New Mexico State University

Steam Driven Chiller

The Mechanical and Circumstantial Causes Behind its Failure

With Prevention Steps Proposed

Stephanie Misquez

April 15, 2017

Table of Contents
Introduction....1

Research Plan.2

Results of Study......5

Discussion of Results10

Recommendations12

References.13
Abstract

The purpose of this report is to determine the cause of the breakdown of the York Steam Driven

Chiller located at New Mexico State Universitys Cogeneration Plant, and what could have been

done to avert its failure. After analyzing the situation, I argue through my report that improved

communication between staff at Facilities and Services at NMSU and GLHN, the engineering

firm responsible for creating the specifications document for the chiller, could have avoided its

eventual breakdown. My research plan involved four phases: 1) developing context for the

situation 2) gathering information on steam driven centrifugal chillers 3) interviewing

Cogeneration Plant personnel at the University 4) analyzing potential causes. Through my

research of the Utility Development Plan Studies for the University I discovered that New

Mexico State University purchased the chiller through a contract with the engineering firm

GLHN, as a cost saving measure to improve its already existent cogeneration system. A

combination of online research and interviews gave me the knowledge to understand the

mechanical cause of its breakdown. Interviewing staff at the Cogeneration Plant also gave me

insight into the situation from the perspective of the University employees. My study of this

situation presented me with 3 results: 1) An assumption made by the consulting engineers from

GLHN served as the catalyst for the chillers failure 2) staff at Facilities and Services were

unaware of the assumption that was made 3) GLHN provided recompense to the University for

the failure of the chiller. This led me to conclude that while improved communication between

GLHN and NMSU staff could have prevented the situation from taking place, ultimately there

was a lack of knowledge within the staff at Facilities and Services which shifted responsibility

from them to the engineering firm, evidenced by the measures it took to compensate the

University for lost time and money.

Introduction

On Monday January 23rd Dr. Gerri Elise McCulloh asked our Technical Communication

class (English 218) to explore issues related to our campus in the form of an analytical report. I

chose to research the transaction between New Mexico State University and GLHN, an Arizona

based engineering firm, which led to the eventual failure of the steam driven centrifugal chiller at

the Universitys Cogeneration Plant. The purpose of this report is to determine what caused the

chiller to malfunction as well as whether the situation could have been averted.

After analyzing the situation, I argue in my report that an assumption made by the

consulting engineers sent to NMSU from GLHN about the steam purity specifications of the

Cogeneration Plants boilers served as the catalyst for the chillers malfunction. While the

situation could have been averted by Facilities and Services staff in the form of through

questioning of the firms information gathering procedures, this is not the staffs responsibility to

do so, leading me to conclude that ultimate responsibility lies on GLHN and its employees. In

future cases, this situation can be averted by Facilities and Services in the form of this thorough

questioning procedure and should be done whenever possible and to the best of their ability. This

subject is a localized example of the importance of communication in the workplace, therefore

anyone seeking to prevent similar occurrences from taking place under their supervision would

benefit from the lessons to be learned from this situation.

This report includes four sections: a) my research plan b) the results of my research c) a

discussion of these results and d) my proposed solution.

1
Research Plan

To study the cause of the malfunction of the Steam Driven Chiller I followed a four part

research plan.

Phase 1: Developing knowledge of the context of the situation.

Phase 2: Gathering information on steam driven centrifugal chillers.

Phase 3: Interviewing Plant Personnel.

Phase 4: Analyzing Potential Causes.

Phase 1: Developing Context

To understand the context behind the purchase of the steam driven chiller I began by

looking for information on the cogeneration power supply system at New Mexico State

University using google site:.nmsu.edu search entry and typing in search terms such as power

demands steam turbine and energy consumption. This led me to the Facilities and Services

Website where they listed their Utility Development Plan and Studies documents. These reports

contained a wealth of information on past, current, and future development stages for the

cogeneration system that powers the University.

