RAptures: Resolving the Tugboat Energy...
Transcript of RAptures: Resolving the Tugboat Energy...
Amsterdam, The NetherlandsOrganised by the ABR Company Ltd
DayPaper No.
1
iNTRODUCTiONTugboat operators are looking for ways to make their vesselsmoreefficientandfriendliertotheenvironment,toreducecosts,meetregulatoryrequirements,catertomarketdemandsforcleaneroperations,orsimplytoimprove‘green’credentials.Efficiencyimprovementsthatreducefuelconsumptiongenerallyreduceoperatingcostsandemissionsatthesametime,adoublebonus.Theconnectionbetweenfuelconsumptionandgreenhousegasesisclear–CO2emissionsaredirectlyproportionaltofuelconsumption.Butwhataboutotheremissions,suchasunburnedhydrocarbons,NOx,andparticulates?Fordieselprimemoversthesedependnotonlyonfuelconsumed,butalsoonhowtheequipmentisoperatedandtheemissionstechnologybuiltintotheengine,oraddedasoff-engineequipment.Asalwaystherecanbetrade-offstoconsiderifnewequipmentrequiressignificantcapitalinvestment.
Ontugs,thepowerdirectedtopropulsionisgenerallyresponsibleforthebulkoffuelcostsandemissions.Withtheexceptionofarelativelysmallnumberofdieselelectrictugs,beginningwithLuna(1930)andexamplessuchastheUSNavy’sYTBlargeyardtugs(1940s),thebulkoftugstodaycontinuetobepoweredbydieselmainenginescoupledtopropellersor,inthecaseofmore modern tugs, azimuthing propulsors (Z-drives), or VoithSchneiderPropellers(VSPdrives).Electricpowerforhotelneedsandauxiliaryequipmentistypicallysupplied by one or more small generator sets.
These systems have generally worked well and, untilveryrecently,therehasbeenlittleincentivetochange.Butthefuel-pricerollercoasterrideandheightenedconsciousnessoftheenvironmentalimpactofgreenhousegasesandotheremissionshavebroughtaboutare-examinationofthestatus
quo,andanewinterestinalternativepropulsionequipmentconfigurationsthatoffersomepotentialforimprovementsinfuelconsumptionandemissions–andpreferably both.
Designersandoperatorsoflargeanchor-handlingtugs and other offshore support vessels have been quickertoembracedieselelectricpowersystemsasanalternativetodieselmechanical.Thisisnotonlyforthepurportedfuelsavings,butalsofortheflexibilitythatacommonpowergenerationsystemoffersinvarying the power distribution between propulsion, dynamicpositioning,pumps,anddeckequipmentloadsasoperationschange.However,forsmallertugsthatdonothavethesamevarietyofequipmentortheneedforextendeddynamicpositioning,anyimmediateadvantagesarenotasobvious.Furthermore,thetimehascometolookbeyonddieselelectrictowhatisachievablewithnovelintegrationsofothercommerciallyavailabletechnologiesortheapplicationsofmorerecent‘alternativepower’technologies,suchasalternatefuelsorbatteryhybrids.Alongwithalternateequipmentchoices,operatorsmayalsoachievecostsavingsbysimplychanginghowexistingequipmentisoperated.
To make the best use of the opportunities alternative tug propulsions may offer, Robert Allan Ltd wanted to beequippedtoefficientlyandquantifiablyanswerthefollowingbasicquestionswhendesigninganewtug:
• Whatarethemostpracticalpoweringoptionsavailablefortheapplication?
• Howdotheseoptionscompareintermsoffueleconomyandemissionsfortheintendedoperations?
• Whatisthecostpremiumorsavings?
