Aft Mercury 7

Applied Flow Technology
AFT Mercury
Quick Start Guide
AFT Mercury version 7 .O
lncompressible Flow Pipe System Modeling
and Optimization
App/ied Flow Technology
Dynamic solutions for a fluid world
CAUTIONI
AFT Mercury is a sophbttcatcd pipe flo\\ program dcsigoed for
qualified engineers with cxpenence m pipe
11
0\\ atW)515 and should not
be uscd by untrained individuals. AFT Men.ury i:- intcndcd solcly as an
aidc for pipe now analysis engineers and notas a rcplaccmcot for othcr
dcsigo and analysis mclbods, including band calculatJons aod sound
enginccringjudgment. AU dala gencratcd by AFT Mercury sbould be
indepcndcntly verified with olher engioccring mcthods.
AFT Mercury is dcsigned to be uscd only by pcrsons who possess a leve!
o[ knowledge consistcnt with that obtaincd in an undcrgraduatc
cngineenng coursc in tbe analysis of pipe system fluid mcchanics and is
familiar wi1 h standard iodustry practicc in pipe flow anaJysis.
Fonnal training on thc use and application of AFT Mercury is highly
recommcndcd, and providcd by Applied Flow Tcchnology.
AfT Mercury is intcnded to be uscd only within thc of its
cngineering assumptions. Thc uscr should consult the Uscr's Guide for a
discussion ofall cngincering assumptions made by AFT Mcrcury.
lnformauon m 1h1s document subjcct to change without nollce. No part Qu1ck
Start GUidC mny be rcproduced nr transmitted in any fom1 ur by any elcctronic or
mcchonical, for uny purpose, without thc cxpress wnllen pcrmiss1on of Aprlicd Flow
Tcchnology.
10 2012 Arplied Flow Tcchnology Corporation. All right!> rcscrved.
Printed in thc Unned S tates of
"AFT Mcrcury". "AFT Falhom", "Applied Flow Tcchnology", 'Dynamic solutions for a
nuid world", ond the AfT logo ore trademarks ol' /\pphcd Flow Tcchnology Corporation.
Lntelhqup is a tradcmark of lntclliqulp, LLC.
Chcmpak IS a rrademark of Madison Technical Software. lnc.
Wmdows 1s u rcpstcrcd trademnrk ofMicrosoft Corporallon.
Contents
r
1. lntroducing AFT Mercury ............................................... 1
How AFf Mercury works ........................................................................ 1
Analysis vs. design ................................................................................... 2
Analysis ..... ......................................................................................... 2
Design ....... ..................................................... .................................... 3
1
Cost-based opmization vs. co!!.t estimali ng ............................................. 3
AFT Merc ury design capabilitics ............................................................. 3
Typcs of systcms Lhat can be optimizcd ............................................ 3
Opmization parameters available ..................................................... 4
Engineeri ng assumpti ons in AFT Mercury ........................................... ... 4
AFT Mercury pri mary windows ............................................ ................ ... 4
Lnput windows ................................................................................. ... 5
Output w i n o w ~ ................................................................................. S
Opt imization terminology ......................................................................... 6
Design variables ................................................................................. 6
De sigo constraints .............................................................................. 6
Acli ve and inactive constrai nts .................................................... 6
Objective function .............................................................................. 6
Continuous vs. discrctc optimi zati on ................................................. 7
Design variable linking ...................................................................... 7
Feasible and infea!\ible designs .......................................................... 7
2. Weight Optimization Example ....................................... 9
Tapies coverecl .............. ......................................................... ................... 9
Required knowledge ................................................................................. 9
Stcp l . Create the model ......................................................................... LO
Summary .. ........................................................................................ 10
A. Layout model ............................................................................... 1 O
B. Select fl uid ................................................................................... Ll
C. En ter data for rcscrvoirs .............................................................. 12
iv AFT Mercury 7.0 Quick Start Guide
D. Enter control \W\"e d:n:J. -------- 13
E. Enter pipe data ................ ............................. J4
Step 2. Setup the optimization data------ 15
A. Crea te pipe size range set.. ....... ................................................... 15
B. Creale a control val ve consu-aim sel --- 17
Step 3. AppJy optimization data .......................... ................... ....... 0 ........ 18
A. Apply optimization data to Pl ......................... 0 ........ 0 . ..... . ........... 18
B. Apply optimization data to P2 ..... ................................................ 19
C. Apply optimization data Lo J2 (FCV) ....... ... ....... ......................... 20
Step 4. Specify Optimizalion ConLrol... ............. ..................................... 2 1
Step 5. Run the OpLimiL.ation ....................... .................... 0 . . ................... 22
Step 6. Review optimization results ............................ .. ............ ........... .. 23
Conclusions ................................. ................................ ......... ... ............... 25
3. lnitial and Lite Cycle Cost Optimization Example ..... 27
Tapies covered ........... .......... o 0 ....... . ...... .. . . ........ . ............ . .. . ..... ....... .... 27
Requircd knowlcdgc ........................................................ 0 ...................... 27
Model files .... 0. 0 . . .. o. o ............................................... o .. o ............................ o 28
Oplimization goaJs ................. ..... o-0 28
Getting started ............. o.ooooooo ooooo 28
Review Opti mization Control .... 0 .... o 0 ... 0 .. 0 ................ o ..... .......... 0 .. 0 ....... 0 29
Review databas es .............. ....... ................... o o 0 0 31
Review pipe oplimizatiun setup ................... o ............................ . 0 ..... ..... o 32
Pipe size range sets .................... 0 ....... 0 .................... 0 ....... 0 ................ 33
Pipe constraint sets ........ o .. o ........ o ................ o ............... o ....... o ....... o ... o. 34
Pipe link.ing .. 0 .. 00 35
Creating pipe size range sets and constraint sets ............................. 36
Review junction optimization setup ............. ............................. 0 ............ 37
Optimizing systcms with pumps ... ................ ......... .......................... 38
Modeling a pump as a fixed t1ow .............................................. 40
J unction costs ................................................................................ ... 41
J unction constraint sets .o .. o ........ 0 0 .......... o ...................................... 41
Crcating junction constrainl sets ................ 0 ....... 00 .. 0 ..... 41
Table of Contents v
Unc.Jcrstanding the modc1 ........................................................................ 42
Running tbe sccnarios and interpreng rcsuhs ....................................... 4-+
Scenario to minimjze tirst coa ......................................................... 4-+
Optimized pipe si7.cs .................................................................. 46
Cbeck.ing so urce of cost data ..................................................... 46
Scenario Lo minimize life cycle col>t for 20 year<. ............................ 47
Optimizing with pump curve data .......................................................... 51
............................................................................................ 51
4. Multple Design Case Example ...... ........ ................. .... 53
Topics covered ............... ............... .......................................................... 53
Rcquircd knowlcdgc ...... .................... ..................................................... 53
Model files .............. ....... ......................................................................... 54
Optirni7alion goals .................................................................................. 54
Gctting startcd ......................................................................................... 54
Review model ......................................................................................... 55
How the dependent design c<u;e crcatcd ................................... 57
Run the optin1ization .............................................................................. 63
Considcr the resuhs ................................................................................ 65
OptimiLe for three pipe siL.el> .................................................................. 66
Run the optimization .............................................................................. 67
Other ................................................................................... 68
5. Other AFT Mercury Capabilities .................................. 69
Optimite with operating costl> spread over multiple cal>el> ..................... 9
Yary rccurring costs over tin1e ............................................................... 69
Time vaJuc of tnoncy .............................................................................. 70
OptimiLe life cycle costs wiLh constrarncd initial cost ........................... 70
Determine cost effectiveness of replacing exil>tmg pipe ........................ 70
Working with different currcncics .......................................................... 70
Col>t!-. Vl>. si .le ........................................................................................... 70
OptimiLing rectangular duct ...................................................... 71
Compare YFD vs. FCV optimi7ed systems ............................................ 71
vi AFT Mercury 7 .O Quick Start Guide
Maximum cost groups -------- .......................... 71
(
Nerwork -- - ............ 71
1
1
71
71
C HAPTER
lntroducing AFT Mercury
Welcome to AFT Mcrcury 7.0, Applied Flow Technology's powerful
pipe and duct syMem optlmization tool. With AFT Mercury you can
automaticaUy siLe all pipes or ducts in your c;ystcm tu mi nimi.te
monetary cost. weight. volurne. or surface arca. ln addiri on, you can
concurrently siL.e the pumps and pipes to obtain the absoiUlc lowcst cost
system that satisfi es your design requirements. Finally. by accounling for
non-recurring amJ recurring ynu can optimile pi pe and duct
systems to rninimi ze lifc cycle over sorne spec1fied durauon.
How AFT Mercury works
AFf Mercury cons ists uf three basic the Graph1cal Interface,
le Hydraulic Solver. and the Optimizalion Engi ne (i.e., the Optill'l.Uer).
Figure 1. 1 shows the relationship bctwcen the three.
Figure 1.1 AFT Mercury main component flow chart
2 AFT Mercury 7.0 Quick Start Guide
The Hydmulic Sol\er obun' a balanced h)draulic solution for a
spccific pipe or duct -}s1em. The Optimizer then modifies Lhe design,
and the Hydraulic Solver the modifioo design. The Optimi t.er
continues Lh.lli process umil 11 ts l-atistied that no funher design
improvements are posstble. AL thts poinL the Optir:nUer has converged
on a design. and lhe op1imiLed de!>ign is then sent back to the
Grapbical Interface where it is displayed 10 the
The Hydraulic Solver, which functions as the pnme mover in perforrning
an engineering analysis (e.g., AFf Fathom). becomes a subroutine
calied by the Optirnizer. The Optimi t.er the prime mover in AFf
Mercury.
The Hydraulic Solver in AFJ' Mercury was derived from AFf Fathom. a
leading commercial ptpe flow product with many years of
industrial use to its credit.
The optir:nUation engine employcd by AFT Mercury uses state-of-the-art
opt.imization lechnology liccnscd from Vanderplaats Research and
Development, lhe leading company in op1imit.ation technology. VR&D's
Lechnology has been used for many ycars in engincering design. with
cxtcnsive use in strucwml tinitc clcmcnt analysis.
Analysis vs. design
Analysis
Traditional piping system engineering has employed pipe fiow analysis.
Engineering analysis is Lhe process of using acccptcd calculation
methods to predict the behavior of a given system. These calculation
methods may be manual or automated in a computcr program.
The weakne!.l. of analytical mcthods is that they require the specification
of the sysLem befare lhe methods are applied. Specificall y. the pipe or
ducts siL.es, pump, val ve and other equipment must be specified in arder
to perform the calculation.
However. whcn a new pipe is bcing designed, these parameters
are not known. To use Lhe analytical methods, the engineer must guess at
lhe pipe sizes and required equipment, pcrform thc analysis, Lhen motlify
his or her original selections necessary.
The anal ytical metho<h are used teratvel} to arrive ata final design.
a
1
S
Chapter 1 lntroducing AFT Mercury 3
Design
A desi!,rn ori ented approach to piping system engmt:ering would allow
the selection parameters to be variables. Rather than <,pecifying pipe
diameten,. Lhe engineer sol ves for pipe diameten. by specifying thc flows
and pressures (and other design requ1remems) and 'ielecting the
appropriate pipes which minimize the overall '-Y"tem cost.
Within certain limits engineers do this with traditionaJ analytical
mclhods, but the number of design tradcoffl> that can be considered is
Jimitcd and lhc tradeoffs considcrcd are ind1rcctly ued to cosL.
AFf Mercury offero; a true design-orienteu approach to piping systcm
engineering by using advanced optimiLation methods to evaluate
competi ng designs vs. cost and selecting the optimum design. Thc
;malysis melhod (i.e., thc Hydraulic Solver) called repeatedly by thc
Optimizer in w1 effort Lo idcnt ify design improvemt:nb (i.e ..
improvements that reduce cost).
Cost-based optimization vs. cost estimating
AFf Mercury is nora cost estimaling too!. Rathcr. it offer'\ a rationaJ
and automated approach for comparing potential pipe or ductl>ystem
using Lhe common denominator of cost lt b, lhe pipe or duct
sy'item design Lhat AFf Mercury obtains that 1s of unmense "aJue, not
the process of cost eslimating.
AFT Mercury design capabilities
AFf Mercury can be u sed to opti mize u wide variet) of engineering
systcrns.
Types of systems that can be optimized
Piping. ducting and tubing systems
Open and cJosed (recirculating) systems
Network systcms lhat branch or loop. no limit on the number of
loops
Pressure fcd systems and gravity fed S}Stcms
Pumped systems. mcludmg - - in parallel or in seri es
Pumps wilh variable speed. controUedpres.;;;ure. conrrolled flow, and
viscosity corrections
Systems with pressure and/or OO\\ control vah-es
Systems with vaJves closed and u p ~ turned off
Systems with heat transfer and encrgy balance
Systems with variable density and viscosity
Systems wiLb non-Newtonian lluid behavior
Optimization parameters available
Pipe size
Pipe velocily, pressure gradient, pressure. and l1ow
Pump head rise, NPSH margin, proximity to BEP (Best Efficiency
Point), power, ami others
Control vaJve pressure drop an<.l open percentage
Engineering assumptions in AFT Mercury
AFf Mercury is based on lhe foll owing fundamental Quid mechanics
assumplions:
lncomprcssible flow
Steady-state conditions
One-dimensionaJ flow
No chemical reactions
AFT Mercury primary windows
AFT Mercury has live subordinate windows lhat work in an integr'dted
fashion. You work exclusively from one of these windows at aJl times.
For lhis reason they are referred to as Primary Window:;.
and
y
J
Of Lhe five Primary Windows, two are input windows, two are output
windows. and one displays both input and oulput infonnation. Figure J .2
shows lhe relationship betwcen the Pnmary Window1..
r
Model Data
-
,,
Visual Report
Workspace
..
Output ,.......

