RADIAN 

...... e••••oM 

MBMORAHDUM 

TO: Mary Tom Kissell 

FROM: Kristine Pelt 

DATE: February 1, 1994 

A-90-23 

IV-B-7 

SUBJECT: Steam Stripper Total Capital Investment and Total 

Annual Costs 

This memorandum discusses the equation~ and assumptions used 

to devel~p total capital investment (TCI) and total annual cost 

{TAC) for the HON wastewater design steam stripper. A LOTus• 

spreadsheet was developed to calculate these costs, and a copy of 

this spreadsheet is attached. 

T~e design basis of the·steam stripper will b~ ~iscussed in 

detail in a separate steam stripper design memorandum.l .. That 

steam stripper design memorandum will include a discussion of 

steam-to-feed ratio, column diameter, number of trays, and .column 

height, which are all inputs to the Lotus• cost program. 

Therefore, these parameters are not discussed in detail in this 

memorandum. 

The algorithms for TCI and TAC developed in this memorandum 

were used to optimize the stream to feed ratio for the design 

steam stripper.2 Once the steam to feed ratio was optimized, the 

new steam to feed ratio (0.04 kg steam per kilogram of 

wastewater) was ~sed in the.Lotus spreadsheet to generate the 

cost equations that would be used in the f~amework to generate 

cost impacts for wastewater.3 Th~s memora~du~ W~S·Written to 

document the assumptions used in the Lotus spreadsheet·and does 

not necessarily reflect the final design parameters. 

Sections 1. 0 and· 2 .. o present in detail the TCI' and· TAC for 

an so gpm (300 tpm) steam stripper system. A steam stripper witn 

an 80 gp~ flow rate of wastewater was chosen as a~ example 

because this flow rate is the median of the five flow rates which 

were used to develop cost equations for TCI and TAC. Section 3.0 

presents a summary and comparison of the TCI and TAC for steam 

stripper systems designed for five dift:erent wastewater feed 

flow rates ranging from 10 to 200 gpm (40 to 760 tpm).· 
1.0 TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT 

Table 1-1 presents the TCI for an 80 gpm (300 tpm) steam 

stripper system. Total capital investment is the sum of the 

basic equipment cost (BEC), the purchased equipment cost (PEC), 

and the direct and indirect installation costs. The BEC includes 

the cost of the steam stripping column, feed tank, feed 

preheater, overheads condenser, overheads decanter, and pumps, 

and is discussed in Section 1.1. The PEC includes flame 

arrestors, instrumentation, sales tax, and freight, ~nd is 

discussed in Section 1.2. Direct and indirect installation costs 

are discussed in Section 1.3 and include costs such as 

foundations, painting, and engineering. 

1.1 BASIC EQUIPMENT COST 

The ~est of each piece of e~ipment'included in the BEC, as 

well as the material of const·ruction and size of the equipment 

are presented in Table 1-~. Each individual piece of equipment 

is discussed in this section and the detailed calculations used 

to develop TCI are presented in Attachment 1. 

1.1.1 Steam Stripping Column 

The cost of the column was based on the average cost 

calculated using an equation·from Chemical Engineering Magazine,4 

and an equation from Peters and Ti~erhaus,5 assuming the steam· 

stripper column cost was constructed of 304 stainless steel 

(304SS). 

The equation from Chemical Engineering Magazine was used to 

estimate the cost of a carbon steel column including the shell, 

skirt, nozzles, and manholes. A factor (X~ol) was then u~ed to 

estimate the cost of an equivalent stainless steel column as 

shown below. 

Cost of Stainless Column = Cost of Carbon Column * Xcol 

The costs of stainless steel ~rays and carbon steel 

platforms and ladders were added to the cost of the 304 stainless 

steel column. 

mgm40:fnlmemo.kas 2 
TABLE 1-1. SUMMARY OF TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT 

Cost 

Component 

Direct Equipment Costs 

Base Equipment Cost (BEC) 

Flame arrestor 

lnstrumentaton 

Sales Tax and Fretght 

Purchased Equipment ·cost (PEC) 

Direct Installation Costs 

P~ptng 

Foundations and Supports 

Electrical 

Erection and Handling 

Painting 

Insulation 

TOTAL DIRECT INSTALLATION COST 

•Indirect .lnstallatton Costs 

~ngtneertng and Su~ervtston 

Construction & Field Expense 

Construction Fee 

Start-up and Testtng 

Contingency 

Cost 

Factor 

$112.00 /arrestor 

0.1*[BEC+Arres~or] (b) 

0.08*[BEC+Arrestor +Instrumentation] 

3DX of PEC (b) 

12X of PEC (b) 

IX of PEC (b) 

401 of PEC (b) 

IX of PEC (b) 

lX of PEC (b) 

lOX of PEC (b) 

lOX of PEC (b) 

lOX of PEC (b) 

2X of PEC (b) 

3X of PEC (b) 

(b) 

~nent 

. Cost (a) 

. $288,796 

$112 

$28,890 

$25,420 

$343,218 

$102,970 

$41,190 

$3,430 

$137,290 

$3,430 

$3,430 

$291,740 

$34,320 

$34,320 

$34,320 

$6,860 

$10,300 

TOTAL INDIRECT INSTALLATION COST $120,120 

Percent of Total 

Capital Investment 

38.2 

0.015 

3.8 

3.4 

13.6 

5.5 

0.5 

18.2 

0.5 

0.5 

4.5 

4.5 

4.5 

0.9 

1.4 

TOTAL CAP.ITAL INVESTMENT (TCI) $755,078 100.0 

-----~------~---------~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-~---------- (1) July 1989 Dollars 

(b) OAQPS Control Cost Manual 

mgm40:fnlmema.kas 3 
TABLE i-2. SUMMARY OF BASIC EQUIPMENT COSTS 

Equipment Estimated Price year Price index Equipment Equipngnt Construction 

c~t price costs, she material 

July 1989a 

Feed tanks 48,515 1st qt r. 1979 230.9 74,800 960 ~ Carbon steel 

Feed 34,638 July 1989 356 34,~38 240·~ Carbon steel 

preheater with copper 

(shell and tubes 

tube) 

Steam 69,703 1st qtr. 1979 230.9 107,467 0.76 m 304 Stainless 

stripping diameter, steel 

colum 8.8 m hefght 

Primary 9,831 July 1988. 343 10,203 21.7 rtf. 304 Stainless 

condenser steel 

(water 

cooled, shell 

and tube) 

Overhead 9,n2 Jan. 1979 225.9 15,320 3.8 ~ 304 Stainless 

collection steel 

decanter 

P~s (4) 52,022 Nov. 1988 347.8 53,24? 8,800 total Stainless 

watts steel 

Total base 295,677 

equipment 

cost (SEC) 

~orrected using the July 1989 price index of 356. 

ased on wastewater flow to the steam stripper. 

mgm40:fnlmemo.kas . 4 
Based on vendor inform~tion,.the calculated cost factor 

(Xcol) for 304ss·was 3.1. Details regarding the estimation of 

the value f~r Xcol are shown in Attachment 2. 

The second method used to estimate the cost of a 304SS · 

column was taken from Peters and Timmerhaus.S Shell, manhole, 

nozzle, tray, platform~ ladder, handrail, and insulation costs 

were included in the Peters and Timmerhaus column cost. The 

trays and shell were stainless steel, and the manholes, nozzles, 

platforms, ladders, and handrails were carbon steel. 

The cost of the column calculated using the· Peters and 

Timmerhaus equation was averaged with the cost of the column · 

calculated using the Chemical Engineering Magazine equation to 

obtain the final cost of the column. 

Both of the methods used to calculate the cost.of the steam 

stripping column are based on the weight of the col.umn, which is 

dependent on the diameter of the column.4,5 For simplicity, it 

was assumed that the diameter of the column was dependent only on 

the flow rate of the wastewater to the steam stripper. Fer the 

design of the steam stripper, it was assumed that the column 

diameter was dependent on both the flow rate of the wastewater to 

the steam. stripper and the flow rate of the steam to the steam 

stripper.1 The diameter that was estimated using only the flow 

rate of the wastewater to the steam stripper is 25 percent higher 

than the diameter estimated using both flow rates. ~owever, an 

increase in the diameter of the column results in only a slight 

increase in the ·total capital cost of the steam stripper, because 

the cost of the column is either a logarithmic or an exponential 

function of the weight of the column.4,5 ·Furthermore, the cost 

of the column is less than fifteen percent of·the total capital 

investment. 

1~1.2 Feed Tanks 

Feed tank costs are based on 1979 cost equations from 

Chemical Engineering Maqazine.6 Because the reference equations 

are more than 5 years old, additional information was used to 

verify that the scale-up of the feed tank costs to July 1989 

~O:fnlmemo.kas 5 
dollars was valid. Feed tank costs obtained from Richardson's 

Manual7 and a vendor representative verified that the 1979 cost 

equation ga~e an adequate cost estimate (see Attachment 3). 

1.1.3 Condenser 

Because the overheads condenser· was operated at elevated 

temperatures, the material of construction used in the cost 

estimate was 304SS. The equation for condensers calculated the 

cost in carbon steel and multiplied by a factor, Xcond, to obtain 

the cost in stainless steel. The cost equation for the condenser 

and the factor, Xcond' were obta~ned from Chemical Engineering 

Magazine.B The factor for the condenser was variable and 

dependent on the area of the condenser. Therefore, the 

appropriate Xcond factor equation was used to develop the Xcond 

factor for the condenser, instead of using the.factor developed 

for the steam stripper column. 

1.1. 4 Preheater 

Preheater costs were based on vendor data.9 A linear 

relationship was developed between feed tank cost in July 1989 

dollars and the flow rate of water to the preheater. Detailed 

calculation·s are shown in Attachment 4. 

1.1.5 Decanter 

The overheads decanter operated at elevated temperatures and 

therefore, the material of construction used in the cost 

estimates was 304 stainless steel. The cost equation for 

decanters was obtained from Peters and Timmerhaus.10 Detailed 

calculations are. shown in Attachment l. 

1.1.6 Pumps 

The operation of the steam stripper r~quire~ four pumps 

including a .pump for wastewater transfer to an~ from the feed 

tank, an overheads pump, and a bottoms pump. The pump cost 

equations were obtained· from Chemical Engineering MAgazine,& and 

the cost was based on 316 stainless steel construction. D~tailed 

pump cost calculations are shown in Attachment 1 •. 

1.2 PURCHASED EQUIPMENT COSTS 

The PEC is based on the BEC and is the sum of the BEC, the 

flame arrestor. cost, the instrumentation cost, and sales tax and 

freight. The cost of·the flame arrestor is $112.11 The 

mgm40:fnlmemo.kas 6 
instrumentation cost is 1 percent of the sum of.the BEC and the 

cost of the flame arrestor. The sales tax and freight is 

8 percent of the sum of the BEC, the cost of the.flame arrestor, 

and the cost of the instrumentation. All PEC cost equations with 

the exception of the flame arrestor cost were obtained from the 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Control Cost 

Manua1.12 Purc~ased equipment cost for a steam stripper with a 

flow rate of 80 gpm {300 tpm) is shown in Table 1-1. 

1.3 INSTALLATION COST 

Direct and indirect installation costs.are all expressed as 

a percentage of the PEc.12 The direct inst~llation cost~ include 

piping, foundations and supports, electrical, erection and 

h~ndling, painting, and in~ulation costs. Indirect installation 

costs include engineering and supervision, construction and field - 0 

expenses, start-up and testing, and contingency costs. Direct 

and indirect installation costs for a steam stripper with a 

flow rate of 80 gpm (300 tpm) are shown in Table 1-1. 

