Upload
tranquynh
View
229
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Total Project Cost ReductionThrough both Short and Long Term Effective/Efficient Design
Developing Solar on Brownfields & Landfills ConferenceChicago – June 2017
John England Eric Oetjen
www.rbisolar.com
Rough Brothers
Founded 1932 – 80+ Years in Business
2
RBI Solar History
RBI Solar Inc.
3
RBI Solar History
Manufacturing Best Business Practices Raw Material Bulk
Purchases National Suppliers Timely Deliveries Procurement of WEEBS National & International
Manufacturing Facilities - Cincinnati, OH - Temecula, CA- Washington, NC - Shanghai, China
Material Certifications- ARRA Compliance- “Made in the USA”
Certification Available
Installation On-Site Representative Experienced Installers
- Foundations - Racking - Modules
OSHA Compliant Crew Leaders Components Pre-Assembly Installation Manuals Pre-Designed Field
Adjustments QA\QC Warranty As-Built Drawings Detailed Schedule
Engineering
In-House Engineering Licensed/Registered In All
50 States Project Specific
Engineering- Wind- Snow- Seismic
Wind Tunnel Tested Foundation Design
- Geotech- Pull Tests
Stamped Drawings (Including Foundations) Combiner Box Mounting Inverter Pad Supports
Design
In-House Designers Site Layouts Options For Sloping Sites UL 2703 Classification
Available Multiple Cost Saving
Bonding/Grounding Options Wire Management Installation Manuals
Advancing the Entire Solar Value Chain 4
Single Source Provider
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Part III – Installation
Part IV – Case Study
Agenda
Part I
Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Site Specific RequirementsI. Verify current state building code along with local AHJ requirements
II. Determine load factors and combinations from building code and local AHJ
• Snow (PSF), Wind (MPH), Seismic Loads• Exposure Category (ASCE 7-10)• Importance Factor (ASCE 7-05)
• IBC 2015 (ASCE 7-10)• IBC 2012 (ASCE 7-10)
• IBC 2009 (ASCE 7-05) • IBC 2006 (ASCE 7-05)
• State Specific Building Code• Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC)
• Surface Roughness and Exposure Categories• Kzt, Kd, Kz Factors • Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) vs.
Allowable Stress Design (ASD)
ASCE 7-05 ASCE 7-10
Lower Wind Velocities Higher Wind Velocities
Higher Wind Load Combination Lower Wind Load Combination
Uses Importance Factor Uses Exposure Category
One Wind Speed Map Three Wind Speed Maps
Larger Hurricane Prone Areas Reduced Hurricane Prone Area
Table 1 – Differences between ASCE 7-05 and ASCE 7-10
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Site Specific Requirements (cont.)
Assumptions and Factors per Code LRFD Method ASD Method
ASCE 7-10 D = Dead LoadW, Wind Load = qz, velocity pressure Kz, exposure coefficient = 0.85 (29.3-1)Kzt, topographic factor = 1.0 (26.8-1)Kd, wind directionality factor = 0.85 (26.6-1)V= 105 MPHExposure Category C, up to 15 feet above ground
D = 5 PSFW = qz = 0.00256*Kz*Kzt*Kd*V2 (29.3-1)W = 0.00256*(0.85)*(1)*(0.85)*(105)2
W = 20.4 PSF
Load Combination(0.9D + W) / 0.9(0.9*(5) + 20.4) / 0.927.7 PSF
D = 5 PSFW = qz = 0.00256*Kz*Kzt*Kd*V2 (29.3-1)W = 0.00256*(0.85)*(1)*(0.85)*(105)2
W = 20.4 PSF
Load Combination(0.6D + 0.6W)*1.67{0.6*(5) + 0.6*(20.4)}*1.6725.4 PSF
ASCE 7-05D = Dead LoadW, Wind Load = qz, velocity pressure Kz, exposure coefficient = 0.85 (6.5.6.6)Kzt, topographic factor = 1.0 (6.5.7.2)Kd, wind directionality factor = 0.85 (6.5.4.4)V= 90 MPHI, Importance Factor = 0.87 (6.5.5)Structure Risk Category I
D = 5 PSF W = qz = 0.00256*Kz*Kzt*Kd*V2*I (29.3-1)W =0.00256*(0.85)*(1)*(0.85)*(90)2*(0.87)W = 13.0 PSF
Load Combination(0.9D + 1.6W) / 0.9{0.9*(5) + 1.6*(13.0)} / 0.928.1 PSF
D = 5 PSF W = qz = 0.00256*Kz*Kzt*Kd*V2*I W =0.00256*(0.85)*(1)*(0.85)*(90)2*(0.87)W = 13.0 PSF
Load Combination{0.6D + W}*1.67{0.6*(5) + 13.0}*1.6726.7 PSF
Table 2 –Example of Wind Load Calculation with Different Load Combinations
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Site Specific RequirementsIII. Determine soil and cap characteristics with Geotechnical Engineer, Environmental Engineer, or AHJ
Interface Materials, Concrete Cast on…… Friction Coefficient
….Clean sound rock 0.70
….Clean gravel, gravel/sand mix, coarse sand 0.55 – 0.60
….Clean fine to medium sand, silty medium to coarsesand, silty/sandy gravel
0.45 – 0.55
….Clean fine sand, silty or clayey fine to medium sand
0.35 – 0.45
….Find sandy silt, nonplastic silt 0.30 – 0.35
….Very stiff and hard residual or preconsolidated clay 0.40 – 0.50
….Medium still and stiff clay and silty clay 0.30 – 0.35
Source: Armstrong, Richard C. Engineering And Design: Revision Of Thrust Block Criteria In TM 5-813-5/AFM 88-10, Vol 5 Appendix C. Ft. Belvoir: Defense Technical Information Center, 1992. Print.