Graph Results
Figure 1.2 Prlmary Window workflow in AFT Mercury
Input windows
The two windows Lhat funclion exclusively as input windows are che
Workspace window and the Motlel Data window. These mo windows.
one graphicaJ and lhe other text-based. work together to proce model
input data wilh immense tlexibility. The tools provttled in rwo
windows allow you to model a large variety of pipe nerworks.
The Visual Rcport window can functjon in suppon of both input and
output data. Asan input window. 11 allows you 10 sce Lhe mput data
supcrirnposed on Lhe pipe system schcmatic created on the
Output windows
The two windows that function cxclusively a." output windows are che
Output window and the Graph Results window. The Output window is
text-based. whi le the Graph Results wintlow is gr..tphical. These two
windows offer a powerful and di verse runge of features for reviewing
analysis results for modeling errors, gaining a deeper understanding of
the pipe system's flow bchavior, and preparing the results for
documentmion.
Asan output window. Visual Report all ows you to \ee the ourput results
supcrimposed on Lhe pipe system schcmatic created on the Workspace.
The five Primary WtndO\\' a ughl) highly efficient
system for cntering. proce-.!\ing. a.nalyzin;. md cb.. -umenting
incomprcssible now of pipe netwod::: ....
Opti mization terminology
General optimizalion terminology applicd to ptpe S} !>Lem ... is as follows:
Design variables
Thc dcsign variables in AfT Mercury are thc pipe sizes.
Design constraints
There are numcrous design constraints in AFT Mercury. Common
constraints are pipe velocity, control val ve pressure drop and proximity
to pump NPSH and BEP (Best Efficiency Point).
Active and inactive constraints
One constraint type is pipe velocily. One may setlhe maximum to 1 O
feellsec, and the mnimum to 2 feetlsec. lf the final pipe velocity were
9.9 feet/sec, the maximum velocity constraint would be aclive bccause
tbe fmal value of the velocity is at or near lhe maximum velocily. On the
other hand. the 9.9 feet/sec pipe velocity is far away from lhe 2 fcct/scc
mnimum. lf we remove the mnimum velocity constraint, the result will
still be an actual pipe velocily of 9.9 feet/sec. Thus the minimum
velocity constraint is inactive and does nol influence the pipe size
selectcd by the optimizer.
On the other hand, if one removed thc 10 feetlsec maximum velocity
constraint. the actual vclocity would probably increase above 10
feet/sec, thus rcsulting in a differcnt pipe size. The maximum velocity is
acti ve in thal if we change or remove the constraint the selected
optimum would change. Changing or removing inactive constraint<. have
no effect on the selected optimum.
Objective function
This is thc cost of the system. The cosl can be monetary or can be based
on wcight. volume or sorne other parameter. As AFr Mercury vares rhe
.vs:
tty
e
!he
ec
.vi 11
ds
1ve
ed
the
pipe !otiLes, the cost of thc pipes and associatcd cquipmcm vares. The
optirni.wtion enginc scarches for combinations of pipe sizes lhat
minimi:res the objcctivc function (i.c .. cost).
Continuous vs. discrete optimization
Most commercial pipe comes in discrcte sizes (e.g., 1 inch. 2 inch, 3
inch, etc.). Whcn dealing with discrete data. AFT Mercury evaluates tJ1c
best combination of discrete pipe sizcs. lf. on the other hand. it is
possible Lo obtain thc pipe in any sizc. the pipe siLes are continuous.
AFT Mercury can find continuous optimums in addition to discrete
optimums. Tbc continuous opmum should provide a better design tban
the discrete. and is used usa basis for the discrete whicb is
normall y thc goal.
Design variable llnking
Thc optimization procells takcs longer al> thc number of of
potcntially different size increases. FrequenLI) there are group!-. of pipes
in your sysrem which either you want to be of !he same 'i7e for design
purposcs. or mullt be the same size by virtue of their location in Lhe
systcm. To do this one can Link pipes. Whcn one links pipell. one is
saying that the linked group of pipes all must bave !he -.ame p1pe size,
and be the same material and schedul e. class. or type. A hnketl group
thus collapses the i ndi viduul pipes that are pan of that group tn a 1>ingle
design variable for thal group. There can be multiple linked groups in a
modcl.
Feasible and infeasible designs
A feasible design is one which sat.isfics all constrainb, while an
infeasible design docs not satisfy onc or more con. traints. There are
many ways you can crcate a model that has no solution. Here is
any ea!> y way: Conncct a pipe toan assigned pressure Junction sct to 200
Then place a constrai nt on lhe pipe that it cannot have a prcssure
greater than 100 psig. Since the pipe is connected toan assigned
pressure j unct.ion at 200 psig, therc is no \\a} for it to '>atisfy thc J 00
p:..ig constraint. Thus. no reasible solutton exists.
e
V
CHAPTER 2
Weight Optimization Example
Topics covered
This cxample shows bow to use AFT Mercury to perfonn an
parameter optimation on a system. Engineering parameter
optimizatjon involves minimimg sorne quantity ::.uch the total pipe
weight or volumc. Pipe weight or \IOiume frequently relate<> clo. el y to
the actual pipe cost, and is casier to setup lhan cost based optimization.
Tls example demom.trates minimizing the pipe weiglu in a -.ystem.
Thc example is for a fluid transfer system lhat fceds water from an
elevated rcl-Jervoir toa Jower reservoir ata specified tlO\\ rate. A comrol
val ve is used to control the fl ow ratc and can be placcd anywhere within
the Jine. For we wi ll locate thc tlow comrol valve <ll the
midpoint.
Engincering parameter (pipe wcight) optimizallon
Pipe linking options
Control Val ve constmims
Required knowledge
No prior knowledge is rcquircd for this example.
Step 1. Create the model
Summary
Create a modelas shown in Figure 2. 1 with the following !>peci fi cations:
Water aL 70 degrccs
Upper reservoir at 40 feet and lower reservoir at 10 feet
Dcsired flow is 300 gpm
Control val ve must ha ve a pressurc drop of at lcasL 5 psid
Total pipe length is 400 feet
Pipes are STO from 1 Lo 12 inch
Figure 2.1 Control Valve system layout
A. Layout model
Creale a modelas shown in Figure 2. 1.
ions:
!lm!1
!...___
:0
ti
Chapter 2 Weight Opti mization Example 11
l. The threc juncLions, J 1, J2 and 13. can be from the Toolbox
at the left and dropped on Lhe Workspace.
2. The two pipes, P l and P2. can be drawn on lbe Workspace by
clicking the Pipe Drawing Tool at the uppcr right of thc Toolbox and
then drawing lincs on Lhc Workspace. Makc sure Lhe dirccLional
arrows poinl from J 1 Lo J2 antl Lhen J2 Lo J3. (The tlow dircction can
be reversed by use of the Reverse Direction too! on Lhe Arrange
menu.)
B. Select fluid
l . Open the Syslem Propcnics window from the Analysi!. menu (scc
Figure 2.2)
2. In the uppcr lcft select the "AFf Standard" option
{1 .. ( .. 1 \ioc,,..,.,,.J s.-!i.u 1
u-twfUol o...-,..M[-IP,
"'"-

--,.o.-
fUd-
1!!& 1
a !n ]50 DN
t ,_@!>il-
, __
il S...@!>.O-
s.,...,@ 1'1l:..a

.. o...,..llqudJ
Syj'u1 !lk:Jidl
I...._Jloo.-ll
;j YhJkif.l!) 41'ITI
J.!""''Y
.. odtl i f>-. ;:]

V-"-l- a
r-..

. cr ..... (Lo!,..._
l'

r. u..,- t._.....,. .. 1\odi
r H..,l_
r
Figure 2.2 System Properti es window is where you specify the
fluid.
3. In thc "Fluid'i Availablc in Databasc" st. select "Water at 1 mm"
4. Cl ick the "Add lO Model" button
"
5. In tbc Tcmperature field type 70 a.eg F
6. Click the "Calculate Propenjes buuon (Lhi.s obtains the density,
viscosily ami vapor pressure)
7. Cl ick the OK button to el ose the \\indo\\ and accept the fluid data
for the model

11"'1!.'&111! JSUC>OIJiloi<

, J
Figure 2.3 Input for Reservoir junction J1
C. Enter data for reservoirs
As shown in Figure 2. 1, the J 1 (Supply Tank) junction is a Reservoir
junclion.
l. Double-click the Jl junction icon to open the Reservoir
Specifications window (see Figure 2.3)
2. Entera Surface Elevation of 40 feet
3. Entera Surface Pressure of 1 atm
4. Click the OK button
ty.
data
ttr
Chapter 2 Weight Optimization Example 13
Repeat thls process for junction J3 (Discharge Tank). but use a Surface
Elevation of 1 O feel.
D. Enter control valve data
The J2 junction is a Control Val ve junction. Wc will use Lhis as a tlow
control valve (FCV).
l. Double-click thc J2 junction icon lO open Lhe Control VaJvc
Specifications window (see Figure 2.4)
2. Emcr an elevation of O feet.
J. rn the "VaJve Type" arca sclcct "Fiow Control (FCV)"
4. ln Lbe "Control Selting" area, selccl ''Volurnctric Flow Rate" and
enter a "Fiow Setting" of 300 gallmin.
5. Click the OK bullon
"""*'
u_..rw 1
ti 1
a
l
11-
V.-,.,l.ilt
Cl.l;oyl) .. f.,..JJ;t 1
VIM':P>
,.. -...f!6nooii'RVJ
r "'"-;...w.r.o IPSYI
fboC.,..,,JtVl

r .. _ra.,.,;.....,r .. 2J
1 w u . l.ld...f A<:iooow
....
a lniol ro:---1 ....
a
cl IMK r-- ;;; . ...,..,,..,
r.
r Cx

3
(" llwC lollitonOptQnillilo
Figure 2.4 Input for Control Valve j unct ion J2
c..:.!
1

1
t-4
1
E. Enter pipe data
l. Double-cJick on the pipe PI to open lhe Pipe Specifications window
(see Figure 2.5)
2. Tn the "Siz.e" area choose thc "P1pe Material" as "Steel"
3. Choose thc Sizc and Type as "4 inch' and STD"
4. Specify the length al. 200 feet
5. Click thc OK button
6. Enter the sarne data for pipe P2 as pipe Pl.