2.0 TOTAL ANNUAL COST 

Th.is section describes the TAC associated with the operation 

of the design steam stripper~ This cost is the sum of the direct 

and indirect annual costs, which are pre~ented in Sections 2.1 · 

and 2.2, respectively. Direct, indirect, and total annual costs 

.for a steam stripper sized for a flow rate of so gpm (300 tpm) 

are presented in Table 2-1. 

·2 . 1 TOTAL DIRECT ANNUAL COST 

The direct annual cost includes the cost of utilities, 

labor, and maintenance. Utilities include electricity, steam, 

and water costs, and these cost calculations are shown in 

Attachment 1. The heat loss in the steam ~tripper was assumed to 

·be five percent of the heat input (see A~tachment 5)". Steam cost 

is discussed in detail in a s.eparate memorandum.13 

Primary condenser cooling water costs were base~ on a 

recirculating water system. The losses of cooling water were due 

to evaporation, drift, and blowdown, and these losses were · 

4 percent of the cooling water flow·to the primary condenser. 

mgm40:fnlmemo.kas 7 
TABLE 2-1. TOTAL ANNUAL COST CALCULATIONS 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cost 

Canponent 

Cost 

Factor 

Annual 

Cansa.nptton 

Annual 

Cast(a) 

Percent of Tot 

Annual Cost 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------~---------------------------------~------------------ Direct Annual Costs 

Uttlit1es 

Electricity 

Steam 

Water (cooling) 

labor 

Operating Labor 

Supervision & Admin 

Maintenance 

labor 

Materials 

TOTAL DIRECT ANNUAL COST (TDAC) 

Indirect Annual Costs 

. Overhead 

Property Taxes 

Insurance 

Adm1nistrativ~ Charges 

Capital Recover~ (CR) 

TOTAL INDIRECT ANNUAL COST (TJAC) 

TOTAL ANNUAL COST (TAC) 

ANNUAL WASTE THROUGHPUT (AWT) 

COST PER UNIT WASTEWATER ($/Mg) 

$0.0590 /kwh (a) 

' $9.26 /Mg (c) 

0.0528 /1000 1 (a) 

$22.50 /hr 

lSX of Op. labor (a) 

$22.50 /hr 

lOOX of Maintenance Labor (a) 

73,092 kWhr (b). 

6,363 Mg (d) 

21,999,767 ltters (e) 

530 hrs (fl 

530 hrs (f) 

&OX of labor and maintenance materials (a) 

lX of TCI (a) 

. 1X of TCI (a) 

2X of TCI (a) 

lOX I 15 yrs (a) 

TDAC + TIAC 

151,444 Mg/yr 

TAC/AVT 

$4,310 

$58,920 

$1,160 

$11,930 

$1.790 

$11.930 

$11,930 

$101,970 

$22,550 

$7,550 

$7,550 

$15,100 

$99,270 

$152,020 

L7 

23.2 

0.5 

4.7 

0.7 

4.7 

4.7 

8.9 

3.0 

3.0 . 

5.9 

39.1 

S2s3,99o 1oo.o 

$1.68 

COST PER LITER WASTEWATER FEED ($/1) TAC/FLOW 1BD,DDO.OOD 1/yr 0.00159 

--------------~----------------------------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------------- a OAQPS Cont ro 1 Cost Manua 1 

b · 240 kWhr/day. 351 days/yr 

c Steam Costs, August 23,1993 d 21,200 kg/day, 351 days/yr 

e 73,000 ltters/day, 351 days/yr (based on recirculating cooling water) f Based on 1/2 hr shtft. ~ •htfts per day, and 351 day/yr. 

~O:fnlmemo.kaa 8 
Detailed calculations of cooling water losses are shown in 

Attachment 6. 

Operating and maintenance labor rates were estimated at 

$22.50 per hour, based on the labor rate used in Subpart H of the 

Hazardous Organic NESHAP for equipment leaks. The information in 

Attachment· 7 ·indicates that this value for operating and 

maintenance lab~r rates is reasonable. The number o.f· hours of 

labor required ~or maintenance and operation of the steam 

stripper was assumed to be 530 hours per year. This estimate was 

based on the general quideline given by the OAQPS Control Cost · 

Manual:12 30 minutes per shift, 3 shifts per day, and 351 days 

per year. These labor hours are not specific to steam strippers. 

Supervision and administrative labor was assumed to be 15_percent 

of operating labor.12 Maintenan~e material costs were assumed to 

be equal to maintenance labor costs.12 

2.2 TOTAL INDIRECT ANNUAL COST 

Total indirect annual cost includes overhead, property 

taxes, insurance, and administrative charges. overhead is 

60 percent of the sum of operating, supervision, and maintenance 

labor, and maintenance materials. Property taxes, insurance, and 

administrative charges are a percentage of TCI. Capital recovery 

is estimated assuming a 10-percent interest rate and an equipment 

life of 15 years.~2 

· 3.0 TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND TOTAL ANNUAL COST VERSUS 

FLOW RATE 

Using the equations in the LOTUS8 spreadsheet, va~ues for 

TCI and TAC were calculated for the design steam stripper at 

5 different flow rates (tpm): 40, 150, 300, ·455, and 760. These 

selected wastewater flow rates provide a representative range of 

flow rates of wastewater to ·a steam stripper. The results are 

sho~n in Table 3-1 and are graphed in Figures 3-1 and 3-2. 

mgm40:fnlmemo.kas 9 
TABLE 3-1. ·SUMMARY OF TCI AND TAC FOR A STEAM STRIPPER 

Flow rate 

(tpm) (gpm) TCI TAC 

760 201 1,199,296 638,310 

455 120 925,338 441,210 

300 79.3 773,069 339,660 

150 39.6 580,641 233,090 

40 10.6 363,272 142,070 

mgm40:fnlmemo.kas 10 
I 

0 

.. 

.... 

i 

CIJ 

~ a Cll 

t.l 

t.l 

t.7 

t.l lu tA 

... t.a 

&t.a 

~ 

I~ ~ 

-

t= 

... Ju 

u 

... 

.... 

CLt 

0 

•• 

. 

. --~~··· .... 

• Qdan .... 

0 1Cif ..... 

.. 

..... ---······· 

m conan .-o -a.• + m.e (lpm) 

.410 . 100 

. ......... , ... Rile ~pm) 

Rgure 3-1. Summary of total capital Investment versus 

wastewater feed rate for steam lbtpping unit 

.... ----~ 

100 

I 
i 

0 

.. 

... 

i u· 

"" C» 

liD 

CL7 

u 

( .. 

·! ... .... J N 

Ju 

.. 

... 

at 

• 

• 

. ...,., ..... 

• c.tlaft .... 

OTAC,...._ 

TACfltr'nln• ..... fllr •121.1R1 + 882.4 Clpm). 

TAC (cMion .... • 72,112 + 131.1 (lpm) 

.. 40D 

. ....... , ... .,... &lpm) 

F'gure 3-2. Total annual cost versus ~ater feed rate for steam stripping unit 

100 

I 
REFERENCES 

1. Memorandum from Bagley, c., Radian Corporation, to Kissell, 

M., EPA/SOB. Design Steam Stripper -·Background, Basis, and 

Proposed Changes. February 7, 1994. 

2. Memorandum from Allen, c., Research Triangle Institute, to 

Manninq,·E., EPA/CPB. Evaluation of Cost Effectiveness of 

Steam Stripping Wastewater streams. February 2, 1994. 

3. Memorandum·from Pelt, K., Radian Corporation, to Kissell, 

M., EPA/SOB. Total Capital Investment and Total Annual Cost 

Equations Used in the Framework for steam Stripping 

Wastewater. February 1, 1994. 

4. Mulet, A., A.B. Corripio, and.L.B. Evans. Estimate Costs of 

Distillation and Absorption Towers via Correlations. Chem. 

Eng. December 28, 1981. p. 180. 

s. Pet.ers, M.S., and K.D •. Timmerhaus. 

Economics for Chemical Engineers. 

McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1980. 

Plant Design and 

Third· Ed. New York, 

pp •. 768-773 •. 

6. Corripio,· A.B., K.S. Chrien, and L.B. Evans. Estim~te Costs 

of Heat Exchangers and Storage Tanks via Correlations. 

Chem. Eng. January 25, 1982. pp. 144-146. 

7. Richardson Engineering Services, Inc. Process Plant 

Construction Estimating Standards, Volume 3. Mesa, AZ. 

1988. . 

a. Hall, R.S., W.M. Vatavuk, and J. Matley. Estimating P~ocess 

Equipment Costs. Chem. Eng. November 21, 1988. pp. 66~75. 

9. Scott, K.A., Radian Corporation with Ambassador Heat 

Transfer company.· May 12, 1993. Cost of Heat Exchangers. 

10. Peters, M.S., and K.D. Timmerhaus. 

Economics for Chemical Engineers. 

McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1980. 

Plant Design and 

Third Ed. New York, 

p. 572. 

11. Telecon. Gitelman, A., Research Triangle Institute with 

Hoyt Corporation. September a, 1986. Cost of flame 

arrestors. 

12. u.s. Environmental Protection Agency, ·Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards. OAQPS Control Cost Manual. Fourth 

Edition. ·EPA-450/3-90-006. Research Triangle Park, NC. · January 1990. 

13. Memorandum from Bagley, c., Radian Corporation, to 

Kissell, M., EPA/SDB. Steam Costs. March 17, 1993. 

mgm40:fnlmemO.kaa 13 
ATTACHMENT 1 

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND UTILITY CALCULATIONS 
STEAM ~TRIPPER aJSTII&' PROC£DURE: BASED 

a. ASPDI ,_IITOUT - 300LPII (ao&PM} CASE 

STEM/FIED RATIO. IC& STEMIIC& W: 

VASTtVATEI FtED RATE. &PII: . TAC: 

FlOW RATES Ttl: 

------·--·------ FIED FlOW. IC&/ .. : 

BOTTCMS FLOW. IC&/HR: 

STEAM FlOW. IC&/HR: 

OVEAHEAD FlOW.IC&/HR: 

PRJ COifD H20. IC&/S: 

EQUIPMEIT 

--------------- PREHEATER AREA. M-2: 

11974.67 

17803.8412 

1ni.511M 

2083.54141 

18.1012112 

238.910552 

21 .6846841 

0.096 0.801164098 

79.3000 

$401. 550 TOAC 

$870.974 TIAC 

6PII: 

6PII: 

ICJ/hr: 

&PM: 

&PM: 

n · 2: 

n·2: 

79.3 

78.5 

5359430.2 

9.2 

287.5 

2581. 1 

233.3 

1

228.650 

171.800 

DEISITl H20 • 8.331b/ga1 DDISITl Stella • 8.00lb/gal ktlogr•. kg • 2.205 lb 

WATT-9.486E-04 BTU/S 

1.750 baaed on telecon with 

Rob &ol-.. of r..nta · 

PRJ COlD AREA. M·2: . 0.13 ft-2 area baaed on· 2.9 telecon with Rob 6oldnan of 

Ect.arda Engineering. aJLIIUI DIAMETER. M: 0.75865892 FT: 

ITU: 16.25 

NO. OF aJLUMII TRAYS : 10 

ACTIVE HEI&HT. FT: . 15 

TOTAL HEI&HT • FT: 29 

*************•· · · · ······· · · ········*****············••*****•••••••••••••*******•••••············· 

A. CAPITAL COSTS 

1) Stela Stripper Col1111n 

Di • inside di-ter. ft • 

u. n •. tangent-to-tang length. ft• 

Ta • eat. wall thickness. ft • 

rha(aa304). lb/ft•s • 

V.ight of the col1111n: 

va • pi*Di( n + o.811&*Di)Ta*rho 

va. lb· · 7.473 

501 

Z.9 

29. l 

0. 0521 

BE SURE WEI6HT. DIAMETER. AND TOW~ H£16HT ARE WITHIN THE LIMITS 

FOR All EQUATIOIIS The weight equation for calculating steam st ripper column coat 

h the Sllll8 for carbon and stainless steel. but the deni ttiea of 

the t.o •tala are different. - densi ty of carbon steel • 490 lb/ft-3 - density of stainless steel • 501 lb/ft-3 
a. Challical Engineering Magazine, DecedJer 28, 1981, pg. 180. .. COST INDEX • '• 230.9 

-Shell, skirts, nozzles, and manholes 

Cbs • exf[6.823 + 0.14178 (ln Vs) + 0.02468 (ln Vs)A2] 9020 b < Vs < 2,470,000 lb. 