13
RAptures: Resolving the Tugboat Energy Equation
Vince den Hertog,PEng,Ken Harford,PEng,Robin Stapleton,EIT,Robert Allan Ltd, Canada
SYNOPSiS Withdemandsonalltypesofvesselstoreduceemissionsandfuelconsumption,itisoftendifficulttoseparatethefactsfromthesalespitches.Facedwiththefrequentquestionof“Howbesttogogreen”(andalsosavesomemoney),RobertAllanLtdsetabouttocreateatooltoanalyseawiderangeofoptionsfortypicalharbourtugpropulsionsystems.RAptures (RobertAllanLtd:PoweringTugsforRealEnergySavings)isastraightforwardanalyticaltoolwhichcanbeusedforbothahigh-levelsystemcomparisonattheveryearlystagesofanewdesign,andalsoforthelatterdesignstagecomparisonofveryspecificmachineryselectionoptions.Withbasictugpowerandanoperatingprofileasinput,adirectcomparisonofdiversepropulsionsystemoptionsispossible,withoutputsoffuelconsumption,emissionsandinstalledcosts.
2
• Ifoperationschange,whatwillbetheimpactonemissionsandfuelconsumption?
To that end, the RAptures programme was developedasatooltomakeeffectivecomparisons,evaluate the trade-offs, and generally zero in onthepoweringconfigurationthatbestfitstherequirementsandgoalsoftheclient.Appreciatingthatwidevariationsinvesselsize,requiredperformance,anddutyprofilemeanthereisno“one-size-fits-all”solution,theprogrammewasdesignedattheoutsettomodeldiverseapplicationsandconfigurations.
This paper gives an overview of the RAptures programmeanddiscussesresultsfromahypotheticalcase-studyforatypicalRobertAllanLtd28mRAmparts 2800tugtoillustratetheprogramme’scapabilitiesandpotential.
TERMS OF REFERENCERAptureswasdevelopedwiththesespecificobjectivesinmind:
• Toproviderealisticestimatesoffueleconomyand emissions that are not based on guesses or supplier promises, but on reliable fuel consumptionandemissionsdatathatspecificallytakesintoaccounttheperformancerequirementsfor the vessel and the day-to-day operational profile;
• To model how the operating points of the machineryarelinkedtotheactivitiesofthevessel, whether it is idling, free-running, operating atBP,andwhatotherpower-consumingequipment,suchaswinchesorpumps,isbeingoperatedatthesametime;
• Torecognisethat,fortugs,bothBPandhullresistancearecriticalaspectsthatdominatethepowerdemand,andprovideameanstopredictBPandfree-runningresistance;
• Toconsiderhowfuelconsumptionandemissionsofeachinstalledprimemovervarieswithoperatingpoint,basedondatafromcertifiedtestresultsorothersources;
• Toallowoperatingprofilestobedefinedthatarerealisticrepresentationsofanoperator’santicipatedday-to-dayusageofthevessel;
Toaccuratelycalculatefuelconsumptionandemissionstotalsforseveralcandidatepoweringconfigurationsoperatingunderthesameoperationalprofilesimultaneously,sothatlike-for-likecomparisonscanbemade;
• Topresentcostcomparisonsthattakeintoaccountequipmentcapitalcosts,andcoststhatvarywiththeoperator’sdutyprofile,includingfuel,equipmentmaintenanceandoverhaul;
• Makeiteasytoquicklyevaluate‘what-if’scenarios.
THE RAptures TOOL The RAptures tool is a software program developed asaspreadsheetformaximumflexibilityandtransparency.Theprogramisorganisedintoseveraltypesofdistinctmodules(Figure 1):propulsion,dutyandpower,poweringconfiguration,andequipment.Thisarchitecturemakesitstraightforwardtoestablishnewconfigurationsandadjustparameters.Ingeneral,eachmodulerequiresinputsregardingdifferentaspectsofthevessel,equipmentorutilisation.Dataforaspecificvesseloritsequipmentdetailscanbeentereddirectly,orstockdatafromapre-enteredlibrarycanbereferenced.
Propulsion moduleAnessentialelementforpredictingfuelconsumptionand emissions at different operation points is a model of how the ‘demand’ for power by the propellersvarieswithrequiredstaticthrust,orfree-running speed. Not only is power important, but alsothecorrespondingrev/minsinceequipmentefficienciesandprimemoverfuelconsumptionandemissions are governed by both.