..... ""
'l" U....:.W
u.-...-

1

:.c..:..._ _______ _
Figure 2.5 Pipe Specifications window for pipe P1
1S window
;.;;: .. . TU!
t= =j
r..-.:.,1
*""'
1
Step 2. Setup the optimization data
A. Create pipe size range set
In order lo select an optimal pipe site. AFf Mercury needs to know what
pipe materials and/or si1cs should be considered. This is ">pecified
through pipe si:e range sel.\.
l. Open the Pipe OptimiL.ation Parameters window by sclecting "Pipe
Parameters" from the Optimiattion menu (see Figure 2.6)
2. Click the "CrcaLc Sct" button and name the set "Sted Sch 40"
3. ln U1e "Range Set Definilion" area select thc material as "Steel"
4. Click the "Sclect Pipe Siz.cs" bulton lo open the Select Pipe Sizes
window
5. In the Sort area at the lower left select "Type, Schedule, Class" (see
Figure 2.7)
1
s ... R._"''""""""'
..:J
Figure 2.6 Pipe Optimizatlon Parameters window allows you to
create size range sets and constraint sets
"
6. (n the "Available Materi al Sizes and Types" Li st at lhe Jeft expand
the "STO" Ji stmg
7. Add all sizes from 1 inch Lo 12 inch by selccting from the list on the
left and then clicking the "Add >>" button Lo add each one Lo lhe
"Use These Sires ... " list on lhe ri ght (again, sce Figure 2.7)
8. Click lhe OK button
9. Thc Pipe Optimizution Paramclers window should now look like tbat
in Figure 2.8
10. Click thc OK buuon
At this point, wc havc mcrely creared a si.le range set. Thc size rangc sct
will have no effect on thc optimization process until wc actually apply it
to specific pipes in the modcl. We will do lhis in Step 3.
Selet t Pipe Slles ~ ~

,
l"p: Saofl4<9!'SetNIII'It'- StcetS 40
~
Figure 2.7
1 rclt STO
1114 111eh. S lO
11/2ncl1. STO
2 1nCh. STO
2112...:11 STO
3nch. STO
3-1/2nc11. STO
4 1nch. STO
Sn:h. STO
&inch. STO
8n:h. STO
10inch STO
12n:h. STO
The Select Pipe Slzes wlndow aJiows the user to
specify the specific pipe sizes to be included In the
size range set
j
'iel
it
:X
s.s-s"' 1 1
... nW'!ID4"'

1 ..cl SID
IVZ I $Tll
l<l sm
? l /11rk-h sm
)IO,h STD
l lfltn<h STD
-sw
SH>
s.....,sw
iMHO
1 IIY'k ,,r,
.
ll;p.s.t . J
IJ!iWtfl'" 1
.!.J
Figure 2.8 The "Steel Sch 40" size range set when completed
B. Create a control valve constraint set
Thc tlow control valve has two dcsign requirements. First is thattl
control thc flow to 300 gal/min. Sccond, Lhat it operatc with atleast 5
psid prcssure drop. The flow rcquirement is met by specifying the valve
asan FCV with flow control of 300 gaJ/min. We did thic; alrcady {c;ee
Figure 2.4).
To ohtain the 12 psid pressure drop we must apply a constramt to the
control valve.
l. Open lhe Control Valvc OptimiL.aLion Parumeterl> wi ndO\\ by
sclccling "Control Yalvc Paramctcrs" from Lhe Optimt7ation menu
(scc Figure 2.9)
2. Click the "Create Set" hutton and name the sct Drop Min"
3. In thc grid at the bottom, sclcct the Apply checkhox for 'Pressure
Drop Mnimum"
4. Entera "Valuc" of 12 psid
5. Click the OK buuon
Control 01Jtlllltznt.ion r .nllHUele.rs -
lie<'Jdl.ouM...-un
He<'Jdlon MI'lll1liAn
Mi11mum M111g1nAboveVapo. P,......-.
Oper> Percentage Manum
Open Percerlage M ..........

PreuureDropM......,
Cv V .m. Ma1C111Un

12 psir:l
Figure 2.9 Control valve constraints are created in the Control
Valve Optlmizatlon Parameters wlndow
Similar 10 Lhe pipe sizc range set we created, lhc control valvc constmint
has been creaLed but nol applied.ltthus will havc no effect on the
optimization unti l wc act uall y apply il LO the J2 control valve. We will
do this in Step 3.
Step 3. Apply optimization data
To make use of pipe size range sets and constraint sets, tbey must be
applied Lo the relevant pipes and junctions.
A. Apply optimization data to P1
l. Double-click pipe Pl to opeo the Pipe Specifications window once
again
2. Select the Oplimiz.ation tab (see Figure 2.10)
ol
raint
ill
ce
3. In the Oplimiz.aton area sclcct thc "Optimi zc" option (this
automatically forces selection of thc "lncludc Cost in Cost Repon
and Objective" option)
-L Tn the Linking arca (atthe lower left) select the "Use as a Link Basis
Pipe" option
5. fn the "Size Rangc" list elcct the "Stccl Sch 40" sizc range sct we
created previously (Figure 2.8)
6. Click the OK bunon
Figure 2.10 Optimization data for pipe P1
B. Apply optimization data to P2
l. Double-cli ck pipe P2 to open the Pipe Specilicallons "inclow
2. Selcct the OplimiL.ation tab (scc Figure 2.1 1 )
3. lo the Optimization area select the "Opuma.Le" optaon (this
automaticall y forces selection of the "lnclutle Cost in Co L Report
and Objective" option)
4. l n thc Linking arca (at the lower left) select tbe "Link ro Pipe"
option, with pipe Pl as lhe Link (Lhis dropdown list is a list of aJIIink
basis pipes - one in our case)
5. The "Se Range" List (at the lower right) will automaticaUy select
the size range set of the link basis pipe, which for pipe P J was "Steel
Sch 40". This List is grayed out to indicate it is notan option for pipe
P2 because it is a Jinked pipe.
By nking pipe P2 Lo Pl, we are saying that we want AFT Mercury lo
select the same size pipe for each. lf we did not link them, tbe two sizcs
would be selectcd indcpendently, and mayor rnay not end up being the
same size.
Figure 2.11 Pipe P2 is optlmized and linked to pipe P1
C. Apply optimization data to J2 (FCV)
1. Double-cl ickjunction J2 to open d1e Control VaJve Specifications
window
2. Select the Optimization tab (see Figure 2.12)
Pipe"
st of alll ink
illy select
1 was "Steel
ion for pipe
ercury to
: two sizes
being the
icalions
3. l n the Constraint Sccs arca select the "Press Drop Min" cono;trai m set
re= U-PiDe 1
N-
111ow Ccn>dV- 3 o--"'"'
2
1
l"':<IIM

...
3

1
d ()""' r ---ws
J
o..
lncll.dtt Coot n eo.l f1opoo
Figure 2.12 Control Valve window optimization data
Step 4. Specify Optimization Control
l. Open the Optiminti on Control window [rom lhe Analysis menu (sec
Figure 2. 13)
2. In the "OpLimiLalion Type" area (ut the upper left) ::.elect the
"Pcrform Discrete Optimit.ation" option
3. In the Objecti vc arca (at thc uppcr right) sclcct "Engineering
Parameter" in thc dropdown list at thc top
4. Selcct the ''Minimit.e" option
5. Select rhe ''Pipe Weight" oplion in thc list of four engrneering
parameters
Opt&nuzatiDn Control - - <:1: 'i! q,Ov .,. ~
1 Mod1fed Method ol f d ~ l e Di!ecbom
Figure 2.13 Optimization Control window accepts criteria
specification for how to optimize the pipe system
Step 5. Run the Optimization
We are now in a position to run the optimization. Befare doing so, take a
moment to consider what this model is trying to accomplish. The pipe Pl
am.l P2 sizes will be selected from the "Steel Sch 40" size range setas
the same size, such that their weight is minimized while obtaining a
mnimum 12 psid pressure drop across the control valve.
l. To run the optimizalion, select Run from the AnaJysis menu. This
will start the Solulion Progress window (sce Figure 2.14). The
optimum for Lhis smalJ system is qukkJy found. lt is 11.422 lbm. lL
requircd 18 calls to the Hydraulic Solver to flnd the optimum.
2. Click the "View Output" hurton
n
takc a
ripe PJ
t as
a
bis
11. It
3. The Output window will display. whcrc Lhe oplimiL.ation can
be viewed
01screte Opbmwn Obtant!d
M._..lte<danl 100llll
Rela.abon />JrJntdc
0-Mllhod Modiled Methld Cll f eMtJie OreeliOmo
D.:at
Tcx.llle<aoon1
MDIIGI TCII
...... , !Jet( fe.<1bie Cosl Culeo# Cosl
B7 j1H!181 [l=e __ ______,
,,. )16 20 llbm
nc, <'ft.obl J,.... O'll
Figure 2.14 The SoluUon Progress window shows the progress of
the Hydraulic Solver and Optimizer
Step 6. Review optimization results
l. The Cost Report tab (see Figure 2. 15) show'\ a total weaght of JI ,422
lbm. This should be and is consistenl wiLh the weight shown in the
Solution Progress window (in Figure 2.14). Each pipe weighs 5,711
lbm. which is consisten! wilh the factthey are the same Jength and
linked lo optimizc for Lhe S<lme diameter.
2. Tbe OptirniL.ation Lab ),how!. the optimal pipe .,Le chosen was 8 inch.
The 8 inch pipe over -lOO fecl of leng:th corre.,ponds to a weight of
11,422 lbm.
3. The CV ConstrainLS tab shows thar the 12 psid minimum pressure
drop is satisfied in Lhat Lhe pressure drop for 8 incb pipe was 12.70
psi d.
Figure 2.15 The Output window shows the hydraulc results of the
optimized system, plus the optimal system size
results
ssurc
12.70
of the
Conclusions
This cxample demonstrale!-. AFf Mercury's oplimi.Gation capabilities for
a simple system wilb u i n g l constraint. Enginccring parameter
optimization for wcight is fast and easy to implcmcnl.
1
1
C IIAPTER 3
lnitial and Life Cycle Cost Optimization
Example
Topics covered
This cxamplc dcmonsLratcs somc key features in usi ng AFf Mcrcury Lo
optimize a cooling water systcm for cost.
h i ~ example wi ll cover Lhe followi ng Lopic!.:
Engineering and Cost Databases - 1 Jow to connect ami use
Linking Pi pes- How to limit the numbcr of independem variable..'
SiLe range sets and constraint scls - How Lo set requiremento; on the
system
Optimization Control - How LO optimizc for initial or life cycle cost
Optimization outpul - How to undcrstand the optimiLation results
Required knowledge
This example assume1> that the u::.er hall !lOme familiarity wilh AFf
Mercury sucb as placingjunctionll, connecting pipes. cntering pipe and
junction spccificati on1>, and creating and using pipe \ZC range seLc; am.l
constraints. Refer to Lhe Weight Optimimtion Example in Chapter 2 for
more information on these tapies.
28 AFT 7 .O Quick Start Guide
Model files
This example uses Lhe foJiowing files, which are inslalled in the
Examples folder as part of the AFf Mercury installation:
Cooling System.mrc - AFT Mcrcury model file
Cooling Sysrem.dat - junction cnginecring database
Cooling System.cst - cost database associatcd with Cool ing
System.dat
pipe-sreel-sch40-galv-threaded.cst - cost dalabasc for galvanized
steel
Optimization goals
Getting started
This example uses an existing modelto investigate two optimizalion
cases:
1. Optimize system for initial cost with a 20-year operating period
2. Opt.imize system for lije cycle cost wilh a 20-year operating period.
To begin, start AFf Mercury and load Lhe model fil e Cooling
System.tnrc. This modeJ has a number of dlfferent scenarios. If you are
not familiar with sccnarios, you can rcvicw the Scenario Manager
discussion in the Help system or Chaptcr 5 of Lhe AFT Mercury U ser
Guide.
Open lhe Scenario Manager from the View menu to see the existing
scenarios. Select and load the scenario "20 Year Design/Design for
lnltial Cost". The model should be ready lo run, but first lets understand
what the model is doing. See Figure 3.1.
Led
tion
iod
period.
ou are
r
Jser
mg
or

Chapter 3 lnitial and Life Cycle Cost Optimization Example 29
ffl'i'
4
11
1
2
1
Fhftt,
1
i*'dl:p
c.- - ....- -- - ......... ll'- t!ot
3 :1
e, QA
Figure 3.1 Cooling System example model
Review Optimization Control
Open the Optimization Cont rol wi ndow from the Analysis menu (Figure
3.2). The Optimization Control offcrs a number of features to control thc
optimization process. In Lhe Optimi.wtion Type area, the first selection is
"Do Not Optimize". This is equivalcnt to running AFf Mercury as onc
runs AFf Fathom.
The second selection is "Calculate Costs, Do Not Optimize". This is
identical to thc first sclcction. with the exception that costs are
calculated for thc systcm and displuyed in thc Output ...
Thc tJ1ird selection is "Perform Continuous Optimization". wbich selccts
pipes sizes assuming the are continuous. ln olher words, it
ignores the fact that commercial pipe is avai lable only in discrete sizes.
and instead assumes that any diamcrcr is acceptable.
The fourth selection is more realistic Lhan Lhe lhird bccausc it recognize"
the fact lhat commercial pipes are avaalable Onl)' m dJc;crete sizes, and
chooses the optimal combination of discrete sit.cs.