VEI&HT TOO SMALL . 

Cbs $ • 23,175 Cbsl304ss), $ • Cbs*Fm • 69158 

Fa,304ss • 3.01 (Based on Vendor data) -Platfon=s and Ladders . Cbp • 151.Bl*Dt·o.6331&*Lt·o.8D1&1 

3 ftc 01 < 24 ft : 57.5 ft < Lt c 170 ft 

DIAMETER TOO SMALL 

LENGTH TOO SHORT 

Cbp, $ • 4441 

-Cost of Tr~ys - 304 stainless sieve trays 

Cbt • (Number of trays)*278.38*exp[0.1739*D] 2 ft c D c 16 ft 

DIAMETER OKAY . 

Cbt, $ • 4,604 

Total column Cost: 

Column cOst (304 ss) • Cbs(304ss) + Cbp + Ftm*Ftt*Cbt 

COLUMN COST. $ • 79, 505 

where 

Ftt(Steve Trays) - Table V • 

Ftm(304Stainless)• (1.189 +0.0577*0) • 

0.85 

1.36 
b. Peters and Tt11111arhaus Che Plant Design pg 768 - 773. . COST ~NDEX • 225.9 

-Shell Ftg 15-24 

Shell cast • 133.4&*VS·o.6347 

1000 lb < Vs < 70,000 lb 

VEI&HT OKAY 

Shell cast, S • 38,359 

-Manholes Fig 15-25 (SU&GEST USIN& 10 MANHOLES - OHE FOR EACH TRAY) Manhole cast • (no. of manhales)*(internal diameter, tn)* 

(53.83 + 40.71*(ta.er-.a11 thtckness,tn)) 0.375 inches < Ts < 2 inches 

THICKNESS OKAY 

no. of manholes • 

tnt. dta, tn • 

Manhole cast, S • 

10 

18 (THIS IS INHERENT IN THE CURVEJ 

14,269 

-Nozzles Fig 15-25 (SU&&EST USING: ONE,& inch(averheads); ONE,4 inch(feed); TV0,4 tnch(steam); and ON£,4 tnch(battCIIIS) 

Nozzles cost • SUM[(na. of nozzles)*(inches of nozzle)]* (24.57 + 3S.94*(t~r .all thickness, in)) 0.375 tnches < Ts < 2 inches 

THICKNESS OKAY . 

sum[(na. noz)(in noz.)] • [(4*4")+(1*6")] • 22 

Nozzles cast. S • 1,035 

-Trays Fig ~5-26 304 stainless only 

Trays cast • (no. of trays)*214.54*exp(0.2075*Di) 2 ft < Di < 12.5 ft 

DIAMETER OKAY 

Trays cost, S • 3,911 

-Ladders Table 9 

$.43/lb of ladder, 30lb/ft of ladder 

Ladder height • column height • 29 

Ladder cost. S • 374.1 

-Platforms and Handrails Table 9 

$.43/lb ( d-4ft, 1700lb ) Assume a ltnear relationship - 425 lb/ft of diameter 

P and H cost, S • 528.81 

-Insulation Fig 15-27 

Use fDBTUlass (ave) Assume 3 thick (ave) $10/ft2 

A (ft.2)• 142.28125 

Insulation cost, S • 1422.8125 
Total column cost, S • 59,900 

TOTAL COLUMN COST, $ • 69,703 

************************************************************************************************* 
2) Feed Tanks - Clwltc:al Engineering Maaaztne January 25, 1982, P6 144-46. COST IIID£l • 230.9 (1 .. CE Index (Jan-Apr/4)) 

or 

Cb • exp[2 .331 + 1.3673 (ln V) - 0. 063088 (ln V)-2] 1,300 gal < V' < 21,000 gal 

Cb • exp[U.362 - ·0. 6104 (ln V) + 0. 045355 (ln ¥"2)] 

21,000 gal < 'V < 11,000,000 

v. gal • 

Cb,$• 

VOLlltE OKAY 

253,760 (VOLlltE BASED ON 48 HOURS IETEITIOI) 

48,515 

-lnfol"'llltton obtained fn. vendors on the coat of feed tanks •• c:Gq)ared to the coat of t:he feed tanka fn. ChaDtc:al Engineering Magazine In J uly, 1989 dollars to wrtfy that acaltng coats fn. 1982 to 

1989 Ia acc:urate. It Ia .aaallllild that the tanlt Ia not CCIIIPletely 

..... ...!!ll~.:11~.::1tt.~.!:.~l1.!!!!~.1~.!2!.~!.!1:.~!1te ............................ . 

3) Decanters - Peters and Tl11111erh&ua cna Plant Design pg 572, Fig 13-58 

COST INOEI • 225.9 · 

Asauqttl ona: 2 95X VOC reDDYal design 11 304 Stainless Steel 

3 Retention tt• of ONE hour 

4 Operation at 501 captclty 

Oec:ant Cap, gal • 1,005 

Oec:anter coat • 216.8*(capactty, gal)· o.SS02 

Oec:anter coat ~ $ • I, 722 

.................... ........................ ... ........................ ************************** 

4) Feed preheatera - Teleccm. Scott, K.A. , Radian· Corporation with 

Ambaaaador Heat Transfer Caqlany. May .12, 1993. Coat 

of Heat Exchanprs. 

Coat In July 1989 Dollars 

Asa._ ·carbon ateel wtt:h copper tubes 

As..- 100 pat and 300 F 

Built to ASKE codes 

Coat of Preheater • [4213.357 * (Flo. Rate (gpmJr .5] - 2882 .31 

Preheat coat, $ • 34,638 

····························****·····~··••********************* ************ *** ************** 
5) Prt1111ry condensers - ChaDtcal Engtneertng Mataztne ftov_.,.r 21, 

1988. pg. 66 - 75, ftp. 1 a 2. GOSt h .. • 343 

or 

Ass.- ftxed-tube, atngle shell, stngle pass exchangers and 

12 foot length tutiea. 

Prt COnd coat • 2228.8*exp(0.00411*A,ftA2) 150 ftA2 c A < 240 ftA2 

Prt Cond coat • 5328.8*exp(0.0008762*A,ftA2) 240 ftA2 c A c 1500 ftA2 

AREA OKAY 

Fm(304u) • .8193 + . 15984(1nA) • 1.690794 

Prt Cond cost, $ • 9,831 

************************************* ... ******************·····~·····•******************* ******* 

&) ~ - Chellltcal engtneertng Magazine Nov. 21, 1988, pg 66 - 75, 

F1g 11. ALL MPS ARE 316 STAINLESS STEEL. 

COST INDEX • 347.8 

&roup A p~s - 10 to 150 !!'!': &roup 8 - 30 to 900 gp11. 

Group A pump. - 0.5 to 10 426 Group 8 - 3 to 24 ~ = ~: : f~1Xi~1mi'o~2~o :8up : 

Assume a 1M"' ta.needed for the feed to and fi'GII the feed tank, 

the bottaDS,and the overheads. An engtneertng eattmate of 122 feet of lllilter ts ass.-d 

for the head. Total pu111p efftctency ta aallllllld to be &41. 

Pump head,ft H20. 122 

a . feed Tank KP • ffeed flow (gpa)*(122 ft H20}*(8.33 lb/gal)*(mtn/60 a)* 

(lbf/lb)/[0.64 *[(0.001341 np)/(0.7376 ft 1bf/a)] 

Feed Tank hp • 3.8 

&ROUP A FLIII CIICAY 

FEm TANK PlllPS (2), . 30,707 

&ROUP A: HP OKAY 

&ROUP 8: HP OKAY 

b. BottCIIII HP • [feed flow (gpm)*(122 ft H20)*(8.33 lb/gal )*(mtn/60 s)* 

(lbf/lb)/(0.64)*[(0.001341 hp)/(0.737& ft lbf/s)] 

BottCIIII hp • &ROUP A 3.8 

FLOV OKAY 

BOTTCMS PiliP, $ • 15,353 

GROUP A: HP OKAY 

GROUP 8: HP OKAY 

c . overhead HP • [overhead flow(gpm)*(l22 ft H20)*(8.33 lb/gal)* 

(mtn/60 a)*(lbf/lb)/[0.64)*[(0.001341 hp)/(0.7376 ft lbf/s)] 

Overhead hp • GROUP A . 0.4 

FLOW TOO SMALL 

OVERHEAD P\IIP, $ • 5,112 

GROUP A: HP TOO SMAll 

GROUP B: HP TOO SMALL 

Total Cost of P~s • 11111 of (feed,bottOIIIS ,overhead) 

TOT PUMP COST, $ • 52,022 
Converstan -f.- hp "to kw-hr/yr ts (V)/(0.00134lhp)*(KW/1DOOW)* (842• hr/yr) 

************************************************************************************************* 

J 
7) n- arrestors - Cotta 'lven by Penny Lassiter fraa a telecon 

by A. &ttel•n (R 1). Each arrestor ta eattmted at $100. Coat 

ts tn Septllllber 198& dollars. COST INDEX • 319 

Frc. on RTJ ""P.trt frail Paul Peterson to Susan ThDmloe, EPA/CPI. 

dated Januaey 18, 1988: It ts 11..-d that vent ltftll fi'CIIII tN storage tanks, COftdenaera, and decanters each had fl .. arrestors tn place. The current approach asStllleS that these vent ltnes are routed beck to the 

feed storage tank for tt. ste111 strtpper and a that there ts a stngle fl.,. arrestor on the vent ltne fraa the storage tank to the control clevtce. 

Cost of 1 .arrester. $ • 100 

........................ _.**************************************-************************* 

B. AIIJIUAL COSTS - Uttltty costs BASIS: 8424 hr/yr operatton 

uttltty cosh constat of. electrtc1ty. Iteam, and weter costa 

1) Electrtctty - Electricity tl needed for pumps and for 

refrigeration. 

a . P~ - electrtctty use ts calculated under the capital costs 

,._. Electl'tclty use • (Total PIIIIP use tn hp)*0.7457KW(mech. )/hp*(84Z4 hr/yrJ 

Tot ,._. Use, HP • 11.85 

PlJUI ELECT USE, KW-H/yr • 74, 435 

TOTAL ELECT USE, KW-H/YR • 74,435 
2) st .. - st ... ta needed for stripping the 0!'91nlcl. st .. c:ott I• •tt111ted at $9.21/MI ($4.20/111111) . Thtl cott t1 ~ In July1989 •nan. There Is no coat Index. The at.. tt .., palg aat•d ate. wtth a heat cont•t of zaoz KJ/kg 

(1201 BTUIH•) • A factor of 1.25 Ia u....t to account for radlatton losses. 

St.- uae, Mg/yr • 15.172 

3) Vater - Cooling ... ter Is used In the primary .condenaer. 