Iftherelationshipsbetweenthrust,free-runningspeed,shaftpowerandshaftrev/minarealreadyknown, either from model tests or sea trials, this datacanbeentereddirectlyintothedutyandpowermodule(seebelow).Ifunknown,thepropulsionmodulecanbeusedinstead.Themodulecombinesasimplepolynomial-basedpredictionofpropellerandnozzleperformancewithapredictionofvesselresistancederivedfromanexpansionofmodeltestor trials data from similar vessels. These parameters establishthenecessarystaticthrustandself-propulsionrelationships.Withthesoftwarecurrentlyorientedtowardtugs,thepropulsionpredictionsinthemodulearesetupspecificallyformodellingZ-drives with Kaplan-style propellers in 19A nozzles. Othernozzleorpropellermodelscanbebuiltin.
Duty and power moduleWithin the duty and power module, the user first defines a set of different possible ‘operating conditions’whichconstituteallthestatesofsignificantinterestinwhichthetugcanoperate.Avarietyofdifferentconditionscanbedefined.Thesearetypicallyidle,differentfree-runningtransitspeeds,anddifferentstaticthrustlevels.The‘operatingprofile’isthendefinedbyallocatingthepercentageoftimespentateachconditionwithinonestandardoperatingperiod(typicallya24-hourday.)Foreachoperatingcondition,themoduleusesthefree-runningandstaticthrustmodelparametersprovidedbythepropulsionmoduletocalculatepropulsionpowerdemands.Otherloads,includinghotelanddeckmachineryelectricalpower,arealsoentered.Thesepowers,andthedurationsallocatedin the operating profile, are then used by the poweringconfigurationmodule.
3
Powering configuration modulesThepoweringconfigurationmodulesformtheheartof the software, taking input from the user and other modulestodeterminewhatequipmentoperatesinanygivenconditionandreturningparametersrelatedtofuelconsumption,emissionsandcostsrelatedtothatcondition.Thereisonemoduleforeachpoweringconfigurationofinterest.Allareallfedthesamedatafrom the duty and power module, but return different resultssocomparisonscanbemade.Itisthesameasrunningallconfigurationsthroughthesamevirtualtrials.Themainpurposeofeachpoweringconfigurationmoduleistotakethepowerdemandassociatedwitheachoperatingconditionandtranslateitintocorrespondingoperatingpoints(powerandrev/min)fortheprimemovers,takingtheintermediateefficiencies,losses,andgearreductionsintoaccount.Withthisinformation,thefuelconsumptionandemissionsaredeterminedateachoperationconditionthroughtheequipmentmodules(seebelow)andsummeduponthebasis of the running times.
Intheexampleconsideredinthispaper,RAptures assumesfixedpitchZ-drivesareusedforallpoweringconfigurations,thedifferencesbeingonlyintheequipmentconfigurationsupplyingpowertothem.Mechanicallossesingearsandbearingsaremodelledasfixedpercentagesofpowerwithinthepoweringconfigurationmodule.Thisisinaccordancewithtypicalengineeringpractice,althoughtheprogramisamenabletoaccountingforspeed-dependentorotherlinearornon-lineareffectsifneeded.
Costsarealsocalculatedwithineachpoweringconfigurationmodule.Tomakerealisticandstandardisedcomparisonsbetweenpoweringconfigurations,life-cyclecostsareworkedoutforequipmentpurchase,
maintenanceandfuelfor20years.ANetPresentCost(NPC)iscalculatedforeachconfiguration,whichrepresentshowmuchmoneywouldhavetobeinvestedin the market today at a given rate of return (interest rate) tocreatethecashflowtopayfor20yearsofoperation.Interestandpredictedescalation(inflation)ratesareadjustabletosuittheclient’saccountingpracticesandeconomicprojections.Inthecalculationofequipment-relatedcosts,RApturestakesintoaccounthowthelife-cyclecostsareaffectedbyspecificvesseloperatingprofiles.Feweroperatinghoursonequipmentgenerallytranslatesintolowerannualmaintenancecostsandmoreyears between overhauls.
Capturingthiscost-savingeffectisimportant,particularlywherepoweringconfigurationsallowmachinerytobeshutdownwhenthepowerisnot needed. Operating in this manner, however, couldresultinmorewearandtearontheenginesandstartersduetomorefrequentstartingandstopping, thermal stresses, and wear from start-uplubeoildeficiencies.Generally,theseaspectswouldtypicallyhaveonlyasmalleffect,butshouldbesubjectivelyevaluatedininstanceswherethereareonlysmalldifferencesbetweentwocontendingarrangements.TherearecaseswhereRAptures needs tobesupplementedwithacombinationofoperatingexperience/preferencesfromowners,andintuitiveinput from designers.