e; G1!1diert lk!t.el:llolelllod

i_eareh Methocf
Figure 3.2 The Optimization Control window provides features
that control the optlmization process
X
The Optimization Control window aJso provides features to characterize
the optimizalion obj ective. Frequently Lhi s will be to mi nimize certain
monetary cost categories. Also available is Engineering Parameter
optimization, which allows one to minimize the pipe or duct volumes,
weight, surface area, etc. (Weight optimization was used in Chapter 2.)
For calculating life cycle costs, users must provide a System Life and.
optionall y, imerest and infiation rales ro calculare the present value of
the recurring costs.
Simple energy cosls can be entered here, or it can be specified thal
energy costs come from energy cost databascs.
This scenari o assigns a system life of 20 years, and includes only
materi al and install ation costs in the objecli ve. Both of these cost
categori es are non-recu.rring. With only these specified, the model is
1tures
-acterize
ertain
er
1mes,
ner 2.)
: and.
_ue of
.ar
:1 is
attempting to find an optimum based on non-recurring (i.c., first or
tniliaJ) COSL
Review databases
The actual materiaJ and instaUation costs Lhat Lhe Optimizarion Control
window specifics are containcd in cost databases. The cost databases
necdcd for this cooling water cxample alread} exst, and just need to be
accessed.
The Database Manager (opened from the menu) shows all of
Lhe available and connected tlataba&es. Databases can eithcr be
engineering databases or cost datahases. Cost databases are aJways
associated with an engineering database. and are thus displayed
to an engineering database in the dntabasc lists.
Hcrc we will summariLe sorne kcy ospects of databa.,es:
Cost information for a pipe systcm component is accessed from a
cost databasc. Cost databasc Hcms are based on corresponding items
in an cngineering databasc. (The engineering al!.o include
cngineering information <; uch as pipe diameters. hydrauhc loss
factors, etc.)
To access a cost for a particular pipe or junction in a model. that
pipe or junction must be based on items in an engineermg darabase.
Morcover. that must be cmmected.
There can be mulli ple coM databases associated with an<l connected
to an engineering database. This makes it easier to manage costs of
items.
The Database Manager should appcar as shown in Figure 3.3. With thc
"Junction Costs ... ", thc single data base scction is chccked. The scction
should be 'Junction/Componcnt Costs". Thc "STD Stccl Pipe 1"-36''"
database only has thc Pipe Material cost cction selccted.
The engineering associated with these two cost tlatabases are
tJ1e AFf DEFAULT INTERNAL databuse. andan extemal database
caUed "Junct..ions for Cooli ng System". For the cost data in the rwo cost
databases lo be accessed by pipes antl junctions in the model, the pipe
and junctions must use these two engineeri ng databa-;es.
32 AFT Mercu 7.0 Quick Start Guide
Figure 3.3 Oatabase Manager shows avallable and connected
data bases
Review pipe optimization setup
Open pipe PI on the Workspace by double-clicking it. Figure 3.4 shows
the Pipe Specifications window wilh Lhe Pipe Modeltab selected, and
Figure 3.5 shows it with the Optimi.t.ation tab selected.
The Optimization data offcrs Lhe ability lo optimlze or not optimize a
pipe. [f Optimize is i>elected. AFT Mercury will treat Lhe pipe diameter
as a variable and vary it according to cenain criteria that will be
discussed shortly. Why would one choose to not optimize a pipe'! There
could be a number of reasons. but onc good reason is that the pipe
reprcsenL'i a pipe in an existing system and lhe dcsign does not aJJow the
replacement ofthat pipe with a new one. Thereforc its diametcr is fixed,
and optimi.t.ing Lhe pipe would serve no purpose. AJJ pipes in Lhis model
are to be optimized. because it is a ncw system and it makes sense to
select Lhe optimaJ diameters for all pipes.
!Cted
t shows
1, and
ilea
lffieter
, There
e
low Lhe
) fi xcd.
model
! l O
r;
'
Chapter 3 lnitial and life Cycle Cost Optimization Example 33
' c.e- ----- """--
"- o---.......
COQIIP""' F"""ru. j ::!) ......,... ,.:..._j
f'v>oMMI! 1 1 '"""""" 1 0-AIW 1 ... 1 >1 0V> 1 "- 1
.. ITo ... O,.-T. SiooR>oyj
,.,. .. _ 3 n.... iiJ
""- ::::J
..
Figure 3.4 Pipe P1 showing Pipe Model tab.
Pipe size range sets
Whcn the pipe is optimized, the optimaJ di amcter is sclected from a
group of potcntial diamete rs caJled a pipe si7.-e range <;CL A specific pipe
can onl y acccss onc pipe si1.e range set, but a speci fi c pipe size range set
can be accessed by any number of pipes.
As shown in Figure 3.5. Lhe Size Range list shows allthe pi pe size range
sets that for thi s modcl. In this case thcre are three. and one and
onl y one must be selected.
The pipe size range scL<; are crcated in Lhe Pipe Optimization Pammeters
window, which is opcned from the Opti m.i.Lation menu. Tt can al o be
ope ncd by clicking thc Optimization Parameters bmton at thc lowcr nght
(scc Figure 3.5).
Once a sile range set is sclected, thc list of available pipe 'IZC on thc
pipe window is rcstricted 10 pipes in that s izc range .Cl. Look in Figure
3.4 and you can sce the arca normall y describcd a.' "Sue" ' " nO\\
as "Sizc (From Size Range)". Tbe actual pipe
you sclect hcre is analogous to un ini tial guess aL l)le sizc.
34 AFT Mercu 7.0 Quick Start Guide
r.o-
r
r; !.....,..,...,, .. p..,..
r: ... !1
la ..
ttolft
Figure 3.5 Pipe P1 showing Optlmlzation tab.
Pipe constraint sets
Constraints can be applicd to bolh optirnized and unoptirnized pipes.
ConsLraints are dcsign limitations on certain pararneters. For example.
there muy be a design rcqujremcnt that the velocity cannot excccd 10
fcelfsecond. As the optimizer cvaluates different pipe sizes. if a
particular SUe resuiL-; in a velocity greatcr lhan 1 O feelfsecond. that pi pe
size is rejected because it causes a constraint vioJation.
When a pipe that is not optirn.Ued has a constraint. it means thatlhe
optimized pipe sizes cannot be such that it violates the constrainl for the
unoptirniL.ed pipe. Thcrc can be multiple consLraints in a conslrainl set..
and multiple constraint sets applied Lo a pipe. For instance, in addition to
a maximum velocity limit. a maximum pressurc limit may exist.
Constmints are contained in constraint sets, whi ch are crcated in the Pipe
Oplimilation Parameters window. This window is opencd from the
Optimit.ation menu or by clicking the Opti..mization Parameters bunon at
the lower right (sce Figure 3.5).
o
.:.

.ample.
:ed 10
1
that pipe
l the
1lL for the
:nt set,
ddition to
:1 the Pipe
the
button at
As shown in Figure 3.5, pi pe P 1 has 1 wo constraint sets applied. lf yo u
open !he Pi pe Optimintion Paramctcrs window, you wi ll the "Max
Velocity" constraint is 12 feetlsec. and the "Min Pre.." constraint is 15
psia. Olher pipes in this model can havc different consrraints apped
according to the design requircmcnts. You can view the constraint seLs
for each pipe in the Model Data window. In addition, you can' iew Lhe
pipes using each consLraint in thc Optimilation Summary window.
Pipe linking
Pipe Linking is the process whereby certain groups of pipes are specified
to have thc same pipe siL.e. As pipes are linkcd it reduces the number of
design variables ami allows the optimi zer to run (aster. lt also has lhe
effect of simplifying the design.
An unlinked pipe is one lhat has no link::. lo any other pipe, a.nd no othcr
pipes linked to ir. A "link bas is" pipe is one that is not linked to other
pipes, but allows othcr pipes to link Lo it. A linked pipe is one linked to
another pipe that is a link basis pipe.
There is a fourlh type of linking. whi ch is related to dcpendent design
cases. Tbis is discussed in the next chapter.
ln this model. pipe PI is a link basis pipe. To lind out how the pipe
linking is speci fi cd, opcn thc Optimiattion Summary wi ndow from the
Optimization menu and select the LiniJng tab. lf you select the Expand
Tree button, the window shoul d look likc Figure 3.6. This rree
graphically shows the number of dcsign variables that AFf Mercury will
!-.Oive. This particular model has twenty-one pipes that are be ing
optimized. but because of linking it has onl y six link basis pipes. and
thus six design variables. You can also view the pipe link.ing by
the Color Linkcd Pipes feature on the OptimizaLion menu.
Optmn1ahot1 Sumnwv

J
& 0PIPOlirb
PI JPipoj-l.W<B&tls(IWJ
w P21 IPopol
F : P2 JPpel - Lri a ... f7 inhl
- P3
P ll'loel
f'S lf'll>eJ
- F{,
f'111"4>eJ
e PB
P9
: PIO ,_, l.ri a-
"' % P11

PI ' Ploel
P15 JP.>ol
P18 Pc>ol
e P19
F = P13 Btt(IW)
- P16 l'lpej
s : .... n
H.-OIQ-..sP-il 8-n!ll......., 6
llll.irNd.,.. 15
ll-a1P.-NOIODI11111:!111
Figure 3.6 Linking lnformation shows the linking relationshlps
for a model.
Creating pipe size range sets and constraint sets
Tbc pipe size range sets are created in the Pipe OptimiL.ation Parameters
window, which is opencd from the Optimization menu.lt can also be
opened by clicking the Optimization Parameters button (see Figure 3.5).
The source of cost data for each of these size range sets i specified in
the Cost Database Source list (Figure 3.7). In our case. the selection il> lO
use all cunnected cost databases, which mcans to use the data sources as
specified in the Database Manager.
":!]
........ ~
H ...
nships
rameters
so be
urc 3.5).
fied in
tion is to
turccs as
1
r
!!
Figure 3.7 Pipe slze range sets are created and modified in the
Pipe Optl mlzation Parameters window.
The Pipe Optimization Paramctcrs window. Constramt Sets tab. 1s
shown in Figure 3.8. Hcrc constraint scts for pipe!. are created. These
constraint sets can be applicd to thc pipes of your choosing. For
example, if all pipes havc a maximum vclocity of 12 feelfsec. then that
constraim set should be applicd to all pipes in tbe model. Th1 i done on
each pipe window, in thc Constrajnrs Scts area ~ shown in Figure 3.5.
Review junction optimization setup
Opcn pump junction J3 on the WorJ..space by double-clicking iL Figure
3.9 shows Lhe Pump Specifications wimlow wllh the Pump Modeltab
sclecled. and Figure 3. 1 O shows it with the Optimiz.ation tab selected.
Pie!!..,. :,IJI.I,.,.I-tonmn
F'\.,...... . ...
PtHtUt t SIMio OIJbtt Mlnmum
Pattull SllCIC Mtlllml.lfl\
P!anne SIAIII" 0vfll1i! Mn1111 1
ll'""'-
Figure 3.8 Pipe Constraint Sets are created and modified in the
Pipe Optimization Parameters wlndow.
Optimizing systems with pumps
A pump can be modeled as a pump curve. a fixed flow, ora fixcd bead
rLc;e. The fundamental reason one would choose one approach ovcr Lhe
olhef'b if one is trying Lo identify thc pumping requirements for thc
purposes of choosing a pump (in which case one would modelthc pump
as a fixed fl ow). or if one already has a specific pump identified (in
which case one would model the pump as a pump curve). l t could be the
case that one docs not ha ve a specific pump selected, but does ha ve
severdl candidatc pumps. In Lhis case. it would be best to modcJ cach
candidate pump as a pump curve, and do this within a scenario crcated
for each pump.
[1,,
1
1 in the
!d head
ver !he
Jr lhe
be pump
(in
Id be tbe
ave
ea eh
:reatcd
11'

,_.,..;, 1 Opi,nor 1 1 1
,__

r. ..........,FiowRF-
(" ,..... fboi R.. r .,.
,.. f!,o:dRaol'.al
r A.,....af\a.r .. "
Figure 3.9 Pump junctlon J3 Pump Model tab
,._
._ ........
0-l.S
("''tl!:ut..,J,:' ''---------

,.. Do""' 1"4- tnd
r -c.., c.. a-ll'l\l
r.

AIIO,..,..... ....
-FIIFAr. C.OST DTA!IA.'iE) U>ro-
.....
-cos HUlnPI.IEAI!ffllf[-
""*"ttl 100 \
ln:tJJ.M.t:>n 100.'
" '"""""'"" 100 ------'