Vater use • (Prl cond HZO flow,p)*(60 mln/hr)*(3. 7851tters/ga1 )* (8424hr/yr)*(frac:tlon loat to caollng ta.er evaporation and 

blCMdown • 0.04) WATER USE, LIYR • 21,999.767 
ATTACBMEBT 2 

STAINLESS STEEL COST FACTOR 
RADIAN CALCULATION SHEET 

CORPORA'I'IOII CALC; NO.----

SIGNATURE k A ·s DATE C:, /18 f q 3 CHECKED---- DATE ____ _ 

PAOJECT--.I.:lHu..O.J..JN~--------""""ft"'----:-- JOB NO.-----------

.. Xc.oL. SUBJECT--2S.:±-+-::J::oU.•..::~:·na...IW· Pt...:>W\~· ~$L:<f~,.Q.Jpnill0_tf!~aucto:±cJ:..r =~FJ:!i ¢s::_ SHEET_..;....__ OF--=:;)...::;;;...._ __ SHEETS 

- (a 0 c ·: I Q ~; rw 0( ~ ra t 1 .0" at --:±:...h..L <.:.o-1..t. '{ 

o. --·i.J: .. o ......... ~ILL:1..L --u u a D~ <:ol-w.....·TT\.....In.., v --L"-'l.-1...L.-.:.... o....., 

c..o...., bo n '---'Lt:.l..LL C.~· rrwn...: • 

A CJ:....o-1 eLl n ~ 1-o . , t o 0 o p ho n ~ C.an 'J ~ ~ o n::..u '# ~ 

~l... ru_pr......L..u..."'l +a....:t I ·,-IL.·l....: Frorn.- Am ~a.dor 

H ~ T rCl.m-~'l Corn po...~ G...m..d ~ Co 1 , 1 p ~+ 

CocnpOJ~ 1 ~ ~abr, c~· ~ch og J +~1.-,1.; O.....rn .. d L..o..n b 0 n ~ t 0 0 OJ C..ol.w .. ;nl...rr~ a....n..u.; ~ro X: I mo ± q D d ~ ~ • . A~ 4-o r~r~+CL4-i'V......~tAJ 

~rom.. ~-' • Am~ u..dor 1 Q..nw:t -a_,r,~+oru C.orp 1 

~ ~c:Hcfl..J Cl.rn....d ~ C.O..tt for 

Q.cu, l:o n ..........A.±_a:.JL .~ G_p.p rox 1 ~± o 0 d ~ 

~. 

Rn.l,. M~ ~t . ~ .,J. .. ' ±oOocon.) 

C;l.n bon 

3o+ 

~ =. $ .. :l...Ca ' lb 

S + O..Lrr:J .... L~il = Si I " '3. 5". . / I b .. 

Ma+L R..o t ,· oJ 3o+ 5'S' - Car.bon ·-

$ 1.35/lb 

.. $ . ~/lb. = ... 5" • .f_g . 

.. . .. . . 

· • .. ra.b c.as t . ca.r boru. .... ~ .. Fa...b .:.c.as.±..... ss - . F.~b . cost 

e ... f""o.b_ C.OS.t C.Q.r bcHL~ = .. M.a.±L.: C.bS:t . C.O.r:ho . 

(IV\ O..tl-.. :_c.ost_· sS.) /~. ·,9 

. . ~ 

= FOb cos+ · C.ar.t:x:>.n..... .. - . Fo...b. ·· ~t~~ . ~ ---------~--------------------~---------~--------------~~ 
RADIAN CALCULATION SHEET 

CO.PO.AYION CALC. NO.----

SIGNATURE KA 5' DATE __;::G,;..;../_1 .....;S/_q_3__ CHECKED---- DATE ____ _ 

PAOJECT __ ~H~L.------------ JOB NO. __________ _ 

SUBJECT __ _:....._~F~flllii:~....,:..._-)(L::::.s;.C.OQJ.&L_______ SHEET-~-- OF-_..;;;;::;._ __ SHEETS 

• M o -1- L Cos + S S -- 5". 1 q ·* F o. b Cost 

R_Q41o = Fob S'S ·t- /VlQ +L S'S 

:3c.."l1-SS I Co r bort.J Fa.b CQrbon + fiiQ +L C.arbc ru 

Fa b C.os + + o.lq Fa. b Cost -

Fqb cost + Fab cost 

FrrL = 3. I 

C1<.a.of ·: 

C.Clrbon...· 

"Jo4 SS 

Fa...b ~ 

;Lo.J coo 

;J...:) j 000 

$ I 5:4.J 75o 

$ t-.oo. . .~cro 

Ma...U $_. 

:l5"..J 000 

5".Jg( -;L'SJ ceo). 

3 .o.q 5 

Tota..U.$·. 

5"0" coo 

I 5'"+.~75"0 

·-- . l 

.. ·- ·-

.· 

j 

' ~ 

~-----------------------· -----·--- --------------~ 
RADIAN 

CORPORA'riON 

TELEPHON£ CALL AECOM» 

~c.illl Cdl 

rCIOiftl C:.ll 

Peuon C:.L Uq 

K Q.l 

Peuoa C1 Ue~ 

77 I- ';l. '300 

PtojiCC .._ 

ActlWUJ 

TO,ICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN 

\ 0 =" H a ,.J ' Qoc • r. q Do+sv p 

• 

Rlecruuuon 

• • 

u c:j..o 1 m 1l 0 ,. 4 1 Ld) t 0 Q. 0 1 d I A cL ·Q Q q ± I 0 ~ 

CQJ1trrm,mA! •· 

s-a I s-o . 0 ,. p ci.R-tty C Dn-1 p 

cno b a " Column 6 •• a' • 

• • • M'-., cL. 0 Oo ±-coo 

on I~/ p rcc-1 I I (' Q I 4 

• 

b I mi e 0 boLt± ±b o '. ~0 hn I C n cLQ;, . Co1c:L., 

• 

LA -1-o L m p 0 A 4 J V .. gn ~ I I t. 0 nd I 

• . I a+o ' m D q 4 A • IS • 

Con S'•d. A nob I )I l 0 9;' P' aU I .Nt. ~ ·~=+ 

d•"- no+ toy.p ony --&tz- QL 

• ro±to foe. a.. 

mo t' 4 prod • • e A . 

• • • d , , cL 0 Oa±•on 

Col,,, m 4 • 'inc <:d , Hnm , • i.b a+ WLR n. o d• WQrtpmt 

• 

L.J\ I 1-'' I d 0 _pnmdt~ 

CoJ r 1 em m , I 
RADIAN Ptojec& ... 

hojecc .... CORPORA ... lOll 

TEL£PHON£ CALL AECOIIO 

~Maeilll CILL 

ftCIOllll Cll L 

Actl¥U, 

Ac&hU' 

S'is 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKIN 

9Ca''· Wid p, 

Sc:l.e a J $ ~ jU, /tb 

SS 31Ce L 

Lb.n A 

• 3 \C. L "'' 'ah±J ~ ~ Pnwec Codon' 

• ~+ 

(t +.ead or 3"t.:..J • 

\. J A rt±em > I I A 9 d ~ a, c a I I M .+ l I ,. f I 

QAd 

. . "'-_DQ A I Q D 

+o • c ho-tter w·'-0 Ida h· l '*'J WorK Wr±b I forma h tf tty ' 

G.n.a. co 'I z: . rna ±tn '~ 1 CMck, -t;,,.. 

p 1 o t• m g :k n I 4 , • 

) . 

RADIAN 

............... Projecc .... 

Plojecc ... 

HO 

TELEPHON£ CALL RECOIO · DICe 

••non C:.l una 

K~ Peu on C:.lle411 

w-o.. 

TO,CS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN 

\[ >0 n a • e A Co 0 ± Q M I eQ 0 Z 

' 4 ±e 0 0 • 

Cor bon \JL.On Q I I 4 1 

\.vo Y n., WOA 

ma+ecr~O. 0 

S±o, ~ 0 9 , 4 

£Q · b.c ,·c o cLc,; . 

.. r" o On ±•v.p1 

• ·~~a bra·cn.±ron· Co:?± . . '-Soc 0. 64 ±n, n 0 Q " ,A l 

J) o,;l S<t' 

"+a.: Daa.•z 

• • 'i' I.,± 

c01 +s .• 

.·inc· ±bo. 

a, ot --a ... 

. 

o1ct 

ha,e o h01 ·± +n D 
ATTACHMENT 3 

PEED TANK COSTS 
SUMMARY OF FEED TANK.COSTS 

Vendor cost1 Adjusted ·Vendor Flow rate Tank size HON cost cost1 July Percent 

(gpm) (gal) July 1989$ April 1993S 1989S difference 

10.6 33,920 31,666 40,000 39,866 20.6 

39.6 126,720 53,340 55,000 54,815 2.7 

79.3 253,760 74,800 80,000 79,731 6.18 

120 "384,000 93,443 105,000 104,647 10.7 

201 643,200 125,990 135,000 134,546 6.4 

1 Uses the February 1993 Chemical Engineering final cost index value of 357.2 and the July, 1989 

final cost index of 356. Costs are from April 1993 but this index was not published at the 

time of this analysis. 

From Richardson•s Cost Manual: 

Cone Roof. Storage Tank 

cost includes fabrication, delivery, and erection on provided 

foundations. 

cost.includes two manways, draw-off, ladder, vent, qauqe 

hatch, and level indicator. 

- 255,245~qallon tank (6,099 barrel) = $75,200. 

- 380,800-qallon tank (9,064 barrel) = $89,800. 
FISHER TFN< ca f'A4fY 

PI&HER TANK COMPANY 

2330 TWO NOTCH R~D • LEXINGTON. &WTH cAAouNA 290r2- ---------· ··-

FAX COVER SHEET 

DATE: HIN 

TOTAL. NO. OF PAGES :.!.,(NOT INCLUDING THIS COVM lei!T) 

SENT TO: · • . :· .. ·. : .i --: ~ .. 

Tlii.&FAX' Nutllla: 17Hf7•197.t 

FROII::IIJN' 111!NIQC 

SU8JECT: YOUR FACSM£.2 DATS 412111~ 

IIJDGB DmMrE 

WAilJilllliB ITDMGI T4NA 

IN ACCORDANCE WITH WWR·REQUDT Mil WISH 70 MOVIDii THE 

FOLLCMfNG !NI?OIUIATION PER .'lOUR ~ACSIIII.I. · · 

tmMfiP,, . 

.. TMIAL RM catarRUCTION IHOUI.D liE Me CAitaotlsm&wmt 

ne o AI'I'Lia PAINT ON lll7liRIOR • BXTifRIOII SURFACD. . . Q~ 011.,_ I'll ,,..Till! WA'IM IOL~ THe FOLLOWING 

I'Mir8Y8711ilfl IHOIJI.D 8S ADEQCMnL 

""'198 CCMT m7EE' 

l'h GREATER THNI4: lJVIiiii!C Ult/0 YN (IIIIIH SOUDaPOXYJ· . . 7WD Ill COAT IYBJBI NW IBiAre 7D I 

•Lilla COAT 

IMIDILAST: SII'C NO. fO (NMR WMJ'E &ASJ) 
Ph LESS THAN 4: TNEMEC SERIES 120 VINESTI!R 7WO (2} COAT 

SYSTEM APPLIED AT I TO 12 AfiLLS PER COAT 

SAND8LAST: SSI'C. NO. 5 (WHITE METAL BLAST} 

t!XTERIOR CQATSQT€M 

PER YOUR STANDARD EXTERIOR PAINT SPeC/PICA 'nON> 

l'[FMNO. 2 

COST ESTIMATE 

31S,OOO OAUON TANK ................................................... $ 4(1,000.00 

1.28,700 GAL.LON TANI< ........................................................ $ 11,000.00 

2~0,000 GALLON TANK .................... , ••••••••••••••.••••••••••••• $ 80,000.00 

3114,000 GALLON TANK ............................................... $101,000.00 

843,000 GALLON TANK .............................................. $131,000.00 

IP YOU SHOULD HAVI! ANY QUeS170NS Ott NEI!D ANY I'URTHeR 

ASSISTANCE PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THIS OFFICB. 