• Vent pipe set-backs• Soil erosion• Stormwater runoff
Table 3 – Friction Coefficient for Concrete Cast on Soil
• Allowable bearing stress on access roads
• Allowable bearing stress on landfill• Friction coefficient (Table 3)
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Topography and Layout ConsiderationsI. Maximize areas with flatter gradeII. Verify built-in adjustment in rack (additional adjustment with gravel)III. Continuous row or tablesIV. Verify as not all racking systems are non penetrating. V. Windy Tunnel Analysis to maximize interior zones
Figure 1: Example of Using Gravel for Additional Adjustment
Location: Windsor County, VT; COD: 2015; Capacity: 750 kWdc Location: Burlington County, NJ; COD: 2014; Capacity: 10,000 kWdc
Figure 2: Example of Built-in Rack Adjustment
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Foundation Selection ConsiderationsI. ScheduleII. Site access / staging areasIII. Open-shop, DBA, Union IV. Weather / temperatureV. Cost of concrete (ready-mix vs precast)
Figure 4: Stockpiling Ballast Foundations
Project Location: Riverside County, CA COD: 2015; Capacity: 9,396 kWdcLocation: Middlesex County, MA; COD: 2016; Capacity: 1,134 kWdc
Figure 3: Example of Limited Space and Access Roads
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Part II
Rack and Foundation Production
Racking- Lead Time – typically 3-4 weeks from release- Corrosion Protection
I. Pre-galv - G90 minimum per ASTM A653II. Hot-dip Galvanization – per ASTM A123III. Verify Soil Corrosion Potential
Figure 5: Pre-assembled Brackets
Location: RBI Solar Manufacturing and Pre-assembly Facility in Cincinnati, OH
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Racking- Pre-assembly Advantages
I. Reduces total number of connections and man-hoursII. Less potential for improper installationIII. Reduces on-site staging areaIV. Quicker unloading and stagingV. Weather
Location: Berkshire County, MA; COD: 2015; Capacity: 3,300 kWdc
Figure 6a: Pre-assembled Top Chord
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Figure 6b: Unloading Pre-assembled Top Chords
Concrete Block ProductionPrecast Concrete Ballast Block
I. Precast Lead Time – 3-6 weeks from release to first block deliveryII. Production and Delivery Rates
i. For a 1 MW, typical production is 60 blocks/day and delivery up to 200 blocks/day.
Figure 7: Precast Block Production - SCC
Project Location: Chittenden County, VT COD: 2017; Capacity: 2,132 kWdc
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Concrete Block ProductionPrecast Concrete Ballast Block a. Fabrication Drawings and Concrete Mix Design Submittal
i. Verify reinforcing – rebar, WWR, or the preferred fibers.ii. Verify concrete mix design… most common type of mix is a high early strength self consolidating
concrete (SCC)b. Advantages
i. Produced in controlled environment to minimize risks and unforeseen costs compared to cast-in-placeii. Minimizes total on-site man hours
Figure 8: Precast Block Production - Curing
Project Location: Hampden County, MA; COD: 2016; Capacity: 950 kWdc
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Cast-in-Place I. Cast-in-Place Lead Time – 2-3 weeks from releaseII. Concrete mix design varies by ready-mix plant, location, weather, temperature, installation methods, etc.