,.. ,,_,......., ,
Figure 3.10 Pump junction J3 Pump Optimization tab
40 AFT Mercury 7 .O Quick Start Guide
Modeling a pump as a flxed flow
Thc pumps in our cooling water case are both modeled as fixed nows of
3000 gpm. ln conjunclion, the control val ves al J4 and J7 are modeled as
a fixed pressure drop of 5 psid. This modcl thus reprcsents a frrst cut
model wbere. based on Lhe fina cut results, the rwo pumps will become
actual purnps wilb pump curves. and thc J4 and J7 control val ves will
become flow control valves controlling ro 3000 gpm.
As already state<l whcn a pump is modeled as a fixed tlow, it is not a
specific pump from a spccific manufacturer. Thus, the costs for the
pump can only be approximated. Toa first approximation. it !lhould be
possible to estimate the non-rccurring cost (i.e., material and installation
cost) for the pump ~ a function of power requirements. For instance, a
typical one horsepower pump (of spccific conliguration and materials of
construclion) may cost $2000, and a ten horsepower may cost $4000.
Olher typicaJ costs for diffcrcnt power requiremenL-; can be
approximated. The actual cost for the pump will. of course, highly
depend on the application. Thesc cosLs are emered into a cost database,
and are accessed by the optimizer. As AFI' Mercury evaluates different
combinalions of pipe sizcs. cach combination wiU require a certain
power fTom the pump. With a cost assigned Lo this power, AFT Mercury
can obtain a cost to cmer into the objcctive funclion which it opti mi zes.
Later in this chapter, we willlook atthe o s ~ for the pumps in our
example cooling water ncLwork.
[n addilion Lo non-recurring costs, rccurring costs can also be estimated.
SpecificaJJy, the cost of the power uscd by tbc pump over a period of
time (which AFT Mercury calls thc "systcm lifc") can be determined.
All AFT Mercury needs b an overall pump efficiency lo determine the
actual powcr from the ideal power. Again, sincc we do nol ha ve a
specific pump selected yet. the efficiency can only be approxirnated.
AFT Mercury calls thh the "nominal efficiency" (see Figure 3.9). ln
adclilion, uscrs can provide a "nominal NPSHR".
A step-by-step method of pump selection proceeds in two phascs. The
steps are outlines in the Hclp System and in Chapter 12 ofthe AFT
Mercury U ser Guide.
l cut
eco me
\\ill
nota
he
uld be
aJiatJor
.nce. a
rials ot
000.
y
lbac;e,
l'erem
n
[ercUf)
mizes.
r
nated.
1 of
aed.
e the
:d.
In
The
Junction costs
There are thrcc choices in specifying the co,t of a junction. The. e
choices are provided on lhe Optimi1ation tab in the junction'l>
Specificalioru. window (see Figure 3. 1 0).
l. Do Not lnclude in Cost - As il a y ~ the cost of the junction is
enlirely neglected.
2. fncludc in Cost Repon Only- This repons aU costs for the junction.
but does nol include the cost in the objecti ve function. The costs
thus do not impact the overall optimization process.
3. lnclude in Cost Report and Objective- This reports aU cosLc; for the
junction, and includcs the cost an the objective funclion. Tbe
junctioo costs are lbus allowed lo influence the optimization procesl..
Junction constraint sets
Juncons do not have size range scts as do pipes. but many have
constraints. Juncti on constraints funclion similarly to pipe constraints.
Sorne examples ofj unction constraints are pump NPSH and control
vaJve pressure drop. Junction constraint sets are specilied similarl y lo
pipes. by selecting the constrainr sets from the provided li,L
Creating junction constraint sets
Junction constraint sets are crcated in a similar way to pipe constraint
seL'i. Constraint scts for purnps, control val ves, and other lypes of
j unctions are crcated on three differenl wimlows opened from tbe
Optimization mcnu. Figure 3. 11 show!-. a pump constraint set uscd in the
cooli ng water examplc we are rcvicwing. Figure 3. 1 O shows this
constraint applied Lo pump J3. lt is also applied to pump J6.
tomllant !.'11 1
CanoiiM Tta Mlldel
ToShAc11 M"""!"'
Head Rmt To Snutoll Mnnun
NPSH M1n1mum 1 O lee!
NPSP Margon Mu,,...m
% NPSH M111gn Mrwnum
I'IM1Ue M_,..,
f'l....._.eM........,
f'lem.re Re M a.,....
Presoute Ar:e Mnmum
PowerMllltlllliJI11
PowerMn....m
:: Fb.o o1 BEP
Figure 3.11 Constralnt sets for pumps are created in the Pump
Optlmizatlon Parameters window.
Understanding the model
Before runnng Lbe mo<.lel, lets d scuss sorne kcy aspects of thc model.
You may want to revew Lhc actual model tsclf as we dscuss Lhese
points.
l. The system s a closed loop cooli ng water system, modeled as
constant propertcs at 100 deg. F.
2. The overdJI goal of the model s Lo size thc two pumps, J3 and J6, for
flows of 3000 gpm each, and in the process find an optimal pump
an<.l pipe system combination.
3. Aftcr the design is complete, thc now through the pumps will be
controlle<.l by llow control val ves located at J4 and J7. Since we are
Pump
e modcl.
Lb ese
:das
i
and J6. for
:d pump
will be
tce we are
Chapter 3 lnitial and Ufe Cycle Cost Optimization Example 43
sizing the pump!>, we set the J4 and J7 control val ves toa pressure
drop of 5 psid. The choice of 5 psid is not arbitrary. but comes from
a design requirement for this systcm that the now control val ve
shall, ata mnimum. have a 5 psid pressure drop.
4. There are no individual now control valvcs for the three heat
exchangers. J 11 , J 13 and J 15. but therc is a rcquirement that each
receive at lcast 1900 gpm. We thereforc nccd Lo size the pipes such
that this mnimum now is achieved. To accomplish lhis. a pipe
constraint set called " Hx min tlow" cxlsts. You can review thls in
the Pipe Optimiation Parameter'i window opened from the
Optimizalion window. This constraint is applied to pipes Pll-20.
Since thc fiow through pipes P1 7-20 are the same, we really only
need to apply the mnimum l'l ow constrai nt lo one of these, since
they will aH have the same llow. Applying itto all four is somcwbat
redundant, but no harm wi ll result and lhcrc should be no noticeable
impact on lhe model run time. The same redundancy also exists for
pipes connecting Lhe other two hea.t cxchanger:o..
5. A!> shown in Figure 3.6. the pipes are linked such that there are six
independent pipe si7es (i.c . dcsign variables) that will be included.
The linki ng is such that pipes that should have the samc size are
linked togethcr. For instancc. it makes sense that the suction and
discharge pipes for thc pumps ha ve the same size, and Lhat each of
the two pumps has thc samc si.le pipe U!> the other. Thercfore. all
eight pipes in thc pumping scction are linked togcthcr (i.c .. pipes 2-
9). with pipe 2 being thc link basis (any uf the eight pipes could be
chosen as the link basis. and yield identical results).
6. A design requirement exists such that thc maximum velocity in any
pipe is 12 feet/sec. The pipe constraint "Max velocity" includes this,
and it is applied to all pipes in the modcl. (You can see which pipes
use thls constraint in Lhe Optimit.ation Summary window).
7. All pipes have thc mnimum pressure constraint applied of 15 psia
(the "Min prcss" constraint).
8. Tbcrc are NPSH constraints applied to each pump sucb that the
NSPHA must be at least 1 O feet above the NPSHR (see Figure 3.11 ).
The nominal NPSHR is set to 50 feet (scc figure 3.9).
9. Each pump has a nominal cfficicncy of 70%.
10. Tbe two pump!t and four elbows are spccificd to "fnclude in Cost
Rcport and Objective" (see Figure 3.10 for pumps).
1 l . Thc two cost databascs, shown in Figure 3.3, have cost data for the
pipes, pumps and elbows. You can use the Cost Databasc window
opcned from the Database menu to rcvicw the cost data for thcse
databases. 1n summary, there is cost data for the pumps as a funclion
ofpower.
12. There is an energy cost for power of a fixed 0.11 U.S. dollars per
kW-hr (Figure 3.2). The cost is fi.xed in that is assumed lo be
constant over the system life. l t is possible to increasc or decrease
the cost ovcr time using energy cost databases.
Running the scenarios and interpreting results
For each of lhe scenarios we wiiJ evaluate. thc only change will be in the
Optimization Control window. The firsl case is the one we have bcen
reviewi ng.
Scenario to minimize first cost
As shown in Figure 3.2. the system life is set Lo 20 ycars for this
sccnario, and thc objective only includcs costs for ma[erial and
instaJlation.
Choose Run from the Analysis menu. When the model is run. AFT
Mercury cvaluates a range of pipe si .le combi nalions, and finds the one
that minirnizes Lhe sum of material and installalion costs (i.c., initial
cosr).
The Cost Report is shown in the General Seclion of Lhe Oulput windo\\
(sce Figure 3 . 12). AFT Mercury shows aU costs in the Cost Report, e ver
those thal were not used in the oplimilalion. The total cost for Lhi s
system is $5,738,800. (The Output Control has been setup to show coSb
in Lhousands of U.S. Dollars, and to show one decimal.) This includcs al
costs over 20 years. The first cost, which was the basis for the
optimizalion, was tJ1e total of the rnaterinl and installalion ($616,000).
This total is also thc cost shown as Lhc "ltems in Objective". Again, AFr
Mcrcury minimizcs Lhe objecti ve. and Lhu, Lhe cost that was minimized
was Lhe $616,000 cost shown in the Cost Report as "Items in Objecti ve
Individual items whose cost contributed to Lhe objeclive are shown with
a green background in Lhe cell.
data for the
window
for thcse
as a funcon
ollars per
lO be
r decrease
iJl be in Lhe
mve beco
I. AFf
1ds the one
.. inilial
tul window
cven
Jr Lhis
show costs
. incl udcs aJI
e
516.000).
Again, AFf
minimized
Objective".
;hown wi th

Tibie U"'
r,. ..... TOHII. Mateoal
U>tl(lloo:(T-liiiJ
T
616 6 0.0 5. 122.3
GIGG 00 0.0
dJYO 5. 122.3 00 0.0 5. 122.3
5Jl 6 531 .6 o. o o. o
Ppt 799 7'!9 DO 00
o

330 1l0 00 00 00
82

DO 00 00
P
...,. ,..,.
330 JJO 00 00 00
P5
...,. ,..,.
4S 00 a o 00
P6
p.,. ,..,.
po 00 no 00
P7
p.,.
,..,.
82 00 no 00
P8 p.,.
,..,.
no 00 00 00
1'2 p.,.

le 00 00 00
!>10 Por>o 'J'.Ie 00 00 OD
P11 Fop. p.,. 00 00 00
P12 Fopo
00 a o DO
P1J Plpo 6.7 00 00 OU
P14 Pipe OO. 00 DO
P15 Pooe 50 00 00 00
PI S Popo POPe 61 00 OO. 00
P17 p,Je Popo 00 00 00
P18 p.,. Popo. 00 00 00
P19 P!IJO p.. 50 00 00 00
P2ll P.,. f\,o
1
00 no no
PZI
p p.,. 11'1 00 DO o
Bend Sublolal 2.1 n.o n.o DO
[:
5 Bond Send 08 00 DO DO
3 Bend
...,
08 00 DO 00
J 4 B...J hui Ov 00 lO
J16 e..,.
'"""
(1) QQ
Sublolal Gl' BZ.J n.o 51173 51223
;J
"'""
m 00 "1i71
J6
""""
p
ll .!.6115 3119 DO 2 57n1 51'11
Figure 3.12 The Cost Report in the Output window shows the total
and individual costs (in thousands of U.S. Dollars) for
the optlmized system .
Other cosL'\ that are displayed in the CosL Repon are "ltems Not in
Objeclive". These are items thal ha ve costs associated with them. but
wcre not included in the objective that was minimizetl.
Note that the "[tcms Not in Objective" total lo $5.122.300. Looking
across al the subtotal one can sec Lhat aiJ of this cosl is Operation!Energy
(i.e., pump powcr costs). Thc total cost is the sum of the two. or
$5,738,800. Why was thc Opcration/Energy Cost not added to thc ltcms
in Objectivc? Thc rcason relates to lhe Oplimtation Control settings, as
shown in Figure 3.2. Hcrc onc sces that the objective is set ro rn.inimilc
only material and installarion cost. CosL'\ related to mainrenance and
operation/energy are thus not minimed. u thts is still not clcar. read
through to the ncxt scction which optirni.Les with operationlenergy costs
inclutled.
Optimized pipe sizes
The actual pipe siz.es chosen as optimum are shown in Figure 3. 13. This
is the Optimization lab in thc Output window pipe section area. Along
with the optimized pipe sizes. thc pipe Linking il> shown and the cost of
each pipe.
1;! Output 1\- -4
Opbnuzation 1 Ptpe Corulratntt 1 Oatab.lse SOUicet 1
Opt Opt Type/Sch Opl FI,Yd. Ptpe linking
Size O!amete1
_ 1_ STO (schedule 30)

14 tnch STO (schedule 30)
3 14 rnch STO (schedule 30)
14 rnch STO (schedule 30)
14 1nch SJ.Q_ [schedule 30)
14 rnch i STO 30)
14 tnch STO (schedule 30)
11
.....,.,_;:;...,14tnch STO (schedule 30)
14 1nch STO (schedule 30)
16tnch STO Lschedule 30)
10 inch STO (schedule 40)
10 inch STO (schedule 40)
.,
11
._-=-1 121nch STO
1 O 1nch STO (schedule 40)
10 1nch STO (schedule 40)
STO
STO (schedule 40)
STO (schedule 40)
STD [schedule 40)
STD (schedule 40)
STO (schedule 30
inches)
15.25 BasiS ptpe
13.25 Bas1s pipe
13.25 Linked lo P2
13.25 Ltnked to P2
13.25 Linked to P2
13.25 Linked to P2
13.25 Linked lo P2
13.25 Linked to P2
13.25 LJnked to P2
15.25 Basts ppe
10.02 Basis pipe
1 O. 02 Linked to Pll
12.00 B asis pipe
10.02 Unked to P11
10.02 Linked to P1 1
12.00 Linked lo P13
10_02 Basts pipe
10.02 Ltnked to Pll
1 O. 02 Ltnked to P11
10.02 Linked to P17
15 25 Linked to Pl
Opt Co$t)
V aloe
tU.S
79.876
32.984
8.246
32.984
4.948
32.984
8.246
32.984
4.948
99.845
5.035
5,035
6.745
5.035
5.035
6.745
5,035
5.035
5.035
5.035
139.783
Figure 3.13 Optimized pipe sizes are shown in Output window
pipe sectlon.
Checking source of cost data
In both the pipe and junction sections of the Output window. there are
lables called Database Source. These show Lhe source of all data for
each pipe and junction. This is useflJl for model vcrification.
3.
Uong
OSl Of
.876
.984
246
.984
.948
.984
246
.984
948
845
035
035
745
035
035
745
035
035
)35
J35
783
lW
are
ata for
Chapter 3 lnitial and Lite Cycle Cost Optmzation Example 47
Scenario to minimize lite cycle cost for 20 years
Using Scenario Manager, load thc sccnario called "20 Year
Design/Oplimit.e for Life Cyclc Cost". Open the Optimization Control
window. and you can scc thc objcctive now has operation!cncrgy cost
selected (Figure 3. 14). This is thc only difference from the prcvjous
scenario. Let's call thc previous sccnario Lhe "firsl cost" sccnario and this
one the "life cycle cost" sccnario .
>Ut. "Do tfot Opbmc:e