Inthecasestudypresentedbelow,RAptures considersthoseitemsrelatedtothesupplyofpowertothemainpropulsionshaftingsuchasdieselengines,marinegears,generators,electricmotors,drivesandancillaries.CostsfortheshaftingitselfandtheZ-drivesarenotincluded,theseitemsbeingassumedmoreorlessequalforallconfigurations.
Figure 1: RAptures Architecture.
4
Equipment modulesAseparateequipmentmoduleisestablishedforeachspecificmakeandmodelofdieselengine,genset,electricmotororotherequipmentitemsthatareusedwithinthepoweringconfigurations.Dataonfuelconsumption,emissions,andcost(usuallyprovidedbytheequipmentsupplier),isentereddirectlyintoitsmodule.Thisdataisthenmappedwithfittedpolynomialcurvessothatpredictionscanbemadeonthebasisofany given operating point and passed to the powering configuration.Wherespecificdataisnotavailablefromequipmentmanufacturers,genericequipmentmoduleswithtypicalcharacteristicsarecreated.
Inthecasestudypresentedbelow,threeequipmenttypesaredefined:mainengines,VFD-drivenpropulsionmotorsandfixedspeedgeneratorsets.Formainengines,specificfuelconsumptionaswellasspecificemissions(NOx,unburnedhydrocarbonsandparticulate)ing/kWhismappedaccordingtoenginerev/minandoutputpower.Forfixedspeedgensets,dataismappedwithrespecttogensetoutputpoweronly.WiththeVFD-drivenpropulsionmotors,driveandmotorefficiencyismappedformotorspeedandtorque.
CASE STUDY The Robert Allan Ltd RAmparts 2800 (Figure 2) isarelativelyrecent28mdesignwithinthehighlysuccessfulRAmparts series of tugs. To date, all ofthesetugshavebeenpoweredbyconventionaldieselmechanicalpoweringarrangements.Inlightofthepopularityofthistypeoftug,itislogicaltowonderwhetherfutureversionscouldbenefitfromaswitchtodieselelectricorotheralternativepoweringconfigurations.Furthermore,iftherearebenefits,howsensitivearethesetothespecificdutyinwhichthetugwillbeengagedonadailybasis?Toanswerthesekindsofquestions,RAptures is
applied to a notional version of the RAmparts 2800, withtheobjectiveofcomparingdieselmechanicaltothreealternativecandidate-poweringconfigurations.Giventhedependencyoftheoutcomeonthespecific
characteristicsofthecandidateequipmentandassumedtugoperatingprofile,theintentionisnottomake a generalisation on the best arrangement for tugs in general, but rather to show how RApturescanprovideresultstargetedtoaspecificcase.Thesametypeofanalysiscanbeappliedtoanyothervesselsconsideringotherequipmentoroperatingprofiles.
Powering configuration optionsInthecasestudy,fourpoweringconfigurationsareexaminedfortheRAmparts 2800:
• DieselMechanical(DM);• SeriesDieselMechanical/Electrical(SDME);• DieselElectric–RunningStandby(DERS);• DieselElectric–ColdStandby(DECS).
Theoutcomefortwodifferentoperatingprofilesarecompared:
• Harbourduty–Inthisdutythetugisprimarilyengagedinshipberthing/unberthinginaharbourenvironment, where transits are short. Between ship handlingoperations,thevesselspendsasignificantamount of time loitering.
• Shipassistduty–Inadditiontoshipberthing/unberthing,thetugistaskedwithaccompanyingships entering and leaving the harbour over a greaterdistanceforlightescortoperations.Overall,comparedwiththeharbourduty,thetugspendsmore time at higher transit speeds and less time at operationsinvolvinghighstaticthrust.
