Remote Mine Power Plant Design

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bigjabe

Member
Location
Vancouver BC
Hi all, just getting started on the conceptual design for a diesel power plant for a remote mine. Total capacity will be about 16MW and it seems that this is generally accomplished with 9x2MW units or so (N+1).

Just wondering why many smaller units seem to be typical over fewer larger ones. 5x4MW I would think would be cheaper overall (less real estate, less cabling, piping, controllers, breakers, maintenance... maybe higher efficiency? Haven't looked into that...).

I don't want to look stupid by even suggesting it, but also don't want to blindly follow typical configurations. Any discussions would be appreciated!
 

ron

Senior Member
What voltage are you dealing with? Is it low voltage or medium voltage?

It very well could be just the generation sizes that is easily available in the marketplace in that area or in the case of low voltage applications, the ease of getting listed distribution equipment in that ampacity.

I believe only Cat makes a 4MW unit in either case.
 

Bigjabe

Member
Location
Vancouver BC
What voltage are you dealing with? Is it low voltage or medium voltage?

It very well could be just the generation sizes that is easily available in the marketplace in that area or in the case of low voltage applications, the ease of getting listed distribution equipment in that ampacity.

I believe only Cat makes a 4MW unit in either case.

4160V most likely. Yeah that could be!
 

K8MHZ

Senior Member
Location
Michigan. It's a beautiful peninsula, I've looked
Occupation
Electrician
Could it be that the system is meant to be able to have one generator down for maintenance or repair while the rest can still deliver full capacity?

With 9 x 2 MW, one can be down and you will still have 16 MW available.

With 5 x 4 MW, if one goes down you will only have 15 MW available.

Just a thought.
 

Bigjabe

Member
Location
Vancouver BC
Could it be that the system is meant to be able to have one generator down for maintenance or repair while the rest can still deliver full capacity?

With 9 x 2 MW, one can be down and you will still have 16 MW available.

With 5 x 4 MW, if one goes down you will only have 15 MW available.

Just a thought.

Yes for sure you're correct, except that 4 x 4MW is 16MW, similarly to 8 x 2MW. Lol, I assume that was a brainfart.

But yeah, the actual load is 16MW, so we need one extra one past 16MW so that if one goes down the standby unit can fire up and meet the load.
 

kingpb

Senior Member
Location
SE USA as far as you can go
Occupation
Engineer, Registered
As sated by others a 2MW machine is much more easy to come by than a 4MW machine. More suppliers means more competitive pricing. Also, spare parts and maintenance are a lot more common and availability of spare parts easier for 2MW machines. Load diversity could also be another issue in that you don't want to lightly load a genset for very long. it causes wet stacking and becomes problematic. So having multiple units allows for more closely matching generation with load.
 

gadfly56

Senior Member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
Is the load a dead steady 16 MW? If not, how would you handle a turndown of 80% if you had a single unit? Underloaded diesel plants are subject to wet-stacking which is a good way to ruin them. Just like a full grid, operators need to be able to bring units on line and off line to follow the load.
 

iceworm

Curmudgeon still using printed IEEE Color Books
Location
North of the 65 parallel
Occupation
EE (Field - as little design as possible)
Hi all, just getting started on the conceptual design for a diesel power plant for a remote mine. Total capacity will be about 16MW and it seems that this is generally accomplished with 9x2MW units or so (N+1). ...!

First, a couple of guesses:
Commercial power is not available - not even small amounts.
Winter time power failure could put the facility into equipment damaging, personnel endangering, freeze-up with-in a few hours.
The client will be majorly freaked out if the process does not run flat out 24/7.

If these are not true, cancel most of the rest of my reply.

1. 16 MW is non-trivial. Just buying the machines in the $2/Watt range. $32M + buildings + auxiliary equipment. The client has plenty of money to play with to get the engineering right. For example, is the 16MW number a peak number or a prime (continuous) number? Yes it matters.

2. Prime rated recips are maybe good for 40K hours. For eight gensets, the client will be rebuilding two each year - unless they are only good for 25K hours, then rebuilding three or four each year. Consider there will be two to four months each year where there will be one genset down for planned maintenance. What is the plan if one is under rebuild and another decides its time for a turbo to send its guts through the intake intercooler?

With nine gensets, and a requirement for eight operating at 100%, MTBF is getting short. Depending on the client process available turndown, they may want N+2.

2A. Maybe the mine doesn't have to run for a few months during the winter and that is when the rebuilds are done. Only power needed is to keep the heat and light on. If so that really helps.

3. Instead of recip diesels, consider gas turbines - maybe 3 each, 8MW. The bean counters will be looking at the installed capital cost. I personally believe the correct response is to look at the life cycle costs. The maintenance on nine recips is a killer. For TGs, one can swap out a compressor section in a week. Same for the hot section. And only one has to be done each year. Suggest the client look hard at any offered maintenance contract. I've seen a few where the capital cost was way low and the maintenance contract made up for all the profit and then some. Remember - look at the life cycle costs.

4. And they will also need a black start. Depending on the hotel load, this is a good application for a 2MW peak recip, battery start.

5. Consider the turn down. Comments were made concerning wet-stacking. With eight operating gensets that won't be a problem. As the loading goes down, shut off a genset.

With TGs, there are air permit concerns. Some have to be operated above 60% (or so) to make emissions. For example, with two 8MW operation at a minimum of 60%, that is 9.6MW - Oh oh, what if the load is 8.5MW. For this case, that's easy, parallel the 2MW DG, base loaded at 80% - let the TG swing.

6. For distribution, consider 13.8KV. Scatter 480V, 1KVA - 2KVA xfms, and 4KV - 6.6KV xfm for the motors. It really depends on the size of the process and size of the motors. I don't know much about mining machinery - could be I'm all wet here.


All this is pretty simplified, but still the stuff I'd be looking at. Highly recommend getting a copy of IEEE redbook, Std 141, Electrical Power Distribution for Industrial Plants. IEEE is not printing paper copies any more (my hard copy is a 1993) but they may be selling electronic. I'll look tomorrow and see what exactly is available.

This is a dream project - keep us informed.

Ice
 

ron

Senior Member
First, a couple of guesses:
All this is pretty simplified, but still the stuff I'd be looking at. Highly recommend getting a copy of IEEE redbook, Std 141, Electrical Power Distribution for Industrial Plants. IEEE is not printing paper copies any more (my hard copy is a 1993) but they may be selling electronic. I'll look tomorrow and see what exactly is available.

1993 is the latest. They still have hard copies.

I refer to mine on occasion for the pictures.

https://www.techstreet.com/standards/ieee-141-1993?product_id=256
 

junkhound

Senior Member
Location
Renton, WA
Occupation
EE, power electronics specialty
Also, did not see anyone yet mentioning transportation. The bigger the harder to get to the site, especially a remote site.

Wife worked for GE arranging shipping for large equipment. Can be quite a challenge to get big stuff to where it needs to go. The bigger, the more difficult.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top