(: Poffonn
r.
f"' GenellcAigolyn Melhod

1 Modlied ol DrecllOn: :a
Advetad 1
5.-ControlfOIIMI 1 f!dCtrooF'- 1
tnefll!ICost ----
,. U"' E"""l"' Coot Delabatet
1 Dbtect1ve
IMonetary
r- r. M-
P Vll!fn lor S<b:xinClO et C.XU
3 r E:ntbio to.., Castt
!F :ar
Figure 3.14 Optlmization Control setti ng for "20 Year
Design/Opti mize for Life Cycle Cost " scenario
By including operaliun/energy cusL'i in lhe objective, we are now lrying
to rninimize the sum of the material , installalion and operatiun/energy
cost. This may cause the material and in!>tallatiun costs LO increase. Lel's
see wbal happens.
Ruo lhe model and look at lhe resulls in the Cosl Report (Figure 3.15).
11:outpul ., , ' 't
Figure 3.15 Cost Report for llfe cycle cost optmizaton scenario.
There are a number of itcms of note:
l. The overall cost is now $5.079,900. Taken on its own, this
represents a savings of about $658,900 over tbe first cost scenario
wbich was design based on Cirst cost. Tbis represents an 11.5% CO!)L
reduclion. See Table 3.1.
2. The "Jtems Not in Objcctivc" category is now zero, whereas it was
substantial in the firsl cost scenario. The reason is that we have
included all costs in the objective based on the settings in
IW trying
'energy
:ase. Let's
e 3.15).
11.1 4.218 8
IU 4.218 8
0..0 0.0
0. 0
DO
0.0

00
no
DO
DO
DO
00
00
DO
00
00
00
DO
00
DO
D. O
00
1
0 0 1
00
DO
o o
DO
:m ario.
!nario
5% cost
was
ave
Optimi1ation Control. To be complete, the Optimi7..ation Control did
not include maintenancc costs. but there were no maintenance costs
in any of thc cost databascs. You can see this by lookjng at thc Cost
Repon column for Maintcnance. lf there were maintenance cosLc; in
these cost there would be values in this column and the
"Items Not in Objective" would not be 7ero unless Optimization
Control was modified to include maintenance cost.
3. The "Jtems in Objective" category now include!'l all cost items. and
the Cost Report brcals this down further into a Non-Recuning Sub
Total ($861 ,000) and a Rccurring Sub Total ($4,218.800).
4. Bccausc Opcration/Encrgy costs are now included in the objective,
the cells for Operation/Encrgy are colored greco whereas before they
were nol. Looking atthe !>Ource of operation/encrgy costs. one sees
it comes from the pumps (whi ch will ulways be the case for
operalion/energy
5. In the first cost sccnario, the non-rccurring cosl wus $616,600. while
the overall cost was $5.738,800. Now thc non-recuni ng cost is
$861.000 while thc overall cost is $5,079.900. The lirst costthus
increased by about $244.400 in arder to reduce the operating cost
from $5, 122.300 to $4.218.800 (a rcduclion of about $903,500).
6. The source of the operating coM is the cost of power for thc pumps.
To reduce pump power usage, ll sense to increase Lhe pipe
sia and thus reduce frictional losse!'l. For the AFf Mercury
"Optimize for Life Cycle Cost" scenari o, AFf Mercury optimizes
Lhe su m of these two cost!>. The larger pipe si7es can be reviewed by
looking at the Output window pipe Optimi7ation tab. and also are
summarit.ed in Figure 3. 16.
7. Now it o;hould be clcarer why thc operation/energy coste; were
included in the Cost Repon of lhe lirst cost scenario. If they were
noL in the Cost Rcport of the tirst cost sccnario, the totaJ cost would
be $616,600. Sincc the lifc cycle cost sccnario total cost is
$5,079.900, it would appcar (atlirst glancc) to be a
But that is mislcading. Just becausc thc opcrating were not
included in Lhc first cost scenario' objecuve not mean they do
not exjst. To gel a clear comparison between designing for fi rst cost
and life cycle cost one nceds ro makc an "apples to apples"
comparison, including all rclcvant costs in each case. The approach
taken in this chaptcr docs this.
50 AFT Mercury 7 .o Quick Start Guide
8. If, after having pcrformed the optimizalion, one sti ll wants to design
the system for first cost, the firsl cosl scenario results provides the
optimal system desjgn Lo minimize ftrst costs. l mportantly. the
designer has quantitative data on the impact of first cosl design on
operation/energy costs of lhe system.
Table 3.1 Cost Summary of Optlmlzatlon Runs for Cooling System
Opti.mi.zcd for: Ma!rial lnstallation Total Operang Total (systcm + Rcduction j
l nitiaJ CusL 1 O yr 383.900 232.700
Life cycle cost 1 O yr 509.900 272.200
fniti al CO!il 20 yr 383.900 232.700
U fe cycle cost 20 yr 572,900 288, 100
J1
Prcnurrza1
~
P21
16tntn
20 onch
22uodJ
Opttmtzed for nlttal cost
Optlmlzed for 10 year fe cyclo;
Optl mized for 20 year life cycJe
System operntion)
616,600 2.561. 100 3. 177,700
782.000 2. 169.100 2.951.200
616.600 5.122.300 5.738,800
86 1 ,O(K) 4,2 18,800 5,079,900
226,5001
658,900
Jlij
Pl&
12 nch
18 neh
18 neh
J17
I':ZU
10 tnch
1:0: tncn
14 111Gh
Figure 3.16 Pipe sizes selected by AFT Mercury for first cost and
lite cycle cost over 20 years.
sto dcsign
lides lhe
, !.he
esign on
19 System
Reduction

o
JU

2 ncr
18 nch
18inch
J17

tO
. ,,nctl
t 4nch
IJie
)St and
Chapter 3 lnitial and life Cycle Cost Optimization Example 51
Optimizing with pump curve data
Conclusions
Once lhe pump is si7ed then actual pumps can be modeled. The actual
pump should closely match the sizing rcsults in the following areas:
generated head at rhe design tlow. efficicncy at Lhe design tlow. and
COSL
Reviewi ng lhe sit.ing results one can see that the optirnum system calls
for a pump of about 14 7 hp thut generate1> about 136 fcct of head at 3000
gpm. Thc nominal erficiency used in the si7i ng part of the analysis was
70%. The material cost for such u pump was about $23.200. and the
installation cost was about $7600. Note that if no actual pumps can be
found that renectthese requirements, then the process should be
repeated with better performance nnc.l/or cost data for thc pump.
Using cost databases in thc optimization proccss in vol ves increased
complexity from simple engineering parameter optimization as discussed
in Chapter 2. Howevcr. it more powerful oplimizat ion options
including the ability to optimi ze costs ovcr a system life cycle.
CHAPTER 4
Multiple Design Case Example
Topics covered
This example wiH optimi:tc thc pipe si.tes for a water suppl y system toa
housing developmcnl wherc thcrc are two <.lesign cases. Tbis example
uses monet.ary cost optimiL.ation.
Thjs example will cover the following tapies:
How dependem dcsign cases are uscd to s:uisf} two different
operating modes for a system
Pipe linling and t ~ effect on how well AFT Mercury can optimize a
sy!>tem
Required knowledge
This examplc assumes that thc uscr has sorne familiurity with AFr
Mercury such as placing juncti on!>, connecting pipes, entcring pipe and
junction specifications. and crealing amlul>ing pipe size range sets and
constr:nt-;. Rcfcr to the Weight Optiminllion Examplc in Chapter 2 for
more information on Lhese lopics.
Model files
Housing Project.mrc- AFT Mercury model file
Pipe-PVC-sch40.cst- Pipe cost database for PVC pipe
Optimization goals
Getting started
This example uses an existing mo<.lelto invesligatc a single system wilh
two opcrating cases. Tbe cases are the following:
l. Normal flow Lo houses and fire hydrant closed. Supply lo eacb
house must be atleast 10 gaJ/min with a mnimum stalic pressure
of 60 psig.
2. North Hydrant open with at leastlOO gpm and atleast 90 psig
mnimum static pressure. During fires the supply to each house
must be at least 2 gpm wilh no mnimum prcssurc requirement.
For this example, we will evaluate both operating cac.;es. First, we will
use AFf Mercury to oplimiz.e assuming a requirement to use oruy one
pipe size tlrrougbout tbe system. After this we will optimize lhe pipes
assurning the pipes can be al most three different sizes.
Stan AFT Mercury and open the "lwusing projecr.mrc" file. Select the
scenario "Base Scenario/Optimize<.l Cases/One Dep. Case/1 Design
Variable (Case 1 )" (see Figure 4. 1 ).
This example consists of a reservoir (i.e., West Lake) atan elevation of
235 feetlhat suppet. water to 10 houses and one tire hydranl. AIJ Lhe
pipes in the system are Schedule 40 PVC pipe. The supply line to each
house is set to l incb PYC. The optimization of this system will only be
used to siz.e lhe supply Une from the reservoir and the neighborhood
mains and h ydrant.
tem witb
each
)TeSSllfC
psig
10use
me m.
'Ve will
lly one
pipes
ect the
.ign
aon of
tU the
oeach
only be
ood
Review model
Chapter 4 Multiple Design Case Example 55
8o:t' Sn:na10
- u-t ....
. r...ts_,, r-ao ... c....t
- OrwOs C..:t
Q@ldb. $ E i

Figure 4.1 Scenarlo Manager for Houslng Projec1 example
The suppl y lo each under normal LO gpm with a
minimum of 60 psig static pressure. The primary design case. " onnaJ
Water Suppl y", is shown in Figure 4.2. was built in the Base
Scenario. which is not the scenario we are currentl y revie\\ ing.
X
For the supply lines Lo cach house (pipes 40-54). Lhe pipe siLe is Jixed to
one inch and wiJI nol be optimizcd. Wc wam Lo flnd the single ptpe sue
lhat will serve for Lhc suppl y from Lhc rcscrvoir. the "neigbborhood
mains'', and thc hydranL (pipes 1-25, and 80). To do this. we have to
establish one pipe as the "link basis p1pe" and thcn link alllhe other
pipes (exccpt thc pipes Lo thc houscs) to th, pipe. For tJlli. example. Pipe
1 was choscn as the link basis pipe. 1f wc look at the Oplimization
Summary window. wc can scc lhat all Lhc p1pes are linked together.
Figure 4.3 shows the Optimizati on Summary Window for thil> scenari o.
Figure 4.2. Primary Desi gn Case layout of Housing Project, whlch
is In the Base Scenario.
You can aJso investigute thc sizc range sets and pipe consLrainL sels for
this model in lhe Pi pe Optimization Parameters window opened from thc:
Optimization menu. The s i1c range set incJudes aJJ PVC Schedul e 40
pipe from 1 inch to 1 O inchcs. Two pipe constraint sets ha ve been set up
for a mnimum outlet ~ t t i c prcssure of 60 psig for supply to the houses
anda mnimum outlet static prcssurc of 90 psig for thc fire hydrant.
"/
1
:t, which
>eL'I for
from the
le40
set up
bouses
ant.
foclrh
- : f>1 ls.m.IJ\oh<IIIR-1- lri S..nfl71riaJ