AllpoweringconfigurationsassumetwinfixedpitchZ-drives.Hotelloadsare80kWandmaximumpeakdeckmachineryloadsare80kW.Alldeckmachineryisassumedtobeelectricalorelectric/hydraulic.Specificequipmentdataisobtainedfromavarietyofspecificmanufacturerspublisheddatasheets.Allenginesarehigh-speeddieselsfromacommonmanufacturerandareEPATierIIrated.Figure 3 (at end of paper) shows thespecificfuelconsumptionoftheprimemoversasafunctionofthepercentratedpower.
TheDieselMechanicalconfiguration(Figure 4, at end ofpaper)hastwo2,000bkWmainenginesmechanicallycoupledtotheZ-drives.Hotelanddeckmachineryloadsaresuppliedbytwo175kWship’sservicegenerator sets arranged for independent operation.
TheSeriesDieselMechanical/Electricalconfiguration(Figure 5, atendofpaper)isanexampleofanalternative arrangement, but one that makes use of fairlyconventionaltechnology.Itincludesthesametwo2,000bkWmainenginesastheDMconfiguration,exceptthatanelectricmotorisnowinstalledbetweeneachofthemainenginesandZ-drivessothatthemotor is in series with the main engines. Power to the Z-drivesisprovidedbyeithertheelectricmotororthemain engines, but not to both at the same time. During Figure 2: RAmparts 2800 built by Cheoy Lee (2008).
5
loiterorlowspeedtransit,theelectricmotorsdrivetheZ-drivesfromgensetpower;themainenginesaredeclutchedandnotrunning.Whenhigherpowerisrequired,themainenginesarestartedupandclutched-in,andtheelectricmotorsarefree-wheeled.Mainenginepowerispassedthroughtheelectricmotorssothemotorshaftsaresizedaccordingly.
This arrangement is similar to the one used in serieshybridsystems,egFoss’sGreen Assist hybrid tug,exceptthatthemotorsarenotalsogenerators,anddonotcontributetorquetothepropulsionshafting when the main engines are operating. TheelectricmotorsareAC-typecontrolledwithVariableFrequencyDrives(VFDs)ratedfor250kW.Electricpowerforthemotorsandforthevessel’sotherelectricloadsissuppliedbyeitheroneortwogensets, one of 560kWe, the other of 175kWe.
BothDieselElectricconfigurations(Figure 6, at endofpaper)havetwo2,000kWelectricpropulsionmotorsdirectlydrivingtheZ-drives.Electricalpowerisprovidedbyacombinationofthefollowinggensetsconfiguredtoallowstagingandfullloadsharing:2x2,200kWe;1x560kWe;1x175kW.ThetwoDEconfigurationsdifferonlyinhowthegeneratorsareoperated.
IntheDieselElectric–RunningStandby(DERS)configuration,whenBPoperationsareanticipated,the two main generators are started up and paralleled (runningstandby)sothatmaximumpowerisavailableandthesystemcanrespondalmostimmediatelytoanydemandfluctuationscommandedfromthebridge.However,duringlowerspeedtransitsnotinvolvingbollard operations, one or more main gensets are shutdownandthesmallership’sservicegenerator(s)provides power.
IntheDieselElectric–ColdStandby(DECS)configuration,itisassumedthatanygeneratoroperating surplus to the immediate power demand canbeshutdownimmediately,evenduringbollardoperations, and is only started up when needed (coldstandby).WhilethiswouldcertainlyreduceresponsivenesssubstantiallyincomparisontoDERS,especiallyduringbollardoperations,andisofquestionablepracticality,itisincludedforcomparison.
Tug operating profilesTheoperatingprofiles(Figure 7, at end of paper) for both the harbour and ship assist duties are based on a 12-hour daily operation, 360 days per year. On harbour duty,thetugspendsasignificantamountoftimeidlingandtransitingatlowspeeds,mixedwithshortperiodsof high BP operations. On ship assist duty, more timeisspentathigherspeedtransittorendezvous/assist ships, and less time on BP operations. These scenariosareconsideredreasonablyrepresentativeoftypicaldutyforthepurposeofthiscasestudy.
RESULTSResults for the harbour tug are presented in Figures 8-11(atendofpaper).Thenineoperatingconditionsthatcompriseeachoperatingprofile(duty)areshownalongthex-axis.Thewidertranslucentbarsindicatethepercentageoftimeallocatedforeach.ThenarrowersolidbarsarefueloremissionsquantitiesforeachPoweringConfiguration.Totalsaregivenonthe right.