FISHI!It TANK CO. FAX NUMBER: (BOI} tf7•331f 

IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE COMPI.ETE TRANSMISSION PLEASe CAU. 

THE FQLLOWING NUIIBSR: (103} 359-4113 

ORIGINAL WILL. OR X WILL NOT se MAII..l!D 
" .. 

RADIAN PIOJMC ... plesr&wuu 

P~OJMC .... CORPORA91011 HeN 

TELEPHONE CALL A£COID Dn• n. 

~-lac Colli 

CIOlftl Colli 412B/q3 IO: 3o a.rt\..1 

Pnaon C:.lUq 

Scott 

Acelwi.CJ 

Ha.1 S R.ad IQ,;_, ·••uon cau.~· 

Sec-t± 

AcCI.VUJ 

How e., F,. 9 c..h e.a.. . ·.,.-Q. N K ~ 

C.Mr·re~3) 35'"q - +l73 Fa..."" (so 3) q 5"7 - 337~ 1 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAICEN 

• ..i • .. ~ J) ct..oJ d L h_, ern J...b.o± 'ttQ·4 WorHe~ • WI ebb., cL.b_p 

E:PA to do y., fop en..,;-, ,gee s±oco' +omt<A. . 

.. b AO u:L 

\ b Q »«Qt I v ci "'p md noo<+ 

~1. 0 ...J 1 t=b o+· \ft{Qt I Q d ! I 1 A p·, 

• i 0 .... m •a ± q 4 1 £o,.. W?uld 

1\ • 

v · fe? ±a do .. 0. AQm1Jv Char k. On. ±b o CM±· 

LQ1"0At \fy.Q C.urre.n~ly • 

Oao 

, ,J,A•mt}o· • .. 

' 
RADIAN 

............... hojHC ... 

HON 

plesr&leatton Pra)HC ... 

TELEPHON£ CALL AECOIIO , ... 

I I d r"l'lhuon C.Lllftl 

Peuon C. Lle~ 

Gre 

Acct.wtcJ 

Ccn+1~e..n+ C.nereL Subjecc 

448- 4c·+5' Fa..:x. 

TOPICS DISCUSSED. AND ACTION TAKEN 

~ · +c fd . . WorH 'ns;. • w,±h ±h.9 EPA 

+o deye lop Gr . A4;oca f · +omt<" , • 

'=An ad, - Con boo L;., b"" I 0 d ) i t« ' I I n p d bp t .. 

\t Woqtd bo . Ago D • 

poan ted< (can± o ..L 

roo£ 

. , A a 1 A. cL.b a± , ±-h a · a n o n +-h •. c.o. 10 ±t y .. \ I t? rna I! e <' o 

, On hoc \lory omd • c:L.h I 4 Con ran kp 0. 

; 

• • d I 8S.U Om cO, ln.. 

C. o " par , ,; 0 o I J ·=G>e l ~n rcw' a cr a ) • 

h •. I CD\ . ±er ±Oz?lH fOe Objrr- b I •+ 

"' I I It Hnnw W,b 0 f: ' h 0. 

• 

\,llAIO'J: • 

Fo ex ad • 

• ,Aome±b, 0 'J ,Daety Oaprt W.J o K • 
CALCULATION SHEET 

SIGNATUR DATE------ CHECKED----

CALC. NO.----

DA"rE-----

PROJECT-------------~--- JOINO.------------

SUBJECT----------------- SHEET--- OF-----SHEETS 

- .···-. -· --· -- .-.TanH'S' 

. . W~tewa..te.L ... ~.Lth.. a_ '-!loluble.. .. -~o..t.JQ~ _ 

. 't . or f"~'~ ic.s ( CO:I .. .dd_. prlem cLQ U ~ 'iJ , Ula. -te_ o....n:.. . .._ ·-- _ 

Or'if-r.ic. ·'Do·~, ) ;_ . ; __ t L.. ~, _. __ 

T ~""P ~ would.. __ a ~e.c~ ~- . :D.: ~4CfC-r _· _b+ :rrlJ.¥-· ·--~ _. ·- ·CJoi- _Q..A._:, L~ ... o 4. __ -~-~-·t- r-+ -~ r-+-+- . . . ~ . · I . I ' ~ . . --· ---- ·- . -· -- ---. -· t--- . ·- ;~ --- ·--·-+· +--· '--+--

! t ___..- --:W.Jla.+. • . ~m<Wu..A I • a ( ·· (£ ~. ~. • Ju:_ . , -~ ~tnh.tu~,--;c:·~·111'·~ • , I . . I • 

'--·· ~1-f:.±toiu~ _ ,R;,?~~~-~·iam·~· IIJ· , .. ! 

·: ---. -·~ -~~·~· ~- ~ ·-; .. r·--- -. ~- -· :1 ~--~· I · : 1· I ! .. ··; ; 

I . ~I li4 ~-) . • ; I I 

. ·-t .. .. . • ?f' 4-J~- - .. --:--r·· --· --· ~. L--- ! I I ! I : . 

~ __ ·. -~1-· 1 coo ~ + _ -- -· -· +-. _ - - _. t ~ -·-l----H=·. ~ -W-~L L-' I • L . ~ ; ' : I .. ; I. i ~·--·1 -·-. ~~7. .. -·r-r---' - ~: :.-·; i -1 : i I I : .__. -~. d ~(=, .· cq=> i . ···-~-. : ; ~- -rl--r.- i 

.-.. ..1 ·38.4Ja±o: -~1 ; __J_--1--!--~~----~---1 I j 1 . i I 

..--·-!- _(ad:3 ':leo· --~ ·--... 1_._,_.....,.·~-~----.,.-~~ -- 1 : ... ; I I i ! 'I ! I; ' ..__..,._. __ __,_ ---- I . . -. -· I . I 

I

. I ' ' • I • • : ; I 

~--~~-~-~~-·:·,-J-.'~·~::c:rs~:--~: , ··I : ~·r-L-~ .l ,-' c Q r ·r ' -hlP; . ('"!" ,~, ; . ~--L . j· I , --r-. . : __ -~- i : ' I i I ..... I ·-- i : I : --~1 

. ! · ::Jibq nti · you. i -~·--- ~.. ! · I ~..o j II ;-: . -T , ___ ..... ! I I 

1

. 1r<k.·6' ..t.~·. 1 ~J:- "i$o4f•nliv TT-r-- -r-t 

. ·. I I . . I . . ' I I. . I - r i I. I ! ' . :-----1: . ! i - __ ...... -1 ~ .. 

I 

-.L 

; I I I ; 

-I -· i I 

I .. 

I ! ! t ! ! ; I i 

., -

! : ! I ! I I I 1 i 

~---t-L I I 

I . ! I j I 

: i ! ! : 

I I l I - ! i I -H-·j - I : I I· I ' . . 

I I I . I . I -. . . ..... ! --+-- -I . . i ! "----... 

.___,__... ·~----· ·---L- ; ·- -n-·· --. - .. ~ ~ L__ i ! I ! : ; 

: ! i ··---

~~ -------1- -----~--+-,--.-!-,-~ f ; ; i - ------~--- . -··~ - : li: I__ i I . . - --·-r-~---- 1 -- 1 
ATTACHMENT 4 

FEED PREHEATER COSTS 
HEAT .EXCHANGER COSTS 

Adjusted 

Flow rate Area of hea~ Vendor cast May vendor cost1 

(gpm) exchanger c ft ) 1993$ July 1989S 

10.6 345 10,800 10,764 

39.6 1,289 23,000 22,923 

79.3 2,600 35,009 34,882 

'120 3,906 45,000 44,849 

201 6,542 56,000 55,812 

Uses the February 1993 Chemical Engineering final cost index 

value o1 357.2 and the July, 1989 final cost 'index of 356. 

Costs are frOm May 1993 but this index was not published at the 

time of this analysis. 

The cost of the heat exchanger was first. plotted versus the flow 

rate (gpm) to obtain ah equation. The graph of the cost of the 

heat exchanger versu$ the square root of the flow rate (gpm) 

produced a better linear regression and equation. Therefore, the 

equation for the cost of the heat exchanger versus the square root 

of the flow rate is: 

1 

Y = (4213. 357) (x) 2 - 2882. 3i 
Flow Rate 

(qpm) 

10.6 

39.6 

79.3 

120 

201 

'Jendo~ 

Cost 

(July 89 $) 

10764 

22923 

34882 

44849 

55812 

/":"\. C..o~ -r · v S Fh."iv 1'-.n_;- e \!) Regression output: 

constant . 12964.28 

Std Err of Y Est 4668.126 

R Squared . 0 •. 947980 

No. of ObserVations 5 

Deqrees of Freedom 3 

X Coefficient(&) ~ S~d Err of coef. 

Cos1: i·n:rn eq,'-"l.t.~n<D 

.231.7615 

31.34456 

10.6 15421 

39.6 22142 

79.3 31343 

120 40776 

201 59548 

,)·/~ -t- (r•cw R.ctte(~p,.....J; V~ndor CoSL 

3.25576411 10764 

6.29285308 22923 

8.90505474 34882 

10.9544511 44849 

14.1774468 55812 

~Cost- vs Square R.cCt of F-tow t:\a_-te ~ . Regression Output: Constant 

std Err of Y Est 

R Squared 

No. of Observations 

Degrees of Freedom 

X coafficient(s) 4213.357 

Std Err of coef. 139-.7482 

-2882.31 

1173.882 

0.996710 

5 

3 
Cost vs. Square Root Of· Flo.w Rate 

60 . 

50 

""'"' II) 

L 40 0 

0 

0""'"'- II) 

m, 

coc 

mo 

(I) 30 - ::J 

~0 -L 

:J~ -, ...._, '-' 

+' 

m 20 

0 

·u 

10 

0 ~~------~--~------~------~~--~--~--------~ 3 4 5. 6 7 . 8 9 . 10 11 12 13 14 15 

SquQre Root of Flow Rate (gpm} 
P.Gil 

lEL: (513) 281-Q9.12 

FAX<SI3)281~7583 
RADIAN 

CORPORA ... IO,_ Projecc .. _ 

l'roJecC llo. 

HoN 

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD 

I d.. : I~ pi"'\.. 

hr-son c. L Hna f-'<,r ,·s AcCLWICf • 

R.ad' an_..; 

huon C.LLed 

MarK OConnelL 

ACClWUJ . 

A rra bo. S' S'a.dc sz... Heat Transfer Cc.. 

Cinc~nna..+t ,.~ 0 H 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN 

F' CL:x a d . . b ' rm• 

LA_o, d i-bo.'J >bad ~ 

H,a a.., R 0 d -for Qn_p 0' 

' ' b no+ 

01.± • OVAO: " 

'N Ian p bo ' L M I 1 ·~ + 

Q 4 Rod 4-b Q I bur ! D.t::~i:.c.bJ ~n A· 

orT&:l'lA 

+o A S M e: A Cod o A 1 • N' A Ad 4h 1 on ~ . A >) M , • 2 1: ±o T E:M ccd n "' • 

S"!ro/93 

"·:.a.n '.'' -- + . i c.~\~!··J ? I I"U. A n t n ¥ -~- * - = 

'ic I 5"o , ~or . ion 1n ·' ~ c a+ 

. . .. E'o ba, eo~n • 

'l .. \. I fl 

' ) slo ' m L P ' '-' \I.Jl.n 4' r 4.· Con bon, 

• - . .o +o • , Q o ,, 1. mo 'J bu 

h •. ,*= . ro± a_. D,± 
CALCULATION SHEET 

CALC. NO.----

SIQNATUA DATE CHECKED DATE ____ _ 

PROJECT lei ::.11 Q ~ Cx c bo a'(p 1 ~~ JOI NO. 