Through these documents I learned that NMSU purchased the chiller through a contract

with GLHN, an Arizona-based engineering firm, as part of a three stage utility development plan

for the University (Chilled Water System, 2009). This led me to GLHNs website where I learned

that GLHN specializes in both utility master planning and design of central plants and

underground utility distribution systems. From this information and by searching through

GLHNs website I realized that GLHN was not the company that physically constructed the

steam driven chiller as they are not a large structure manufacturing company (Firm Profile,

2017). I therefore had to explore other means of research to find which entity was responsible for

2
manufacturing the chiller.

Phase 2: Information on Steam Driven Chillers

Before I could determine the physical cause of the chillers failure, I had to develop an

understanding of its inner workings. I did this by first researching YouTube videos from the

college of engineering which had been used in my previous classes regarding large scale

machinery. This led me to Learn Engineerings website where I found helpful information that

gave me a basic understanding of the operating principles of absorption chillers. I concluded this

portion of my research by collecting transcripts from the videos which I watched as well as

diagrams from online documents.

Phase 3: Interviewing Plant Personnel

I then set up interviews with staff at Facilities and Services-- one interview with Lead

Engineer Dale Harrell and one with Plant Operations Supervisor Mark Blanchford.

On Monday March 27th I interviewed Dale Harrell in Thomas and Brown, the Electrical

Engineering building at NMSUs main campus. Dr. Harrell is the Lead Facilities Engineer for

the University as well as a professor in Power Systems Engineering for the Klipsch School of

Electrical and Computer Engineering. During the interview, I asked Dr. Harrell about the steam

driven chiller; how it works, how it fits into the campus power supply grid, the mechanical

causes of its failure, and the repairs taken to remedy it. I also asked him about the administrative

situation regarding its purchase, breakdown, and repair.

He was also able to give me background information on GLHN and their role in the

situation regarding the chiller. Furthermore he directed me to York, the utility manufacturing

company owned by Johnson Controls which GLHN contracted to construct the chiller. As we

concluded our interview, he recommended that I talk to Plant Operations Supervisor Mark

3
Blanchford next.

Upon Dr. Harrells recommendation, I interviewed Mark Blanchford on Monday, April

the 3rd at the Cogeneration Plant on NMSUs campus. Mark has 30 years of experience in

refrigeration and received technical training during his term in the Air Force. Since he left the

armed forces in 1992 he worked for several large contractors before he worked for Facilities and

Services where he has been the Supervisor of Plant Operations for the past 15 years. Mark gave

me a timeline of chronological events pertaining to the chillers purchase, breakdown, and repair.

He also explained the process of negotiations involved between NMSU and Johnson Controls

regarding who would assume responsibility for the chillers failure. He told me that the point of

failure for the chiller occurred in the compressor motor which was constructed by Dresser-Rand,

a parts manufacturing company contracted by York.

Phase 4: Analyze Potential Causes

I then analyzed two potential causes based on my research. One cause, proposed by

GLHN was that the information regarding the specifications of the chiller should have been

provided by staff at Facilities and Services without prompting from GLHN employees. On the

other hand, Facilities and Services staff claimed that it was in fact GLHNs responsibility to

gather all of the necessary information regarding the operating conditions of the chiller prior to

manufacturing it.

The criteria which I used to judge between these two scenarios involved the result of the

correspondence between NMSU and GLHN which terminated with GLHN providing

recompense to the University.

4
Results of the Study

In this section, I will describe the mechanical causes of the chillers failure prefaced by a

brief description of its inner workings. Then I will give a timeline of events as these failures were

discovered by staff at Facilities and Services.

Design of the York Steam Driven Chiller

The York steam driven chiller is a centrifugal chiller which uses steam produced from

waste heat to power a compressor that circulates refrigerant through four chambers that, by

means of evaporation and condensation, cool water which then services buildings throughout

campus. The chillers four main chambers are displayed below in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Four primary chambers of a chiller. Adapted from Working of a Steam Turbine.

Learn Engineering. 2017. Web. 19 Apr. 2017.

The component of the chiller which my research focuses on is the motor which powers

the compressor, since this is where the point of failure occurred. The motor is a turbine engine

5
composed of a rotor assembly attached to fan blades which are shaped to allow high pressure

steam move them in a particular direction. Figure 2 displays the curvature of the fan blades

which allows for rotation when they come into contact with pressurized steam.