Fuel consumption/CO2 emissions SinceCO2 emissions vary in proportion to fuel consumption,theseaspectsareintrinsicallylinkedincomparingtheconfigurations.Undertheharbourduty,thetwodieselelectricoptionsemergeastheleastfavourable. While there are some savings at lower powers, where the minimally loaded main engines of theDieselMechanicalarrangementsufferfromlowspecificfuelconsumptions,thechartillustratesthatmostofthefuelisstillconsumedduringstaticthrustoperations.Thisisthecasedespitethefactthatmuchmoretimeisactuallyspentloiteringormovingslowly.Atthehigherpoweroperatingpoints,thedieselelectricconfigurationssufferfromelectricalsystemlosses.Overallfuelconsumptionfordieselelectricishigherbyapproximately16percent.
Ofthetwodieselelectricoptions,theRunningStandby(DERS)systemcomesoutworstsinceallgeneratorsarerunningcontinuouslywheneverBPoperationsareexpected.ThisisincontrastwiththeColdStandby(DECS)configurationwheregensetsareonlystartedwhenneededandshutdownagainwhennot.Inreality,operatinggensetsthiswaywouldbeimpracticalformosttypicalharbouroperations,aspowerdemandvariesrapidly where diesel gensets need time to start up and parallel.Neverthelessthecomparisongivesanindicationofthepotentialsavingsinfuel,andunderscoreshowbatteriescanhaveabeneficialroletoplayinprovidingameanstorespondtoshort-termpowerfluctuationwithouttheneedtostartupagenseteachtime.
WiththeSDMEconfiguration,thesituationisbetter.SlightlylessfuelisconsumedthanwiththeDieselMechanicalconfiguration.Thisisasonewouldhope,sincetheSDMEarrangementisintendedtoavoidthepitfallsoftheothers:inthecaseofDieselMechanical,mainenginesoperatingunloadedatlowpoweroperatingpoints;forthetwoDieselElectricconfigurations,comparativelyhighelectricallosses.However,thedifferenceisfairlysmall,only3percentlessfuelthanDieselMechanicaland,onitsownperhaps,notincentiveenoughtomovetothisconfigurationwithouttheprospectofadditionaladvantagesofreducedemissionsorlowercosts,aspectswhicharediscussedbelow.(Figure 8).
NOx, Hydrocarbon (HC) and particulate emissionsWithdieselprimemovers,NOx,HCandparticulateemissionsvarywithequipmentdesign,fuel
6
management, off-engine measures, rate of power variations, and a host of other operational and environmental parameters. Data is not always easy to comeby,thesourceoftenbeingthesupplier,wherepossiblydatawascollectedtoproveconformancewithregulatoryrequirements.Forthiscasestudy,theemissionsdatawasbasedontypicalpublishedvaluesforthespecificprimemoversusedinthecasestudy.Asthedataisforsteadystateloadconditions,itdoesnotcapturetheeffectsofrapidtransientloadfluctuations.Nevertheless,comparingemissionsonaquasi-steadystatebasisisareasonableapproach.
Acommontrendisseenintheemissionscharts(Figures 9-11, atendofpaper):whereprimemovermachineryisforcedtooperateawayfromitsdesignoperatingpoint,specificemissions(emissionperbrakekW)tendtobecomeworse.Whileimprovementsinemissionstechnologymayreducethissensitivity,itischaracteristicoftoday’smarinemachinery.Forthisreason,atlowpowersthebenchmarkDieselMechanicalconfigurationhastheworstemissionsofallthepoweringconfigurationsduetothemainenginesrunningsofarbelowtheirratedpower.Forthelow-andmid-powersofidleandtransitoperations,dieselelectricconfigurationsfarebetterthanDieselMechanical,asoptimalloadingpointsforsmallergeneratorsarepossible.However,atthehigh-powerBPconditions,dieselelectriclosesitsadvantagesincetheinherentelectro-mechanicalconversionlossesreduceefficiencycomparedwithDieselMechanical.