i. Admixtures – adds cost– retarders, accelerators, water-reducers, non-chlorides, super plasticizers, evap. reducers
Figure 9: Cast-in-place from Ready-mix Truck
Location: Test pour at RBI Solar Manufacturing Facility - Cincinnati, OH
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Cast-in-Place I. Means and methods of placement:
i. Ready-mix mixing 8-10 yd3 truckii. Skid steer 0.5 yd3 bucketiii. Concrete pumps or concrete pump truck
II. Construction plan for Cast-in-PlaceI. Form assembly and form layoutII. Rack and post assembly
III. AdvantagesI. Shorter lead time than precastII. Can virtually be done anywhere
Part II – Rack and Foundation Production
Figure 10: Cast-in-place from Skid Steer
Source: www.danuser.com
Part III
Installation Considerations
Equipment SelectionI. Equipment Ground Pressures
i. Standard Telescopic Boom Lift (Lull or telehandler) – 40-80 psi unloadedii. Skid Steer Loader
i. Wheeled – 20-60 psi unloadedii. Tracked – 4-6 psi unloaded
iii. Medium Sized Excavator (30 Ton) - 3-8 psi unloadediv. Tracked Carrier – 2-6 psi unloadedv. Ready-mix Concrete Mixing Truck – 80-120 psi loadedvi. Rear Mount Crane Boom Truck – 75-120 psi unloaded
Figure 12: Rear Mount Crane Boom TruckFigure 11: Excavator Setting Blocks on Landfill
Location: Burlington County, NJ; COD: 2017; Capacity: 16,500 kWdc Location: Erie County, NY; COD: 2016; Capacity: 4,100 kWdc
Part III – Installation Considerations
Responsibility Matrix
TaskDeveloper
/ EPCRack
ProviderConcrete Provider
Installer
Foundation / Rack Design I R I I
Provide Anchor Rods I R I I
Provide and Install Reinforcing Materials A C C R
Purchase Concrete A I I I
Pre-assembled Posts C C A A
Provide and Review Concrete Submittal A C R I
Manage Concrete QAQC per ACI Industry Standards R C A A
Manage Ballast Deliveries A I A R
Equipment Plan and Verifying Exerted Ground Pressures A C I R
Unload and Set Blocks A I I R
Install Racking / Modules A I I R
Manage Racking QA/QC per Manufacturer's Installation Manual A C I R
Table 4 – Example for Responsibility Matrix for Ballasted Projects
R = Responsible A = Accountable C = Consultant I = Informed
Part III – Installation Considerations
Part IV
Case Study
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Site Specific RequirementsA. Code – IBC 2009, ASCE 7-05B. Wind – 100 mphC. Snow – 25 PSFD. Importance Factor – IE. Minimum set-backs required at gas vents – 20 feetF. Friction coefficient – 0.5
Figure 13: Minimum 20’ Setbacks at Vent Pipes
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Topography and Needed AdjustmentA. 5-20% slopes
A. Gravel pads utilized at areas greater than 10% on as needed basis.B. Continuous RowsC. Wind Tunnel – Interior / Perimeter (SEE FIGURE 16)
A. Interior Blocks (smaller blocks and larger spans) – 7,348 ct. B. Perimeter Blocks (larger blocks and small spans) – 2,586 ct.
Figure 14: Gravel Pad Utilization at Undulating Slopes
Part I – Rack & Foundation Design / Engineering Considerations
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Figure 15: Gravel Pad Utilization at Undulating Slopes
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Figure 16: Interior and Perimeter Blocks
Foundation SelectionSite access / staging areas
- Areas available on-site for staging of concrete blocksOn-site Wage Rates
- Prevailing wage ratesWeather / temperature – install started in Winter 2016
- Precaster started fabricating blocks in winter during their slow period thus lower precast pricingSchedule – producing more than 100 blocks per day and installing more than 200 blocks per day
Figure 18: Installation during Winter Months
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Figure 17: Installation during Winter Months
Part II – Racking and Ballast Production:
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Figure 19: Pre-assembled Top Chords Delivered to Site
Part II – Racking and Ballast Production:
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Figure 20: Pre-assembled Posts on Precast Ballasts in Staging Area
Part III – Installation
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ
Figure 21: Thirty Ton Tracked Excavators Setting Blocks
Size 16.564 MWModule Quantity 53,432Angle of Tilt 20°
Part V – Case StudyBrowns Mills, NJ
Landfill Project Map
11.47MW
States we have completed Landfill projects
0.04MW
2.3MW
0.09MW
7MW
0.11MW
27.32MW
3.81MW
43.22MW
41.5MW
Brazil – 3MW
TaskDeveloper
/ EPCRack
ProviderConcrete Provider
Installer
Foundation / Rack Design I R I I
Provide Anchor Rods I R I I
Provide and Install Reinforcing Materials A C R I
Purchase Concrete A I n/a I
Pre-assembled Posts A C R I
Provide and Review Concrete Submittal R C R I
Manage Concrete QAQC per ACI Industry Standards A I R R
Manage Ballast Deliveries A I R R
Equipment Plan and Verifying Exerted Ground Pressures A C I R
Unload and Set Blocks A I I R
Install Racking / Modules A I n/a R
Manage Racking QA/QC per Manufacturer's Installation Manual A C n/a R
R = Responsible A = Accountable C = Consultant I = Informed
Table 5 – Burlington County, NJ Responsibility Matrix
Part IV – Case StudyBurlington County, NJ