Fa..~ . 

SUBJECT Mcc~ OCcnnc= l L @; 31 :L&r -758 ;:2 SHEET OF-----SHEETS 

. rJcW R..o..L. · Are~tA;).J +wbe s ,ze: 

s· ne11 · sneu -- ~~a+ ··-- .·· - dtornetest... Jenca+h _ du-ty nTuthr 

I I . 

40 

So 

1.~0 

:lei 

3+ 5" 

I :l.S <1. 

2Cooo 

:,-qOCD 

. e:..o+:l-

'S; 8 .. , 

'31+ -t 

:!!.+ u - :Y-t .. , .. 

~ -~. --~ -

~ hel..+e.\Je.r f"t\O.Hcs - G:a9. ~ / J 9..0. 

S'ense. a.nd. :S. --· -~?~.o,Ga...q__o 

maSt eccnom ia L. ·: g;o + ~3 8..0... 

7~_5'."' d.p~ Q_ 

.Ld..l (QG4...1 5" en_ -

- . ----. . . -··- . -·----· ·-- ---

-::-. "'lla... ~- ~c.hQ.n~ __ -will h._, 11 ud .' T4. ~..JJU.h~. -~"""""""''""""--~ 

. · b..o~~:n a.. Jlot+_~+ec.'-'tr·~Qcn _.:;J,Pre•~ .-.~~P e4lm_S+r...L~p;:~:...t---~· ......... ~Cold wa+e.,. ~ rea..1n ~-t-er,•nq ~-,., ~ r. ~ p~ • lt. t...:* 1". 1\ · 

1

. 

_ Ca:w..,.+ez:~ .rJow._~·- ; ~.A ;..(.L.LUUL....tL--.,. _. __ 

• . I I I 

--'lJJ\d __ ~ __ do "~r~-. _.- __ ~ . . --. -Li-a.mdard-- , pn • .v1 1 'UI (w.Ji.~ ~ -1-· Je~Se · ~ .presfure. 

. -- _:r~o.+Uru1.4 ... _r:of,n~ ·~ tl~~ tn~~- ~reo+tr-: -. -

- . - .. -. - ----r- ··- . -~~~~ -~~ill. ~1-· : -- ~ . ___ (o.L:L..t~-=- ll 0 F.:_'_ .__,_.... ___ i -~ --+- ~ _ ·-. __ _ ' -- _ _cofld. Q! I± ·= :_~_3.-~. I --- -r:. ------- • • I ; ! 

__ ... l!:kt .. .ili .. =-... :l.t ~o:F -· . . .. - r-- ~- ~ ~ l----. _: --. 

: . u .J.. : t ::; 8 .....;. 0 • ' I ! l. I I 1• ·---· .. J].4...L.. ~ ------ ,L.,__F ,--- --- -· . I ----· --

-- -~-.=---1~ ~xu :. .. ~.-- .. -·-+ _:_·- i ~---+- .... --i 

--· - -· -·- -· -- ~.-t=C~ ~. ~ __ · :--L-; t ' I 

.· --: -:--.. • ·-·-.. __ _._. ·:- .~.:.. ··-,. -·- ~·--. ~ .. +I ··~-.. "t--"' --: ~ ·-,.,_ 

. ~ ("Q ..d L n '..Qt I 't Cp-n.~uc cHo~~- --~ ;tSS. d..c:.-'tt ~tev~."!".-

. ~ai; ~::am:_ a~_ .,·dl ~r~-. ..ll~m··c·io!__fu:<~p~~- . QJ 1, ·.~+.. ±c I TElttA._ '.' .D'po c. Q.CJ:l~on v_._ t ----· _ ··--·-

r- . A • :..t. ' L - . ~ . r I ..... .. • : : - ~ ___rr.~ .... +~C\_. I oro 0 d· .~+G~, l.JJ:L. r 10 Q Q :-Uf-'' ~e..c..y. ~ -·- r{_ :b . ~ . . I I - ·' "nmcQ, : --· -- -- -- ·-- ~. _!. _____,.. -~-·- .· -·· ··-·- . . I . .· I I : . I ' 

-·• • ·--· -·. -- ·-· ~-· --I - ~. ~--~ • -~l·- .L.. ~~'' \~,, • = . · i ~ i I: ~·, · . =-: - .. ~ C" I - ·-; L - ; ! . • I • ·r· f t+-- i ,· . - . 

. -·-~. -~~- ~~~ . ~-- · -. : ·-· -t- I 1· 1 ·-: -+~· 1 - ~ --' ·• 

·-- n.!la.J.CL.'L- .L~cp~ _ ~ ·. ___ __._,l-. · i-+-- ! .. j j 

1 qJq' ,:::-4•-l"'•oi ; · · ! I ! ' i .' · 

• --'-• ~ ~-0 ·•--• -- -~·- I .... - ' • ---- ~, : I • I I ~ I __f.O.?C. _ _c q r,g__l 2L::· . <ku_3. _: -· -· -~ i- ~ ___ ____!___]_ • ; ttl. . .. I .. ·~o·l I 

-· . - . ._.__! --+- .~· ·--· _i _i ... _ I ·T· _ _i__[ ~ -t--+-.! ·-· - I ! If! l l·i' 
ATTACHMENT 5 

BEAT LOSS THROUGH THE STEAM STRIPPER 
RADIAN 

C 0 R P 0 R A ... I 0 ·N 

TELEPHONE CALL A£COAD 

~-'"' c:.u· ~·IOiftl C:.ll 

Pen on C.U Lna 

CeneriL Subject 

l'tOJHC lo, 

HON 

PtoJecc ... 

Acuvu, 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN . 

Q- 1>o Y'k' , bov.g 

l b.D 0 t loMJ. 

. . 

a. c Gi ,. '(}b 

-1-hcC\1 '?b · g . • 0 

• • I d 0 0 Who± 

• • • d I 0... 0 Do t 10 CH c.oe I ' an m , 

L 1 o • • , ? f& a , ~s 0 R ;;. '=="" p o e , B ·r C a 0 0 'J J ~±en rrn 

• 2· , ~cbr r ppn n,, • 

• A - T)' p 1 C a Q Q 'J; L A J l bo±. 

. + .. '> J B \' 0 v e ~yb I m ~ 

• 

• , bon+ 

• • • • 

\ I A ) ' 1 m A I I lo +e d ' \ J m-e Q I I d t en ~ 

a en d. 

OccQI•=n± bo co I I 4J) ba y.o 

• • 10 ,,, lo±•oa ·-"por1'~ 

+o +em 

• , a ,clt m a ± p • 

;; ·hI •+ 

pro boB. tf 'd 0 

'> f'' pP bo 

• 

Gz I pIp I ,. I 

• 0. ConServa+•Y·D, 

• 

,-± h 0 \ b g.a± \ p 0=-LA h 1 4.1 

±hom ±-bat. • =n, 0 o )le·r h o n d o < 

... \ I 1 m I Q Q 1 I 0 Q ±eel., ·n_md · 

±h 0 0 p . How tAYerJ Oyecbgad At 

• 

a " a 1 1 1 4 , • .., 0 o 'J , , ;,_ 4_, • o a ted... • ..£:, r 

\blocH •a , ..Daijn t,d • f:,v;. , pon &: pm± , • 4, a.. ~rod 

• 

Sl NICUU 
ATTACHMENT 6 

COOLING WATER .LOSSES 
RADIAN CALCULATION SHEET 

::N:T:A ·~~t-• ~ ~· 

0 

/ DATE c,/1'1/'s"' cHECKED----- ~~:~N_o_. ----- ~ r' PAOJECT~~~--£--------------------------------JOBNO.---------------------------

OF--~-------SHE~S 

-:-"'·:.. t;.:..\r .\·.~ , ..... .!·.;\-·rr··~·~ -'t\.., ·..l;l..,. \'ltjC~ -~:~"l-- ~···- ,...~ .. -+\... .r·r---t..t) 

c..~·=·.:r(~r u5r \\.., S~Q.t.o~ ~~' P'~.r. ~ \,.JCA.+v \ot~~~ ~· ~uo:.• ... ~!'-j r.w·•·,. 

~:·.(w\,.\.u .... .,.;: ~ r·· fl""'') :.).-• .• ,., •r ~ )•; r j ·..x.Tw- ~tw~t "" <. J,-.: ~ j ~IJt..~ e_r. 

\~ c.,vc.h•.r\ 'J_~~~ ~"- ~~s~\- .. \ \"· furJ•s C.-'rew-.c.r.'• 

'1\r.-:i·-·~,~ ( S"hl·1.). \\.. <e\~"'-·~ ~Q ,t, w-. C»l.-\,-c._'-'.,~ , 

\\.a ~"·'~"·j ·~c.-.'"~~ ........ "" -.:- ~ ··~ u..tS\NWWt-•.\ \, e.~t lt.w t-oo\\~ to~41'r 

~t- \ ':) ( 0 f ~,.~ c. .... ~\ ~"' ~ t 0 f I 

• 

::_\..oo.{ ,., .,..~\..-wj ~\.,,.. ~ \Ubo dt"' 1 ~inu \~Hts "'''' b.. 

c..·~\1-vlt~~ \-.. ~ , .... u,. .. • ~ .. ,"L:-~\ ~\,~. \ 

.. 0, OfJ'l i. ~ \ \ Ot.l() ~ ( \OCi -l-':f' 

: ~ 1.1 j t1W' 
--~------------------~------ ' 

New York 

St.Louil 

Son Franclsco 

Auckland 

... . . tobrJburg 

Johalalelburg 

'london 

Madrid 

. Mexico 

Momrlal 

New Ollti 

Panama 

Paris 

sao Paulo 

Si..,. 

Sv~ 

Tokyo 

Toronto 

RADIAN LIBRARY 

RESEARt):t TRIANGLE PARI<fNC 

Prepared by a staff of specialists under the eclltoriaJ direction of 

late Editor 

1-...H.P~ 

Editor 

DonW. Green 

Conger.Gabel Professc;w of Chemical 

and Petroleum Engineering, 

University of Kansas 

. ASsistant Editor 

James 0. Maloney 

Professor of Chemical Engineering, 

University of Kansas 
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data 

Main entry under title: 

Perry's Chemical engineen' handook. 

(McGraw-Hill chemical engineering series) 

Rev. ed. of: Chemical engineers' handbook. 5th ed. 

1973. 

Includes bibliographical references and index. 

1. Chemical engineering-Handbooks. manuals. etc. 

I. Perry, Robert H., 1924-1978. IL Green. Don W. 

III. Maloney, James 0. IV. Chemical engineers' handbook. 

v. Series. 

TP151.P4S 1984 660.2'8 84-837 

Copyright@ 1984, 1973, 1963 by McGraw-Hill. Inc. AU rights 

reserved. Copyright renewed 1962, 1969 by Robert H. Perry. 

Copyright 1950, 1941, 1934 by McGraw·Hill. Inc. All rights 

reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Except as pemiitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part 

of this pubUcation may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a data baae or retrieval system, 

without the prior w,!itten permission of the publisher. 

234567890 DOW /DOW 8987654 

ISBN 0-0~-049479-7 

The editors for this book were Harold B. Crawford and Beatrice E. 