TheabilityoftheSDMEconfigurationtooperateelectricallyatlowpower,optimallyloadingthegensets,butswitchingovertodirectDieselMechanicalforhigherspeedtransitandBPconditionsgivesittheedgeovertheconventionalDieselMechanicalconfiguration.Asthechartsclearlyindicate,theadvantageissubstantialasaresultofthesignificantpenaltyDieselMechanicalsuffersunderlow-powerloiteringconditions.ThenetresultisthatemissionsfromtheSDMEconfigurationarethelowest overall.
COSTSBarchartsofthecosts(Figure 12, at end of paper) comprisethreecomponents:fuel,equipmentmaintenance,andequipmentpurchase.NetPresentCostsinthisexamplearecalculatedonaninterestrateof5percent,anannualescalationof2percent,atafuelpriceof$0.60/litre.
Itisimmediatelyapparentthatthetwodieselelectricoptionsarethemostexpensiveowingtotherelativelyhighcapitalcostofthefourgensets,plusthecostsforelectricpropulsionmotors,switchgearandVFDs.Thehigherfuelconsumptionisalsoafactor,buttoalesserextent.Asthebreakdowninthechartshows,itisprimarilythepurchasecostofequipmentthatpushesthetotalcostbeyondtheotherarrangements.Maintenancecostsareless,particularlyfortheColdStandbyversion,butnotsufficientlytobringthetotalcostbelowtheDieselMechanicalandSDMEconfigurations.
ThecomparisonofDieselMechanicaltoSDMEisinterestingsincetheSDMEconfigurationcomesoutaslessexpensiveoverallthanDieselMechanical.Thesmalldifferenceinfuelconsumptionreducesfuelcostsbyapproximately3percentbelowDieselMechanical,buttherealsignificanceliesintheequipmentpurchaseandmaintenancecosts.AlthoughtheequipmentpurchasecostisgreaterfortheSDMEconfiguration,aswouldbeexpectedgivenrelativelyhighcostfortheelectricmotors,drivesandgenerators,overtimethisisoffsetbyconsiderablylowerlife-cyclemaintenancecosts.WiththeSDMEarrangement,themainenginesaccumulatefewerrunninghoursandthisisanadvantagesincetheyaremoreexpensivetomaintainand overhaul than the gensets.
ForanoperatorconsideringtheSDMEoption,thefactthatthelowermaintenancecostmorethancompensatesfortheadditionalequipmentpurchasecostisakeyconclusionthatillustrateshowallcostelementsneedtobeconsideredcollectively.Regrettably,makingaccuratepredictionsofperhourmaintenancecosts,timebeforeoverhaul,andtheactualcostofoverhaulcanbeadifficultproposition.Datafromsupplierscanbenotoriouslyvariablegiventhemanyfactorsthatcomeintoplay,includinghowrigorouslytheequipmentisoperated,themaintenanceskillleveloftheoperator,andenvironmentalandlogisticalaspectsthatcanconstrainservicingintervals.Forthiscasestudy,datafromvariousequipmentsupplierswasblendedtoarriveatvaluesconsideredtobereasonablyrepresentativeofequipmentofthetypeunderconsideration.Ofcourse,thebestsourceofdataisfromtherecordsoftheoperatoritselfforsimilarequipmentandoperationalconditions,ifavailable.
Despitetheinherentuncertaintyinmaintenancecostprojections,thisdoesnotdetractfromthekeypointthatthecasestudyresultssuggestthattheSDMEconfigurationcouldhaveasignificantcostadvantageover20yearsbysavingmaintenanceonthemainengines,atleastforthesubjectvesselunderthegivendutyprofile.
COMPARiSON TO SHiP ASSiST DUTY With RAptures,oncetheconfigurationoptionsaredefined,itisamatterofafewkeystrokestoseehowchangingtheoperationalprofileinfluencesfuelconsumption,emissionsandcost.Toillustratethis, results for the same vessel, with the same four poweringconfigurationoptions,arepresentedfortheshipassistdutyasdefinedabove.
Lookingatfuelconsumptionfirst(Figure 13, at end ofpaper),itisimmediatelyclearthat,withmoreoftheworking day spent in transit and less time loitering, fuel consumptionissignificantlyhigherthanwiththeharbourtug duty. Most of the fuel is used for the high-speed transit at 12.5 knots, not during bollard pull, as is the casewiththeharbourduty.