Figure 2. Fluid flow around airfoil cross sectioned blade induces a high pressure (P) and low

pressure (Ps) on blade surfaces. Adapted from Working of a Steam Turbine, from Learn

Engineering. Web accessed 19 Apr. 2017.

Steam is directly injected into the chamber where these fan blades are housed, causing it

to turn. These fan blades were specifically designed to operate under certain conditions of steam

purity. Steam purity refers to how many non-steam particles are contained within the steam

being fed to the fan blades. Impurities come in the form of airborne particles and water droplets

which can damage the rotor blades when they come into contact with them at high velocities.

6
 Figure 3. Software depiction of a compressor unit from the manufacturing company, Dresser-

Rand. Adapted from Inside the DATUM Compressor, from Dresser-Rand. Web accessed 19

April 2017.

Timeline of Events

May 2012

New Mexico State University purchased the Steam Driven Chiller in May of 2012. The

specifications for its operating conditions are transmitted from GLHN to York, which then

contracted out the construction of individual components to companies such as Dresser Rand (M.

Blanchford, 2017).

July-November 2013

After a year and four months of manufacturing, the now constructed chiller arrives at the

Cogeneration Plants warehouse via crane hoisted assembly in July of 2013. In November of

7
2013 a factory representative from York came to NMSU and conducted operational testing and

found it to satisfy all of its operational criteria and it was subsequently put online (M.

Blanchford, 2017).

April 2014

Six months later, in April of 2014, vibration sensors within the motors shaft notified

staff at Facilities and Services that it was operating outside of its normal conditions. Under

inspection they discovered that the bearings which kept the shaft together were worn down. Staff

at Facilities and Services replaced these bearings and put the chiller back online (D. Harrell,

2017).

July 2014

After only 3 months of operation in July of 2014 the vibration sensors again notified the

staff that something was wrong. They concluded that this could not be due to faulty bearings

which had so recently been replaced. This time, they contacted an employee from York who

inspected the entire turbine assembly and found that the fan blades were coated in calcium

carbonate which is a point of concern since the turbine blades have to be extremely clean for

optimal operation.

Upon this discovery, the turbine assembly was sent back to Dresser Rands servicing

center in Houston, Texas where inspector Warren Pyontek reported heavy damage on the turbine

and its blades (P. Warren, 2014). Impurities in the steam being fed to the fan blade assembly

caused these damages as well as the calcium carbonate buildup, as Dale Harrell explained, what

was happening was, the steam wasnt clean. It had small particles of water and a little bit of non-

water pollutants, and when it hits the blade a high pressure it starts putting ticks in it. As this

thing is turning at 800-1000 rmp this blade becomes warped and starts vibrating. (D. Harrell,

8
2017). Photographs taken during Dresser Rands inspection of these blades are depicted in

figures 4 and 5.

Figure 4. Rotor Shaft assembly when it was Figure 5. Photograph taken by Dresser

taken apart for inspection by York employee at Rand repair technician of fan blade

the Cogeneration Plants warehouse. Scuff assembly at the Dresser-Rand Houston

marks on the front face of the primary fan blade Service Center. As stated on the inspection

provide evidence of contact with steam report, 1st stage blades show heavy rolling

impurities. (D. Harrell, 2017). on trailing blade edges. (C. Morehouse,

2014).

9
March 2015.

On March 18, 2015, upon request from the University, Johnson Controls released a

proposal which included an estimated cost of $209,229.00 for the repair and reinstallation of the

turbine (Proposal, 2015). One month later in April of 2015 Project Manager Ron Tarazoff of

Facilities and Services released a Project Status Report which described the steps necessary to

reconfigure the Cogeneration Plants boilers to produce high purity steam for the chiller (R.

Tarazoff, 2015).

It was during this time that the University engaged in a 6 month long negotiation with

GLHN to determine which party would assume responsibility for the failure of the chiller, as

well as liability for the cost of its repairs. A solution was reached which involved compensation

by GLHN for damages caused to the fan blades as well as one years supply of chemical agents

for creating high purity steam.