Eckes, the designer was Mark E. Safran. and the productiim 

supervisor was Teresa M. Leaden. lt was set in Caledonia by 

University Graphics. Inc. . 

Printed and bound by It R. Donnelley 6 Sons Company. 

- • .. f;l.AJ18fJ ~1AH1A ~ 

. .... \! ~.. :~ -J·· ' ~)' ~ ~ • a T ; • . ~ ':1 A ·j ~ 3 ::" · • · \ • . ..J - J • ' 1 ' H I 0 o ,l ·.1 I • 
12-16 PSYCHROMETRY, EVAPORATIVE COOUNG, REFRIGERATION, AND CRYOGENIC PROCESSES 

Turntng 

p~nt 

g 

0.025~ 

~ 

0.030 ~ 

... 00350 

0.040-:: 

0.045cK 

o.o5oi 

0.055 i 

o.osof ~ 

::t 

FIG. 12·15 Horsepower chart for a counterflow induced-draft cooling tower. [Fluor Corp. (now £codynt Corp.)) . · 

obtain the desired results. Once the necessarv water concentration 

has been established, tower area can be calculated by dividing the 

gallons per minute circulated by the water concentration in gallons 

per minute-square foot. The required tower size then is a function 

of the following: 

1. Cooling range . {hot·water temperature minus cold-water 

temperature) · 2. Approach 'to wet-bulb temperature (cold-water temperature 

minus wet-bulb temperature) 

3. Quahtity of water to be cooled 

4. Wet-bulb temperature 

5. Air velocity through the cell 

6. Tower height 

Example 11 To Illustrate the we of the charts. wume the following 

conditions: 

Hot-water temperatu~r. rl. °F ~ 102 

Cold-water temperature Ta. °F • 78 

Wet-bulb temperature r.,. °F • 70 

Water rate. gal/min • 2000 

A straight line on Fig. 12·14. connecting the points representing the desl~P! 

water and wet·bulb temperatures, shows that a water concentration of 2 gal/ 

(min·ftl) Is required. The area of the tower is calculated as 1000 ftl (quantity 

of water circulated divided by water concentration). 

Fan horsepower is obtained from Fig. 12-1&. Connecting the point representing 100 ~t of standard tower performance with the turning point ~d 

eJCtendlng this straight llne to the horsepower scale show that it will r~uire 

0.041 hp/ftl of actual effective tower area. For a tower area of 1000 ftl41.0 · fan hp is required to perform the necessary cooling. 

Suppose that the actual commercial tower size has an area of only 910 ftl. 

Within reasonable limits, the shortage of actual area can be compensated for 

by an increase in air velocity through the tower. However, this requires boost· 

ing fan horsepower to achieve 110 percet~t of standard tower performance. 

From Fig. 12·15, the fan horsepower is found to be 0,057 hp/ftl of actuaJ tower area, or 0.057 X 910 • 51.9 hp. 

On the other hand, if the actual comiUfCial tower area is 1110 ftl, the cooling equivalent to 1000 rtl of standard tower area can be accomplished with 

less air an~ less fan horsepower. From Fig. 11&-15, the fan horsepower for a tower operating at 90 percent of standard performance Is 0.031 hp/ftl of 

actual tower area, or 34.5 hp. 

This example illustrates !,!le sensitivity of fan horsepower to small 

changes in tower area. The importanCe of designing a tower that is 

slightly oversize in ground area and of providing plenty of fan capacity becomes immediately apparent 

Example 12 As1ume the same cooling range and approach as used in 

Eumple 11 e1cept that the wet-bulb temperature Is lower. Design condltlom 

would then be 

Water rate, gal/min • 2000 

Temperature range (T1 - T1), °F • 24 

Temperature approach ( T2 - tur), °F .. 8 

Hot-water temperature T,, °F • 92 

Cold-water temperature T2. °F a 68 

Wet-bulb temperature t.,, °F • 60 

From Fig. 12-14, the water concentration required to perform the COo. 

is l.i5 gal/(min· ft2

), giving a tower area of ll45 ftl venus LOOO ftl for 1 -~"~ wet-bulb temperature. This shows that the lower the wet-bulb temper11u; ;r the same cooling range and approach, the larger ts the area of the 1 t or 

required and therefore the more difficult is the cooling job. 0\\'~ 

Figure 12-16 illustrates the type of performance curve furnish 

by the cooling-tower manufacturer. This shows the variation in ~ formance with changes in wet-bulb and hot-water temperat~· while the water quantity is maintained constant. res 

90~----------~----------r---------------~------------

~85~------------~-------------+------------~~~~~ 

~ 

e 

. ~80.----+­ .s! 

7060 65 

8000 gal./min 

70 75 

Wet-bulb temperature, 0 F. 

fiG, 12·16 Typical cooling-tower performance curve. 

COOLING-TOWER OPERAOON 

BO 

Water Makeup Makeup requirements for a cooling tower consist of the summation of evaporation loss. drift loss, and blowdown. 

Therefore, 

w,- w, + wd + w, (12·91 

where W, .• makeup water, W d • drift loss, and W, = blowdown 

(consistent units. m3/(h·gal·mtnn 

Evaporation loss can be estimated by the following equation: 

W, • 0.00085 Wc(T1 - Ts) 02·101 

where We • circulating-water Bow, gal/min at tower inlet 

T1 - T11 • inlet-water temperature minus outlet·water tempera· . ture. OF 

Drift is entrained water in the tower discharge vapon. Drift loss 

is a function of the drift-eliminator design. which typically varies 

between 0.1 and 0.2 percent of the water supplied to the tower: New 

developments in eliminator design make it possible to reduce drift 

loss well below 0.1 percent 

Slowdown discards a portion of the concentrated circulating water 

due to the evaporation process in order to lower the system soUcb 

concentratton. The amount of blowdown can be calculated according to the number of cycles of concentration required to limit scale 

formation. Cycles of concentration are the ratio of dissolved solids iD 

the recirculating water to dissolved solids in the makeup water. Since 

chlorides remain soluble on concentration. cycles of concentration 

are best expressed as the ratio of the chloride content of the circur ! 
· l)t)lin~ 

~ :-oor 

••rt' f,.,r 

l<>"'~'r 

lishl'd 

n J>er. 

atures 

conI own. 

12-9J 

own 

:-10) 

.erat loss 

.uies 

~ew 

drift 

\ater 

.olids 

·ord-

;cale 

dsin 

;jnce 

ltion 

ircu· 

1 . and makeup waters. Thus. the blowdown quantities required laung · --' from .lfe deternuneu 

Cycles of concentration e (W~ + W&)IW&) t12-ll) 

or W& = W,/(cycles - ll (12-12) 

les of concentration involved with cooling-tower operation norC\Jiv range from three to five cycles. Below three cycles of concenrn_iltion. e:~~cessh·e blowdown quantities· are required and the addition 

~: ac1d to limit scale formation should be considered. 

Etomple 13 Determine the amount of·makeup required for a cooling 

tower with following conditions: 

~r Bow. m3/h (gal/min) 

Inlet water temperature, °C (OF) 

Outlet water temperature, °C (OF) 

Drift loss. percent 

Concentration. cycles 

Evapora'um lou 

2270 

37.77 

29.44 

0.2 

5 

W., m3/h • 0.00085 X 2270 X (37.77 - 29.44) X 1.8 

- 28.9 

W •· gal/min • 127.5 

Drift lou 

B/ou1doum 

Makeup 

W 4, m3/h • 2270 X 0.002 • 4.54 

W If, gal/min • 20 

3 w. 28.9 w., m /h • --• - • 7.24 (S- 1) 4 

w._ gal/min • 31.9 

W,., m3/h • 28.9 + 4.54 + 7.24 • 40.7 

w" .. gal/min - 179.4 

(10.000) 

(100) 

(85) 

Fan Honepower In evaluating cooling-tower owning and operating costs, fan-horsepower requirements can be a significant factor. 

Large air quantities are circulated through cooling towen at exit 

velocities of about 10.2 m/s (2000 ft/min) maximum for induceddraft towers. Fan air-Bow quantities depend upon tower-design (acton, including suG:h items as type of 8.11, tower con&guration. and 

thermal-performance conditions. 

The effective output of the fan is static air horsepower (SAHP). 

which is obtained by the following equation: 

SAHP • Q(h,)(d) 

33.000(12) (12-13) 

where Q :a air volume. fr/min; h. • static head. in of water; and 

d • density of water at ambient temperature. lb/fr. 

CooUng-tower fan horsepower can be reduced substantiaUy as the 

ambient wet-bulb temperature decreases tf two-speed fan motors are 

used. Theoretically, operating at half speed will reduce air ftow by 

50 percent while decreasing horsepower to one-eighth of full-speed 

operation. However, actual half-speed operation will require about . 

17 percent of the horsepowe~at full speed as a result of the inherent 

motor losses at lighter loads. - · 

Figure 12-17 shows a typ1Cal plot of outlet-water temperatures 

when a cooling tower is operated (1) in the fan-off position. (2) with 

the fan at half speed, and (31 with the fan at full speed. Note that at 

decreasing wet-bulb temperatures the water leaving the tower during half-speed operation could meet destgn water-temperature 

requirements of, say, 85°F. For example, for a 60°F wet-bulb, 20°F 

range, a leaving-water temperature slightly below 85°F is obtained 

with design water tlow over the tower. If the fan had a 100-hp motor, 

COOUNG-TOWER OPERATION 

120 

... 110 I I I I I :::;a;:.....,..-- d."" I 

... 

= 

= <l 

z•• 

20' 

18' 

2 .. 

:: F . i 100 ~ d""'"f I :::a> ,.........-- = I I 

= 

:c 

It 90 

9 

8 

80 

70 

10 15 70 n 10 8!1 

WIT BULB TEM,EAATUAl·' F 

12-17 

FIG. 12·17 Typical plot of cooling-tower performance at varying fan speeds. 

83 hp would be saved when operating it at half speed. In calculating 

savings, one should not overlook the advantage of having colder 

tower water available for the overall water-circulating system. 

Recent developments in cooling-tower fan energy management 

also include automatic variable-pitch propeller-type fans and 

inverter-type devices to permit variable fan speeds. These schemes 

involve tracking the load at a constant leaving-water temperature. 

The variable'-pitch arrangement at constant motor speed changes 

the pitch of the blades through a pneumatic signal from the leavingwater temperature. As the thermal load and/or the ambient wetbulb temperature decreases, the blade pitch reduces air Oow and less 

fan energy is required. 

Inverters make it possible to control a variable-speed fan by 

changing the frequency modulation. Standard alternating-current 

fan motors may be speed-regulated between 0 and 60 Hz. In using 

inverters for this application. it is important to avoid frequencies that 

would result in fan critical speeds. 

Even though tower-fan energy savings can result from these 

arrangement!, they may not constitute the best system approach. 

Power-plant steam condensen and refrigeration units, for example, 

can take advantage of colder tower water to reduce power consumption. Invariably, these system savings are much larger than coolingtower fan savings with constant leaving-water temperatures. A 

refrigeration-unit condenser can utilize inlet·water temperatures 

down to 12.8°C (55°F} to reduce compressor energy consumption 

by 25 to 30·percent. 

Pumping Honepower Another important factor in analyzing 

cooling-tower selections, especially in medium to large sizes, is the 

portion of pump horsepower directly attributed to the cooling tower. 

A counterflow type of tower with spray nozzles will have a pumping 

head equal to static lift plus nozzle pressure loss. A cross-Bow type of 

tower with gravity Bow enables a pumping head to equal static lift. 