Itisworthnotingthatatthe12.5knottransit,thereiseffectivelylittledifferenceinhowtheDieselMechanical
7
andSDMEconfigurationsoperate:bothareusingthemainenginesonly,directlycoupledtothepropulsionshafting.ThesingledifferenceissomelossoftheshaftpowerpassingthroughtheinactiveelectricmotorintheSDMEconfiguration.ThesamesituationexistsbetweenthetwoDieselElectricconfigurations:thesamenumberofgeneratorsisrunningineachcase.FortheRunningStandbyversion,thestandbygeneratorsarerunningonlywhenbollardoperationsareanticipated,notfortransit.Thereforetheapproximately12percentgreaterfuelconsumptionoftheDieselElectricconfigurationisattributablemainlytotheloweroverallefficiencyarisingfromelectricalconversionlosses.
Thedominanceofthis12.5knottransitoperatingpointalsocarriesoverintoemissions(Figures 14-16, atendofpaper).Thegeneraltrend,whencomparedto the same results for harbour duty, is that the Diesel ElectricconfigurationscomparelessfavourablytotheDieselMechanicalandSDMEconfigurations.Atthatpowerlevel,theelectro-mechanicalconversionlossesoutweightheefficiencypenaltyinrunningthemainengines at a lower load level.
IncomparingtheDieselMechanicalandSDMEconfigurations,withtheshipassistdutythereisanarrowingofthedifferencesinallareas,includingcosts(Figure 17, atendofpaper).Sincemoretimeand fuel is spent in transit in the ship assist duty, andlesstimeloitering,theSDMElosessomeoftheadvantagesithadinrunningmoreefficientlyandproducinglessemissionsatlowpower.However,overallitremainsanattractiveoption.
SUMMARYForthecasestudyfortheRAmparts 2800 tug there islittlebenefittothetwodieselelectricconfigurations(DERS,DECS)overtheothertwoconfigurationsintermsofcostoremissionsforeitheroperationalprofile.ComparedwiththeconventionalDieselMechanicalconfiguration,SDMEappearstobeaveryattractiveoption,particularlyfortheharbourdutydefined.
CONCLUSiONSThe RAptures program is proving to be a versatile toolforassessingandcomparingthefuel,emissionsandcostperformanceofanyalternativepoweringconfigurationsthatprogressivetugoperatorsmaywanttoconsiderforreducingcostsandemissions.Thespecificresultsfromtheprogramcanbeusedtoverifyoperationalbenefitclaims,andcanpreventinvestmentintechnologiesthatmayprovedisappointing.ItsdevelopmentisdrivenbyRobertAllanLtd’scommitmenttothedesignofcleaner,moreefficientvesselsandrecognitionthat,inweighingthetrade-offsbetweenpoweringconfigurationoptions,thewidelyvariableoperationalprofilesoftugboatspreventanyonesolutionfrom being a universally best one.
Asillustratedbythecasestudy,thistypeofanalysisisessentialtotheprocessofproperlyweighingthepotentialimprovementsagainstthecostsofalternativepoweringconfigurations.WithRAptures as a tool, Robert Allan Ltd isreadytoworkwithclientstoachieverealenergyandemissions savings.
Figure 3: Equipment specific fuel consumption.
8
Figure 4: Diesel Mechanical (DM) Configuration.
Figure 5: Series Diesel Mechanical/Electrical (SDME) Configuration.
Figure 6: Diesel Electric Configurations (DERS, DECS).
9
Figure 7: Operational Profiles Duty Cycles.
Figure 8: Fuel consumption – harbour duty.
10
Figure 9: NOx emissions – harbour duty.
Figure 10: Hydrocarbon emissions – harbour duty.
11
Figure 11. Particulate emissions – harbour duty.
Figure 12: Costs – harbour duty.
12
Figure 13: Fuel consumption – ship assist duty.
Figure 14: NOx emissions – Ship Assist Duty.
13
Figure 15: Hydrocarbon emissions – Ship Assist Duty.
Figure 17: Costs – Ship Assist Duty.
14
Figure 16: Particulate emissions – Ship Assist Duty.