April 2016- Current

The above stated remedies took a total of a year to implement. In April of 2016 the now

newly repaired chiller, complete with a steam purification assembly, was put back online

indefinitely under which it has been operating successfully for the past year.

Discussion of Results

Based on my research, I will present the situational cause of the chillers breakdown.

Staff at Facilities and Services did not directly design these fan blades, as stated by Mark

Blanchford, For the steam driven chiller, GLHN, the design firm, wrote a set of specifications,

this is what we want this machine to do, and these are the conditions we expect it to operate

under. He then listed a few examples of these specifications including environmental elevation

10
of 3,700 ft., water temperature range of 40-53 degrees F, steam pressure of 100 psi and a 100%

pure steam rating. However, this steam purity specification was a value that GLHN consulting

engineers assumed. They did not ask staff at Facilities and Services what purity rating of steam

they produced in their boilers. They simply assumed that it was 100% pure since the staff did not

state otherwise.

During their negotiations with GLHN, New Mexico State made the case that obtaining all

of the necessary information for the specifications of the Steam Driven Chiller was a

responsibility of the consulting engineers from GLHN hired by NMSU, not of the staff at

Facilities and Services. On the other hand, GLHN argued that this information should have been

openly provided to the consulting engineers (D. Harrell, 2017).

According to a proposal released by Johnson Controls, the cost of the repairs to the

turbine amounted to $209.229.00 (Proposal, 2015). The cost of reconfiguring the steam

production assembly incurred an additional $77,975.53. After 6 months of negotiations, GLHN

agreed to compensate NMSU for a portion of the $287,204.53 in repairs. The exact amount,

along with the correspondences that led to this conclusion, could not be disclosed. Also, GLHN

agreed to pay for a years supply of chemical cleaning agents for pure steam production which is

an annual cost that NMSU will have to take on once the year is over (D. Harrell, 2017).

The fact that GLHN recompensed NMSU for the expenditures to repair the chiller and

produce clean steam is evidence that GLHN ultimately responsibility for the failure of the

chiller. Had the fault been on the staff at Facilities and Services, GLHN would have been free

from compensating the University. Because of this, I conclude that GLHN was in fact

responsible for obtaining accurate information regarding the operating conditions for the chiller.

11
 Recommendations

In conclusion, I propose that applying the following precautionary steps decrease the

likelihood of a situation like this from occurring in the future:

Staff at Facilities and Services should conduct thorough research on any piece of large

scale machinery that the University purchases.

This research should include a list of operating conditions specific to that machinery.

Contracts should be established between engineering firms and the University clearly

stating that the firm is responsible obtaining all of the necessary information to create

accurate specifications documents for any piece of large scale machinery.

If these precautions are followed, the chances that incorrect specifications will make it

through the manufacturing phase of any large scale utility purchase will decrease.

12
References

Blanchford, M. (2016, June 21). Steam Chiller Operation Instructions [.WORD]. Las Cruces.

Chilled Water System [.PDF]. (2009, June 16). Tucson: GLHN Architects & Engineers,

Inc.https://hr.nmsu.edu/ofs/wp-

content/uploads/sites/57/2013/09/101_ChilledWaterSystemNarrative.pdf

FIRM PROFILE. (n.d.). Retrieved April 15, 2017, from http://glhn.com/firm-profile/

Harrell, D., D.Eng. (2017, March 27). Facilities and Services Interview (1) [Personal interview].

Morehouse, C. (2014, December 3). Final Report for New Mexico State University [.PDF].

Dresser-Rand.

Proposal [.PDF]. (2015, March 18). El Paso: Johnson Controls.

Pyonteck, W. (2014, December 3). Magnetic Particle Inspection Report [.PDF]. Houston:

Dresser-Rand.

Tarazoff, R. (2016, January 29). Project Status Report [.WORD]. Las Cruces: Facilities and

Services.

Working of Steam Turbine. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2017, from

http://www.learnengineering.org/2013/02/working-of-steam-turbine.html

13