A reduction in tower height therefore reduces static Uft, thus reducing pump horsepower: 

Pum bh • gal/min(ht) . 

p p 3960 (pump efficiency) (12-14) 

where h, • total head.. ft 

Fogging ancl Plume Abatement A phenomenon that occurs in 

cooling-tower operation is fogging, which produceS a highly visible 

plume and possible icing hazards. Fogging resulu from mixing 

warm, highly saturated tower discharge air with cooler ambient air 

that lacb the capacity to absorb all the moisture as vapor. While in 

the past visible plumes have not been considered undesirable, properly locating towers to minimize possible sources of complaints has 

' 
ATmACBMEN'l' 7 

LflBOR COSTS 
BUILDING 

CONSTRUCTION 

COST DATA 

1989 

47th Annual Edition 

£Means· 

~,. ,, ' .• 

~ .. 

a. 
ea.,ttnl4=toi"'S Overhead & PrOfit 

installing contractor's percentage mark-ups 

-::=-rateS to arrive at typi~ billing rates. 

Column ~ n E: Pet:centages in Columns 0 and e are based on the 

presumptron that the rnstalling contractor has annual billing of $500 000 and up. Overhead percentages may increase with smaller annual bilii 

The overhead percentages for any given contractor may vary greatly ~d d~d ~n a numbe~ ~f factors, such as the contractor's annual volume. 

~ngrneenng and log1strcal support costs. and staff requirements. The 

ftgures f~r overh~ad and profit will also vary depending on the type of 

JOb, the JOb locatton. and the prevailing economic conditions. All factors 

should be examined very carefully tor each job. 

• ~bor rates are baSed on union wages averaged for 30 major 

. A: e'ase rates includj.ng fringe benefits are listed hourfy and daily. 

Cl~~:res are the sum of the wage rate ~nd employer-paid fringe -rnes:ts such as vacation pay, employer-patd health and welfare costs. ~on cOsts. plus approPf'!_Ste training and industry advancement funds 

costs. 

Cofumn 8: Workers' Compensation rates are the national average of 

state rates established for each trade. 

Cofumn C: Column C lists average fixed overhead figures for all trades. 

Included are Federal and State Unemployment costs set at 6.2%; Soctal 

secur~ty Taxes (FICA) set at 7.65%: Builder's Risk Insurance costs set at 

0.34%: and Public L1ab11ity costs set at 1.55%. All the percentages except 

those tor Soc1al Secur~ty Taxes vary from state to state as well as from 

company to company. 

A 

Base Rate 

Abbr. Trade Incl. Frin1es 

Hourly Daily 

Skwk Sk1lled Workers Average (35 trades) $21.90 $175.20 

Helpers Average (5 trades) 16.60 132.80 

Foremen Average, Inside (SOC over trade) 22.40 179.20 

Foremen Average, Outside ($2.00 over trade) 23.90 191.20 

Clab Common Buildmg Laborers 16.85 134.80 

:.sbe Asbestos Workers 23.85 190.80 

Bo1l Borlermakers 23.90 191.20 

Bnc Bricklayers 22.10 176.80 

Brhe Brrcklayer Helpers 17.10 136.80 

Carp Carpenters .. 21.40 171.20 

Cefi Cement Finishers 20.80 166.40 

Elec Electricrans 24.25 194.00 

Elev Elevator Constructors 24.15 193.20 

Eqhv Equ1pment Operators, Crane or Shovel 22.40 179.20 

Eqmd Equipment Operators, Medium Equipment 21.65 173.20 

Eqlt Equipment Operators, light Equipment 

Eqol Equrpment Operators, Oilers 

Eqmm Equ1pment Operators, Master Mechanics 

Glaz Glazrers 

Lath Lathers 

Marb Marble Setters 

Mill Millwrrghts 

Mstz Mosaic and Terrazzo Workers 

Pard Parnters. Ordinary 

Psst Parnters, Structural Steel 

Pape Paper Hangers 

Pile Pile Drivers 

Plas Plasterers 

Plah Plasterer Helpers 

Plum Plumbers 

Rodm Rodmen (Rernforc.ng) 

Rotc Roofers. Composition 

Rots Roofers, Tile & Slate 

Rohe Roofer Helpers (Composition) 

Shee Sheet Metal Workers 

Spn Sprinkler Installers 

Stpi Steamfitters or Pipefitters 

Ston Stone Masons 

Sswk Structural Steel Workers 

Tilf Tile Layers !floor) 

Tilh Tile Layer Helpers 

Trlt Truck Drivers, Ught 

Trhv Truck Drivers. Heavy 

Sswl Welders. Structural Steel 

Wrck •wrecking 

•Not included in Averages. 

,;:.. &L. . ·.~illf~.-r·· .... ~~r.-.~·"'' ... 

20.60 164.80 

18.45 147.60 

23.10 184.80 

22.05 176.40 

21.60 172.80 

21.95 175.60 

22.15 177.20 

21.45 171.60 

20.10 160.80 

20.85 166.80 

20.25 162.00 

21.50 172.00 

21.10 168.80 

17.35 138.80 

24.45 195.60 

23.15 185.20 

19.75 158.00 

19.85 158.80 

14.65 117.20 

24.05 192.40 

25.25·' 202.00 

24.55 196.40 

22.00 176.00 

23.25 186.00 

21.50 172.00 

17.05 136.40 

17.45 139.60 

.l1.&l 140.80 ~ }3.20 186.00 

-rr.so 134.40 

B 

Column F: Column F lists the total of columns B. C. D. and E. 

Column G: Column G is.Cotumn A (hourly base labor rate) multiplied by 

the percentage in Column F (O&P percentage). 

Column H: Column H is the total of Column A (hourly base labor rate) 

plus Column G (Total O&P). 

Column 1: Column I •s Column H multiplied by eight hours. 

c D E F G H I 

Work· Avera1t Total Rate with ers' Fixed Over· Profit Overhead & Profit O&P Comp. Over- held 

Ins. head % Amount Hourly Daily 

12.59(. 15.796 12.896 10\ 51.09& $11.15 $33.05 S264.40 

13.8 13.0 52.5 8.70 25 30 202.40 

12.5 12.8 51.0 11.40 33.80 27040 

12.5 12.8 51.0 12.20 36 10 288.80 

13.9 11.0 50.6 8,55 25.40 2(]9.20 

11.6 16.0 53.3 12.70 36.55 292.40 

7.9 16.0 49.6 11.85 35.75 286.00 

11.3 11.0 48.0 10.60 32.70 261.60 

11.3 11.0 48.0 8.20 25.30 202.40 

13.9 11.0 50.6 10.85 32.25 25800 

7.9 11.0 44.6 9.30 30.10 240.80 

5.2 16.0 46.9 11.35 35.60 284.80 

6.8 16.0 48.5 11.70 35.85 286.80 

8.8 14.0 48.5 10.85 33.25 266.00 

8.8 14.0 48.5 10.50 32.15 257.20 

8.8 14.0 48.5 10.00 30.60 244.80 

8.8 14.0 48.5 8.95 27.40 219.20 

8.8 14.0 48.5 11.20 34.30 274.40 

10.4 11.0 47.1 10.40 32.45 259.60 

8.4 ,' 11.0. 45.1 9.75 31.3$ 250.80 

11.3 11.0 48.0 10.55 32.50 260.00 

8.4 11.0 45.1 10.00 32.15 257.20 

7.0 11.0 43.7 9.35 30.80 246.40 

10.4 11.0 47.1 9.45 29.55 236.40 

34.9 11.0 71.6 14.95 35.80 286.40 

10.4 11.0 47.1 9.55 29.80 238.40 

21.9 16.0 63.6 13.65 35.15 281'20 

11.0 11.0 47.7 10.05 31.15 249.20 

11.0 11.0 47.7 8.30 25.65 205.20 

6.2 16.0 47.9 11.70 36.15 289.20 

22.0 14.0 61.7 14.30 37.45 299.60 

25.7 11.0 62.4 12.30 '32.05 256.40 

25.7 11.0 62.4 12.40 32.25 258.00 

25.7 11.0 62.4 9.15 23.80 190.40 

8.8 16.0 50.5 12.15. 36.20 289.60 

6.7 16.0 48.4 12.20 37.45 299.60 

6.2 16.0 47.9 11.75 36.30 290.40 

11.3 .11.0 48.0 10.55 32.55 260.40 

26.8 14.0 66.5 • 15.45 38.70 309.60 

7.0 11.0 43.7 9.40 30.90 247.20 

7.0 11.0 43.7 7.45 24.50 196.00 

11.8 11.0 48.5 8.45 25.90 207.20 

11.8 11.0 - 4l5 8.55 26.15 209.20 

26.8 14.0 66.5 15.45 38.70 309.60 

28.1 ', 11.0'' , 64.8 10.90 27.70 221.60 . I • 
RADIAN ProJecC lo. Dll 5J Ueu '9!1. 

Projecc .... CORPO.AW·IO.N HON 

TELEPHON£ CALL RECORD DICe , .. ~ .. eou CJOlaa cau +IJ..9tq3 10: 15" 

Peraon C.Lllftl~ fo-ci R. I<:_:' S~tt ACChlC:p 

-0wr ~ :~ -'f 

·-..r J. j ,. c r-. 

Penon ca LL•• .L . AcelvUJ 

Generel SI& .. JMC 

(:l-ea) Gee.:,- 7S -:1.8 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN· 

~ 

A• I r\-JO I I 

• c~ ·ro, 

Aon••oD S• • ny1 C 'J !> 

• s tot, A )b a ±n D ,Po 

• proo,. c «Yon, 

S:tc ·Cod n • 

• CO r p \ • m C 0 I e J p 4 

.. 0'\1, .. ), cL m j) , a 

<Lm I a ocULD ft 

• I pn I cl 

bo 4 I :I I 

LJ] 0 <a' t Q Q n ba 4 I ; I • . .. 00CC\ g A p Q C I j• e 1· 

. , • 

\tOr a cLan J , A ac L L a go ye Omd 

• • ' I B '0 oallf \ fXl I ,i,l 1 co 

• • 

C,nm I " , •o Ori 

bnu•AAA on a, 

d Of A ·no+ 

. . '=Prod 1, rt•oa, WocH a a 

• 

"···e- ~·· 

0 

.. t 1 m£lY 0f1Lc on · O'XJ 10 :';e rnO m C i· Ia bee 

Wo'f , lm£at:macL.cn• •• • •. not p••hQ, ,bL.l' hy SJ;C.. • 

1 
RADIAN 

CORPORA'fiON 

Ptojecl llo. plnutentgn 

ProjlltCC ..... 

TELEPHONE CALL A£CDRD Dlh "-· 

:l :-1-5 p(TU 

r.uon C.L Una 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN. 

):j, In Q Q I I 'st o bog. 

. . . S'tciss+•~A, 

l . - ~·d ''& Om'J data )CQA :,.pre0J,4br,.l. on 

~ • J .j. q 6 ~ I ' I 4 s d +e, ' p! I u ~I A b ..,...~) 'YQ +· 0 CH c A' a. 

• 

cLb Q AQ ,p,,np~b,.J 

1978 , CLm d .c' a pncib 0 n p. 

• 

N Pi J t" \, pd.' j) zP , A b I d ) ' I H) A A d .on Om· o:n D a. ce ttW. 

f" A.l LAA.l.:\J - I ·, - \ .. ,... L .• ...L.. ~· . "" - • . % . ~ -::.!..!~7 "'=. '< Jf\LO. 4 0.' agrllQ I jJ' LldJ. D 0 1 • ~ 

• 

c;.h Jrm aCn 0. 

. . . . L ' 01 cl.ba F:.s d on a Q · n, f?: ,•fory' "' ... 9i, d .· .• cLr.a o, 

.19B CC' 41 .•