2 P11
e f'\2 IN"\ttu ...... M.,
P1l
; e PU (Neogtbcohood M""J
"' P1 5
E: a P20 (N"\tot...t...,. Ml
;e P21
ffi 6 P22 tNIII!)hbcltoood M..,l
11 fr.n [llo91bomoodM""'I
:; w P24 (NIW;lhbomood Mlllli
W W p;>!o [Nooghtv.IOM<I M_,J
R !!!!' P80 (Lne lo No1th Hyd.>nt)
.. P101 OOI>Ond..-.1 Oo"'l" l ri
1
Lriod '17
Figure 4.3 Optlmlzatlon Summary Wlndow with all the
nelghborhood mains and the hydrant linked
How the dependent design case was created
Acr we creatcd the primary design model shown in Figure 4.2, we
crcatcd onc dependen/ desixn ("0.\e. A dependenL design case (or DDC)
in AFf Mercury is a Lhat models the l>ame physical pi pes and
junctions as thc prirnary dcsign but with tlifferent operating
requiremenls. The dependcnt dcsign case for this model is when Lhe
North Fire HydranL is opcncd. When the hydram is opened, the llow out
of thc hydram is 100 gpm and thc homes are aUowed lo drop to 2 gpm
cach.
Here are the steps to create this DDC for the fi r.,t time:
l. Opcn thc Optimit.ati on Control wi ndow (from the Analysis menu)
and select the "Enabled Dcpcndem Del>ign ca. ... es" option at tbe
lowcr lcft (Figure 4.4). ClicJ... OK.
2. Choose Sclcct AJI from the Edil menu.
3. Open Duplicate Special (from the Edil menu), enteran incremenl of
100 and selecl "Make Dependent Design Case", and "Clear
Constraims" (Figure 4.5). Cli ck OK.
4. Move Lhe duplkated pipes and junctiom. to distinguish them from
tbc original ones from Lhe Primary Design Case (Figure 4.6).
5. Open the J 180 hydranr to flow in thc DDC by selecting it and
toggling off the Spccial CondiLi on sctting on Lbe EdiL menu.
6. Opcn Lhc pipe connected to the hydnmt DDC by double-clicking
pipe P180. Apply the "Fire Supply" by checki ng the
adjaccnt box (Figure 4.7).
7. Use Global Junction Edit (from the Edit menu) to cbange all ofthe
as-;igned now junctions at Lhe DDC homcs (junctioru. 140-154) from
10 gpm Lo 2 gpm (scc Figure 4.8).
Oplrnuzatron [onttol ;:!$:
r:: O o Optlll<ll!
r' !'Winm1
r, Qloclole Opt11n11at10rt
Ol!ie<llvo-=o-
Oependent design
case modeling
enabled here
Figure 4.4
lcr J
Dependent Deslgn Cases modeling is enabled in t he
Optimization Control window
rernent
nfrom
'.
nd
cking
lhe
U ofthe
54) frorr
n the
-
Duplicate Special . ~
P !nctemeti All P ~ and Jt.rJChon Numbets By. 1100
r ueate loup
r H.ge tn Output
P Make Oependent Oesagn Case
r t.eep; Ba 1
P" !;lear Constr n t s
Figure 4.5 Duplicate Special ls the easiet way to create a
dependent deslgn case
\
1"
...
...
. ..
m
@]
t-.1ILM
\
"101
....
,
J ! ID ,
@)
1
.... r
""
..
...
...
Jlll
l9l '1?
JIJt

,.,.
-
IUI
" ' c.:.mt
'
\ '111
'

ca.
il
'16J
.,.
.....
.llV"
, ...
, ....
.......
al
. ..
,"'"
.. , ...
......

\ Jt't
'""

Figure 4.6 Workspace with Primary Design Case (at top) and one
Dependent Deslgn Case (at bottom)
e
Chapter 4 Multple Desgn Case Example 61
,,
1111
: l> .. ... 1:'__.!\I'Q)I>C....
lm ... 8

Figure 4.7
,,.,...,_
DDC supply pipe to North Hydrant with "Fire Supply"
pressure constralnt applied

..
Ket11
N<>th
S t.....,
Calot
Alltl
a .. .,.
IICftiH)dl..,
8mv.rw:
Pelen
Ownbm
Fotdo

Nooh
Stewtf
Colot
Alom

JunG'IICI'IIcon
S
Spectlll Cortt..,

OptmiZahOO
EJ COil Dotobo:<
Mate1181 Cml MLiJiplec
l.,.talloiiOI'ICoii MtAIPiiet

u .. pe::iled
Sclactod ]....,,..,loor

Nor.e
o
Horl

1011\'
101):(
Figure 4.8 Global Juncti on Edit is used to change the flows to 2
gpm in t he homes for the fire flow DOC.
When Dupcate SpedaJ was performed with Dependent Design Case
selected, each of the duplicated pipes was created with a special type of
linking reJalionship. For exmnple, pipe JO] is linked to pipe 1 as "Link
to Pipe as Dependent Design Case" (see Figure 4.9). This type of link
functions similarly toa regular link, except the cost is not counted for
Lhe pipe.
ts to 2
2ase
:ype of
"Link
link
d for
2!J
''"""' u-..
,- nr:-
.._ .... -n ... - .... -----.3 --
1 ::;: _j

r II<>L'"'
r llutliii!<_h,.

)l.. 1 . =::JEJ
---,..,-- r. .. c....
, 3
- COS I ... Llii'UlH>AfflJfO-
'-'-
In....., roo a
10: %
Flf"Q"'l-
[011 """"...,
no
Figure 4.9 Pipes in Oependent Deslgn Cases have a specal
llnklng relatlonshlp to pipes in the primary case
Aun the optimization

._ ,

Figure 4.4 showed the Optimi.wtion Control scuings for Lhis analylli!>.
AFT Mercury will perform a discrete optirnizaon on Material and
lnstallation COl.L'i of this system. Select Run rrom tbe menu and
AFT Mercury will find the optimum pipe sizc to meet Lhe system
requiremems.
After the run finishcs, examine thc opmum pipe sizell calculated by
AFf Mercury. The results ror pipe size are !.hown in Figure 4. 10. Onc
c:m see that thc optimum sizc is 4-inch pipe.
Opt. CoW
Valu
U.S Doler.Jl
Ppe Lri(f1111
Suppjy Une from PVC 4 inch 4.02S 25,110.0 prpe
Main
PVb
4rnch 4.026 4.195.0 J:i!'lkedtoP1
N M atn PVC 4tnch 4.02G o LrnkedtoP1
Netghboihood Matn PVC 4tnoh 4.026 2.790.0 Ltnkedlo P1
Main PVC 4 inc:h 4.026 2..790.0 Llnkedto P1
Nerghborhood Mam PVC 4tnch 4.026 2.7SO.O lrnkedto P1
Mam PVC 4tnch; 4.026 2.790.0 LnkedloP1
Neighborhood Main PVC 4tnch! 4.026 4.185.0 l.lnked lo Pl
Main PVC 4 inch: 4 026 2.790.0 UnkedtoP1
Netghborhood Matn PVC 4tnch' 4.026 2.790.0 Lrnkedto P1
Net;hbofhod Main' PVC (tnch 4 026 2.790.0 Lrnkedto P1
Main PVC 4 inch 4.026 2.790.0 Llnkedto Pl
. Ne;hbochood Main PVC 4 inch 4 026 2.790.0 Lrnkedto P1
Lrno to Noctk Hydran_t _ PV: 4tnoh 4.026 139.5 Lrnkedto P1
Supply Une ftom PVC 4 inch 4.026 0.0 Dependen! Lrnked lo P1
A inch 4 026 0.0 Dependent to P10
Nerghbochood M arn PVC 4111ch 4.026 0.0 Oependent_l,!nked_to P1
N eghborhood M PVC 4mch 4.026 0.0 Depondenl Lrnked lo P12
N eighbothood M 11in PVC 41nch 4.026 0.0 DependenU,rnked to P13
N eighborhood M ain PVC 4 inch 4.026 ___ Q,_Q_ Llnl\_ed_!o P14
Nerghborhood Marn PVC 4rnch 4 026 0.0 Dependenl Llnked to
Ncighborhood Mllln PVC 4 inch 4.02s 0.0 O ependentl.Jnked to P20
Nci;hborl:!!lod Main PVC 4 rnch 00 Dependen! Ljnked to P21
N eishborhood Main PVC 4 inch 4.026 o. o () ependent Linked to P22
hood Matn PVC 4rnch< 4.026 0.0 Dependent Ltnked to P23
Main PVC 4 rnch' 4.026 a. o Dependen! Unked to P24
. Main PVC
.!.!.. rE!.
4Qf!i 0.0 D ependent Linked lt?. P25
Line to N orlh H drant p;;i 4rnchr 4 026 a. o De endent Ltnked to P80
Figure 4.10 Optlmum pipe size In Output window
Thc cost for all optimized pipes is $61,520 (see Cost Report in Figure
4. 11 ). This is the cost for "Itcms in Objccti ve". Since we did not
optimize the pipe sizes to tbe homes (because these were nxed aL 1-
inch). there is an additionaJ cost of $7.288 for "items not in obj ecti ve".
The pipes that were optirnized are disti nguished in the Cost Repot1 by
having a green background color. The total cost is merely tbe sum of lhe
two ($68,807).

!dloPl
!dloPl
!dloPl
!dtoPl
!dloPl
!dloPl
!dloPl
JdtoPl
!dtx>Pl
!dtx> Pl
JdtoPl
!dtoPl
!dto P1
!dto P1
1 to Pl O
lto Pl1
1 lo P12
ltoP13
l to Pl4
l tx> P1S
l to P20
l to P2l
l tx>P22
IIDP23
l to P24
l lo P25
l loPBO
ve".
by
Jf the
............... Nonfle<U!I1Q lo!- O"""""" IIOCI.III'V
'i<b ,.. ..,. f"'V ,m T Cllol
TOlI.
GIIIKII
bll 007 o o o 6UJ107
61.520 o o o 61 .!170
7.211 o o o 7.288
68807 o o o 68.11117
o Sudo ll1l ham fiereMII L
Poe 4 1&!5 u 'J '1115
Pll
>le9"b>fhood ....... 273:1 o o o : 7'll
PIZ 'le9"b>fhood ...... i) o o ! 73:1
Pll PCIC ZMO o o Q
P14 Poo o o o !790
Pl5
""'"

o o 2. nll
P:lJ r'lf""

.,
o o o 41115
PZ1
""""

H:J(J o o D ?i'll
l"ll
""'"

o o
PZ3
"""
....... o o Q 2.1'90
P24 F<>< 11"'\tWhood ....... 2m o o 2.790
P25 p.,.
lh11twhood ""'" 2.MO o o 2.790
pto F1pe Llf'l I0 9 ro'N!'It 111 a o ' 11
Pl1 F1pe L"'" toPolo11 Q 533
P2 f'loo LW. toc:Nnten 885 o o eas
PJ
5Jl
o o 533
P4 Poe 71 1 o o '11
P50 Poe LinotoiiQflho D 1.1167
PSl Lin.!: ro St..wNfs 889 o tWl9
111 o o m
f';>J
m a n 533
P54
,,,
o m
o ?80 ! .U: o n I.W
Figure 4.11 Cost Report ls shown in Output window
Consider the results
The optimizatlon we j ust ran had two operat ing cases. One was for
normal water suppl y, and the !\econd was for hydrant supply for a fJ.Ie.
Thc normal now case is modeled hy the nctwork shown tn the upper part
of Figure 4.6. The second model !\ hown at thc bottom of Figure 4.6
modcls the frre t1ow case.
The pipe.s and j uncti ons in the firc fl ow case are separate enti ties for
modeling purposes, bul rcprcsent thc samc prpes and juncti ons as the
normal llow case. Thus whcn pcrforrning optimiLation. we only count
the cost of the pipes and junclions once. This occurs in the primary
design case, whi ch in our modcl is the normal fl ow case. This can be
seen in Figure 4. 10, whcrc 1-80 all have an a!\M>ciated cost, whilc
pipes JO 1- 1 80 do no t.
By applying different pressure and tlow rcquircmcnts between the
normal and fue fl ow case!\. we performed an optimiLation that selected
the optimal pipe size which simultaneously met lhe requirements of both
cases.
FinaJi y, since the previous case only selected for one pipe to be used
for aH optimizecl pipes, lhere was onJy one design variable. By unlink.ing
sorne of lhe pipes, a better optimum is possible. We will investigate this
in the next section.
Optimize for three pipe sizes
Return to the Scenario Manager and selectlhe "3 Design Vari ables
(Case 2)" scenario. AJI input data is the samc in this case as the previous
case, except for two things:
l'lpellnb
1:1 . P1
,. P1 01 IS'4'1'1Y l.rle hom R,_.,;,l - Oeperdon( Oecogn lnk
El-= P10 fNeoghbofhoodM..,I-t...l. Bmitj2311nksl
'tl P1 1 fNefli>b<>hood M..,l
1 o F'12 INel\#lanoodMarol
:ti P13
; o P14
ti P16 INI!!Ijoboohood MoO>l
fl P20 (Net1balwJod ManJ
ltl P2l !Nooghboohooa M.,)
IIl o P22 (Nooghbomooo M...,J
tfl M F'23 (Neoghb0111ood M..,J
'" P24 (N"''!hbootoood Man)
13 a P25 (NeoghbOihood Man)
"& P110 l'loighboohoodM""') Ocl"""loriDa>gnlnk
a .. [ltwl
,. P180 ILW1eloN01111H)ICifaroll .. Ignlinl.
20
Figure 4.12 Llnking relationships for the case with three optlmlzed
pipes.
1. Pipe 10 has been made a link basis pipe and a JI "neighborhood
mains" (pipes 11-25) are linkcd to pipe 10
of both
to be uscd
&y unlinking
tigate this
iables
be previous
optimized
lood
2. Pipe 80 has been made a link basis pipe
There are now three independent pipe sitos (P 1, P J 0-25, and PHO) for
which the optimi7cr will search. Figure 4. 12 the new linking
relationships.
Aun the optimization
Run this scenario and examine lhe results. The optimum pipe siLes for
lhis scenario are shown io Figure 4.13. The pipe si1.es now are a
combin:uion of 4-inch. and 3-inch pipe. Thi s design slill meets all the
requircments of both scenarios but Lhe pipe siLes are optimized for cost.
'
Opt Opt Hjd OPl Cost/
S!Ze Vakle
..J
(U.S D
PvC 11'1Ch 4 026 25.110 O Bam ppe
tleighbo!hood Melrl PVC 3 ti1Ch 3068 3.585.0 Bt!lm ppe
NeiQI'b:whood Mlll'l
P\1(
3111Ch 3!GI 2.390 O Lri ed lo Pl O
NeiQI'b:whood M.., PVt 3111Ch 3008 2.3900 Lri-.dloP10
Neq-barhood Mm PJC Jnch 31)58 2.3910 L.ri ed to P10
" e91bo!hoo;Mi Me1n PVC 3111Ch 3068 2,390.0 Li11f.ed lo P10
N elghbcwhood M e1n PV(
3nch 3.068 2..390 O lo Pl O
N e1ghbothood Ma111 Pvt: 310Ch 3068 3.585. O l.Jriked to Pl O
tleiQI'b:whood Mall'l PJC Jnch 3068 2.390.0 Lri ed lo PlO
tleqtlorhood Mlll'l PV(
3111Ch 3!GI 2. 390. O Lri,ed lo P1 O

