be sure to let us know how you get on.