PV(
311'1Ch 3068 2.3900 l.lnfed to P10
Neoghborhood Ma1n PVC 3068 2.390.0 L1nl<ed to Pl O
Neighborhood Meon PVC J 1nch 3068 2,390 O Llnf ed la Pl O
lone to NCifth HydrMI PVC 4 rc:h 4 0.."'6 1395
101 L.roe ltom PIIC 4111Ch 4 026 0 0 Oependenll.ri ed lO P1
110
f'll(
3111Ch 3068 O O Oependenllri ed lo P1 O
111 1 Neq.bothood Mc>YI
f'll( l onch 3068 o o Oependenlurbd lo Pll
11? Nt!!ltoborhood Ma1n PVC 3 onch 3068 0.0 Oependenllinked lo P12
..lil Neghborhood Ma1n PVC :l1noh 3068 O O lriced lo Pl3
JlC tlellj1bolhood Mm PVC 3mh 3068 O O Dependen( Lft ed lo P1 4
115 Ne'!11bothoodMt!lll'l PVC 3n:h 3068 0 0 Dependent lried lo P15
120 Ne'!7ixwhood M .m PJC 3n:h 3068
-
O O Oependenllri-ed lo P20
1 Z1 J Neghborhood MMI
PI/C ) oneh 3068 O O Dependenllrll ed to P21
_1_22 Netghborhood Mm PVC J onch 3068 ll O Dependen! I.Jnl ed lo P22
123 Nt!!;lborhood Malrl PVC 3onch 3.068 O O O ependenU.Jnl ed to PZ3
l?-' NeoghborhoodMilln PVC 31rlCh 3068 0.0 Dependenii.JN ed to P24
Neq1bo!hood Matn PVC 3nch 3008 O O Dependeri Ln<ed lo P25
lJne lo NCiflh H llnl PVC 4 nch 4 026 00 o LriedtoPOO
Figure 4.13 Optlmum pipe slzes for the case wlth three link basis
pipes
The cost of tbe design is sbown in Figure 4. 14. The cost of Lhe optirnized
pipes (i.e., llerns ln Objecve) has changed from $61,520 Lo $56,320, a
reduction of over 8% in cosl.

Ppe
Popo liVI>cohood M.n D o
;,., t.lain 2.:BJ o o o
PiDe Noig!Mhood M,;, 2.:Bl o o o
l'lpo M.., o o o
. PipO lleVw.haod 3.56!i o o o
Pipo N"''lt.t>cwhood Main 2.l00 o o o
Pipo o o
Pipe tl""'tto<hood t.lain 2:BJ
ppe tl o9't>ahood Moin 2.:Bl
Pope Mllln
Pipo Lino to Br....,.. n ;
Pipo Lir>ol1l Pot"' !>33
Pipo lino 111 Chon*'er ' 999
Pipo lino"' ro:wm s3
Pipe l ino"' kojlyt n1
Pope lJnerollotlht 11167
Ppe llfle o Slewarla !199
Pipe l'""loCdes m
Pope lJne ro AIIMI 'jJ3
Pope
Figure 4.14 Cost Report for the case with three link basls pipes
Other possibilities
To obtain the best possible optimal systern, une can un1ink a1J the pipes
in the neighborhood and aUow each pipe to be optimized independentJy.
Wbilc not shown here, it is possible to reduce the cost for Lhis system to
less than $49,000 (a furthcr reduclion in cosl of 13%).
This final optirnization lakes much longer to run (a few minutes vs. a
few seconds previously). Since alllbe pipes are sized independently, Lhe
practica! resul t i.s that ordering and installing tbe pipe is more
complicaLed because there are so many more sizes involved.
plimized
,320, a

1; '""TAl

o 53,607
o $,320
o 7.288
o 63,607
D 25.' 10
u 3.595
o 2..300
o
o
o 2.390
n 2.290
o 3.595
o UIO
o
o 2.390
o ,!.JSQ
10 UJ.J
1! m
o 533
o 8119
o 533
o m
o 1JlS7
Q
889
o m
o 5l3
o nt
140
fpes
pipes
dently.
tem to
s. a
jy, the
C HAPTER 5
Other AFT Mercury Capabilities
This Quick Start Guidc ncccssarily omilted coverage uf a number of
AFT Mercury capabilitics. This chaptcr briefly describes sorne of thc
importam capabilitics not covcrcd.
Optimize with operating costs spread over multiple cases
For systcms with multiple <.lesign Lhe system may operate a
significant port.iun uf the time in each case mode. AFT Mercury
allows one Lo assign a percenlage of the operating cost to each relevant
dcsign.
For example. assumc you are dcsigning a two-pump cooling system
which uses bolh pumps in thc summer but only one in the winter
(because of reduccd dcmand for cooling water). The winter operating
cost is thus much lcss Lhan in thc summer. Yuu can account for this by
assigning the pcrccntagc of thc time lhc purnp opemtes in each design
case. This allows a proper accounting of annual operating costs, anda
proper life cyclc optimi zati on to be pcrformed.
Vary recurring costs over time
Tbrougb "scale tables" AFT Mercury alluws you Lo input recurring data
for pipes or junctiuns Lhat vary over time. For instance, perhaps the
maintenance cost uf a piece uf equipment is low at first bul requi res
incrcased maimenance nver sorne time pcriod. Thc cost for maintenancc
can be varied uver time LO match the anticipatcd schedule.
Time value of money
An important consideration in evaluating recurring cost items is the cost
of money for future expenses. AFT Mercury allows you to enter an
interest rate and intlation rate to account for actual value of future
expenses based on today's currency vaJue. This data is entered in the
Optimization Control window.
Optimize life cycle costs with constrained initial cost
Optimizing to minimize iniLiaJ cosl or life cycle cost docs not need to be
an exclusive decision. One can include both criteria in the same
optimization run. Thls feature is found on thc Optimization Control
window. By optimizing for life cycle cost while constraining the allowed
inHiaJ cost, AFf Mercury can Cind the lowcst life cyclc cost design
which mccts thc initiaJ cost budget.
Determine cost effectiveness of replacing existing pipe
AFT Mercury can detennine the cost effectiveness of leaving exisling
pipe in place or replacing it with new pipe. h i ~ feature is enabled in the
Pipe Specifications window, Optimization tab.
Worldng with different currencies
Costs vs. size
Cost data can be emered in any currency you wisb. Different currencies
can be defined in the Parameter and Unll Preferences window, and lhen
uscd as a basis for cost databases.
Scale lables can be used Lo model how equjpment costs vary with pipe
diameter. For instance, a 4-inch val ve will cost more than a comparable
2-inch val ve. This can be accounted for in the cost database by use of
scale tables.
is Lhe COSI
eran
ture
in Lhe
1eed to be
e
mtrol
he allowed
:sign
!xisting
)led in the
urrencics
and then
ilh pipe
nparable
use of
Chapter 5 Other AFT Mercury Capabilities 71
Generi c pump costs can be modeled a,., a function of power, and generi c
control vaJve can he modeled as a functi on of maximum Cv.
Optimizing rectangular duct systems
AFT Mercury can optmze systems wilh only rectangular ducts ora
combination of rectangular and cylindricaJ ducts. Rectangular ducts ha ve
two space dimcnsions. and thus two dcsign variables are required for
each independcnt duct !'..iLe.
Compare VFD vs. FCV optimizad systems
Vari able Frequt: ncy Ori ve (VFD) control methods are frequently
comparcd tu Flow Control VaJ ve (FCY) methods. However. this is
typically onl y evaluated in the context of a givcn pipe system. AFf
Mercury allows one to optimizc the system for each of these methods.
This allows a more meani ngful comparison.
Maximum cost groups
When evaluating multiple operating cases, onc of Lhe pump operati ng
modes will dri vc lhe pump selecti on for all cases. This is hy virtuc of the
fact that the cost will be based on thc modc rcqui ri ng Lhe most powcr
andlor largest hcad. This can be modelcd in AFT Mercury with
Maximum Cost Groups. A Maximum Cost Group allows one to couple
costs togethcr for all pumps that wi ll evcmuall y be of Lhe same de ign
(and thus cost Lhc same). This allows thc propcr cost inforrnation to be
used for each dcsign case.
Maximum cost can also be uscd for cont rol valves.
Network databases
Engineering and cost databases can be locatcd on local PC's or dcployed
across local or widc arca networks. The Database Manager allows users
to conoect to rclcvant databases for their specific pipe system dcsign.
lndex
A
AFT DEFAULT lNTERNAL
DATABASE J l
AFT Mercury
e
engineenng assumptions 4
Overview 4
summary of capabi li ties 3
Constraim 6. 34
Active antllnactive 6
General juncon 41
Pipes 34
Pump NPSH 43
ConMr.tint Set
Crcating for pipe 36
Junctions 41
Pipes 34
Control valve 9
Control Valve conslrainl set 17
Control Valve junction 13
Control Yalve OpLimiL.alion Paramelcrs
window 17
Cost Report 23, 4-t, 64
Currency units 70
D
Datahase Manager 31, 71
Databases 71
Cost 31
DDC See Dependent Design Case
Dependent Design Case 57
Enabling in Optirnimtion Control 57
Linking See
Dcsign variable 6. 35. 43. 66. 71
linking 7
Duct optimization 71
Duplicatc Special 58
E
Energy cost'> 48
F
Flow Control Valve 17. 71. See
Control valve
Maximum Cost Groups 71
G
Global Junclion Edil 58
Graph Resulls window 5
lnfea.<,ible dcsign 7
lnstallation costs 44
J
Junclions
Costs 41
L
Link basis pipe 35. 55
Linking 7, 35
M
Malerial COSLS 44
Model Data window 5
o
Objective
Operation!Encrgy costs 48
Optimization
Continuous vs. discrcte 7
Optimization Control window 2J, 29,
31' 45, 47' 57. 70
Optirniz.alion Summary window 35. 55
Output window 5
Pipe Optimtalion 46, 64
Overview of AFT Mercury 4
p
Paramerer and Unit Preferences window
70
Pipe Drawing Too! Ll
Pipe linking See Linking
Pipe Optimization Parameters window
15. 33,34,36,56
Pipe Size Range Set 15, See Si7c
Range Sct
Pipe Specifications window 14, 18
Optimization data 32
Pipes
Opti miL.ing 32
Primary e ~ i g o Case 55
Primary Windows 4
Pump junction 38
Pump Spccificaons window 37
Nominal efficicncy 40
Nominal NPSHR 40
Pumps
R
as fixcd now 40
Cost or power 40
Optimiing wilh pump curves 51
Rectangular duct optirnit.ation 71
Recurring costs 69
Reservoir junclion 12
S
Sccnario Manager 28, 47, 66
Size Rangc Set
Creming for pipes 36
Pipes 33
Solu1ion Progress window 22
System Lifc JO
System Pruperties window 11
T
Time value of money 70
V
Variable Frequency Ori ve 71
Visual Rcpo11 wi ndow 5
w
Workspacc wmdow 5, 11
lndex 75
ArT
Applled Flow Tedlnology
2955 Professional Place, Sulte 301
Colorado SprinQs, CO 80904 USA
(719) 686 1000
sales(Jlaft.com
www.aft.com

Aft Mercury 7

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Aft Mercury 7

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Applied Flow Technology

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen