MV Hyak

[Kam]

Nov 5, 2011 16:41:02 GMT -8 Steve Rosenow said:

Nov 5, 2011 15:14:21 GMT -8 rusty said:

A hybrid Hyak? Just think of how much fuel they'd save with modern 4-stroke diesels. Of course, at WSDOT, the motto is: why do something smart and simple, when convoluted, complicated, and expensive is possible. Kdt's, deep-bored tunnel, LNG fruit boats, and now this. Gotta love those government dollars.

Hybrid makes sense in new construction, but in the case of the Hyak, a 44 year-old boat--a big waste of money.

Allow me to disagree.

For one, the Hyak was never upgraded and is still running to a large degree the original equipment she was equipped with in 1967. To run that equipment any further than absolute necessary would almost mean a certain early retirement of the Hyak.

At the current rate of Washington State Ferries' situation being drastically short of vessels, doing so would be a grave mistake NOT to upgrade.

Sure, construction of a new 144-car class vessel isn't supposed to start until sometime early next year, but the best way to test this sort of method is to retrofit an existing vessel.

My only complaint is that they better not touch the interior! LOL

The only thing I have to say is 44 is sure no early retirement...

[Steve Rosenow]

Nov 5, 2011 20:33:03 GMT -8 rusty said:

OK, you guys are right. Gut the Hyak, put in this hybrid system, which will be an order of magnitude more complex than the MkII's propulsion system, and by then the boat is 50 years old. It all makes perfect sense to those without technical expertise.

If one just wanted fuel savings and less pollution--put in modern 4-cycle engines.

If the feds want to fund this boondoggle, I have just one word for them--Solyndra.

I really shouldn't get hot under the collar, because the Hybrid Hyak is DOA.

How exactly are you sooooo sure about that being DOA?

I for one don't see your point of view.

[Steve Rosenow]

Nov 5, 2011 20:35:02 GMT -8 Kam said:

Nov 5, 2011 16:41:02 GMT -8 Steve Rosenow said:

Allow me to disagree.

For one, the Hyak was never upgraded and is still running to a large degree the original equipment she was equipped with in 1967. To run that equipment any further than absolute necessary would almost mean a certain early retirement of the Hyak.

At the current rate of Washington State Ferries' situation being drastically short of vessels, doing so would be a grave mistake NOT to upgrade.

Sure, construction of a new 144-car class vessel isn't supposed to start until sometime early next year, but the best way to test this sort of method is to retrofit an existing vessel.

My only complaint is that they better not touch the interior! LOL

The only thing I have to say is 44 is sure no early retirement...

Well, yeah, I'll give you that, but the Steel Electric debacle pretty much left WSDOT to effectively force the retirement of vessels at 60 years. The Hyak is 44 years old, and to a large degree so is her machinery and powerplant. Something has to give in that respect. I highly doubt that equipment is going to last the next 16 years.

This retrofit ensures WSF gets at least another 20 years' life left out of the Hyak (which, from what I understand is the best Super-Class ferry in terms of hull condition).

And I highly doubt it's going to take four years to install a hybrid designed propulsion system.

[rusty]

Once again let me state that my complaint is not with a retrofit of the Hyak, my complaint is with a hybrid retrofit.

This complaint with a hybrid installation in a ferry is due to some basic scientific facts.

A ship, unlike a car which operates in air, is in water. Water is a denser fluid, and more energy in deceleration is lost to friction. Also, the way ferries are operated, the period of regeneration via the propeller is relatively brief. When you add in shafting frictional losses, electrical losses, and the fact that you get less energy out of a battery than you put in, any real energy gain from regeneration would be insignificant, and effectively zero.

The other justification for a hybrid installation is that the ferry could secure its engines and operate on battery power while at the dock. A neat idea, but flawed. Any power removed from the battery bank would need to be replaced by fuel driven generators, unless they plan to also plug the thing into the grid while docked (another level of complexity).

Overall, the hybrid system would consume more fuel than a conventional diesel electric plant that had the ability to add and remove engines dependent on load conditions, and run its engines at peak efficiencies.

The issue of particulate and NOx emissions has already been addressed by modern engine design, exhaust gas treatment, and ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel.

I hate to raise the bloody shirt here but a hybrid Hyak is yet another example of the corruption in the Washington State political establishment, and I say that as a life long Democrat.

[rusty]

The hybrid Hyak proposal: www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/AF8C5114-E659-4FF0-B339-4924D1550779/0/TIGERIIIHyakHybrid102811FINAL.pdf

It looks like they do plan to plug it in at docked dwell time, which would require an increase in electrical capacities on dock circuits, and some method to plug the thing in. It would need a large supply circuit, more than the typical shore power 100amp, 3ph, 440v circuit. Some sort of automated plug in system would be required, unless they want several guys dragging a heavy cord, prior to off loading, and after loading.

Overall, a nice proposal, but still unrealistic. Get rid of the feel good hybrid concept, and just go with a smart diesel-electric propulsion system. That, in itself, would more complex than a Mk II.

The proposal admits that this would be a first-of-kind installation. When done they could park it next to one of the BC Fast Cats, (if those things haven't been scrapped yet), it's that kind of project.

[rusty]

Counterpoint to the complexity in the proposed hybrid propulsion system for the Hyak is this:

“Simplicity is always something to strive for,” says Steven J. Paley, an inventor who holds nine patents and is the author of “The Art of Invention: The Creative Process of Discovery and Design.” “Most people just try and come up with a solution. It is much easier to add complexity than to work and discover simplicity. I think people do know this, but it’s hard.”

John Maeda, president of the Rhode Island School of Design and author of “The Laws of Simplicity,” echoes that notion.
“It’s everyone’s instinct to want more,” Mr. Maeda says. “We’re programmed to want more food, just in case we won’t have a chance to eat tomorrow. So we eat a lot today. More is safety. More is when you’re at the checkout counter and there are more features.” But, he says, people ultimately don’t want all the extras: “At the point of desire you want more, but at the point of daily use, you want less.”

(from 11/5/11 NYT: In the School of Innovation, Less is Often More, by Nicloe Laporte)

It would appear that WSDOT engineers and consultants are at the point of desire, and not at that of daily use.

[rusty]

On the basis of cost, over a projected service life of 60 years, the stated total benefits are overstated. This is due to the fact that WSDOT used the figure of 19 years for the remaining service life in their calculations. As the Hyak is currently 44 years old, and the return to revenue service, from this point, is realistically 4 years, the remaining service life of the vessel is 12 years. That is a 37% error, and as such, corrected calculations would yield a negative cost benefit.

Also, the total costs of the Hyak Hybrid Ferry Propulsion Project is listed as $12.5 million dollars. For the proposed propulsion system modifications this figure is wildly unrealistic, and should be between two to three times higher.

In order to maintain fleet capacity, a retrofit of the Hyak is a worthy project, but due to the age of the vessel and the cost of the current proposal, this project must be scaled back. Realistically, a retrofit similar to those already done on the Yakima and Kaleetan should be considered. With these previous retrofits as a starting point, additional fuel efficiencies could be incorporated into the design of the Hyak retrofit.

If a hybrid propulsion system is truly of such benefit that WSDOT desires to proceed with such a dubious project on the Hyak, why wasn't a hybrid propulsion system specified for the new vessel that WSDOT has recently contracted to build?

[Steve Rosenow]

It makes no sense, to answer that last question.

Even with today's advances in computerized propulsion systems and hybrid technologies, it makes no sense to apply it to a new vessel.

The Issaquah-class stands testament to what happens when unproven technologies are applied in new vessel construction. It's best to test it on an existing vessel. If flaws are uncovered in a new vessel, it stands to ruin the entire credibility of the vessel class as a whole. (see the early years of the Issaquah-class as proof).

And furthermore, where are your figures coming from. I'm still having a hard time seeing your POV.

[rusty]

As far as the Issaquah is concerned, and to paraphrase Billy Pilgrim in Slaughterhouse-5, I was there.

The problem with the Issaquah was not unproven technology. Rather, it was the fact that the control system vendor (who was also the controllable pitch propeller manufacturer) was a criminal enterprise. Lacking sufficient technical expertise they found it easier to defraud the State.

The figures I'm using come from WSDOT's Tiger III Grant Application: Hyak Hybrid Ferry Propulsion Project. I had a link to it a few post back. In the next paragraph I return to that document, this time concerning the technical aspects of the proposal.

The proposal document is so limited and bereft of detail to be nothing more than a wish list. But what is there is so sprinkled with falsehood, and misconception to border on a criminal attempt to defraud the Federal government.

First technical false statement (pg. 3): "-- the generators powering the Hyak's current, outdated propulsion system run at a constant rate of 900 rpm..." The second false statement, (which is the remainder of the sentence)"...,and produce a fixed amount of power."

The Hyak is a DC/DC boat. Engine speed and generator voltage are varied to control propeller speed. The Elwha, I believe, is the Super that runs at 900rpm and a product of several control system retrofits.

That second false statement proves that the author of this proposal is a technical idiot.

The third false statement, on page 3 again: "Similarly, at times when many generators are running, but not all the power is being used, the batteries will store this additional power, rather than letting it go to waste." (emphasis added).

Ah, excuse me, what the f*ck. Do they mean that a valve is opened and electrons are allowed to escape into the atmosphere?

Do I need to go on. This project lacks all credibility with just those three false and inaccurate statements.

Speaking as a Washington State resident: we own the Hyak, we will be the ones that pay for this project. It is time to stop this boondoggle now!

[rusty]

Complaint filed with USDOT, Office of Inspector General.

[dumbthird]

Nov 7, 2011 17:53:25 GMT -8 rusty said:

Complaint filed with USDOT, Office of Inspector General.

Seriously?.....To each his own i suppose.

Full disclosure, i have not read the Tiger grant application nor the propulsion system upgrade RFP, but I'm pretty familiar with the boat.

-The Hyak's propulsion control system (and drive motors) are original, installed in the 60's and probably was state of the art a decade before that.

-The Hyak's hull is in really good shape, lots of $ put into it 5 or so years ago at DCI. Also number of other "mid-life" upgrades were done in 2005, elevator, steering controls, etc.

-Its my understanding that when the state started planning the propulsion control system (PCS) upgrade a number of years ago a hybrid scheme wasn't under consideration, the lure of federal $ along with very decent fuel savings/operational benefits has brought it under current consideration. Key word there, "planning", the state is not designing/engineering this!

-Regeneration through deceleration doesn't really even enter the picture. But being able to make the schedule crossing on 2 main engines running at 90% load (versus the current 4 mains at 60%) with a large reserve of power available to make a emergency stop without waiting for one or more prime movers to come on line is very appealing.

I guess what I'm getting at with my disjointed ramblings is the boat needs a serious control system/prop system upgrade, it pains me to say that but its true. That was already in the works and it evolved into the battery hybrid design. Somebody in WSF engineering just didn't pull the hybrid design out of their rear end to spend taxpayer dollars.

My gut feeling though (as much as i like a lot of the battery hybrid scheme).....the money set aside for the PCS upgrade will be appropriated for other projects before anything gets off the ground.

[Steve Rosenow]

Nov 7, 2011 15:37:50 GMT -8 rusty said:

First technical false statement (pg. 3): "-- the generators powering the Hyak's current, outdated propulsion system run at a constant rate of 900 rpm..." The second false statement, (which is the remainder of the sentence)"...,and produce a fixed amount of power."

The Hyak's engines run at the same speed at the dock that they do when the vessel is in motion.

The engines and drive motors on the Hyak are the exact same engines and drive motors that the Hyak was equipped with when she left the NASSCO shipyard in 1967. Only the Kaleetan, Yakima and Elwha have upgraded engines and drive motor systems.

Your saying the Hyak has a variable-speed propulsion system is a false statement. Having spent time on the Hyak this summer when she spent a brief bit of time on the Bremerton/Seattle run, I can attest that the exhaust note remained a constant coming out of either funnel and that was whether or not the vessel was in motion or at either dock. (Keep in mind, my trips were for photographic documentation for a 1:64 scale model of the Kaleetan I'm building, but I also pay close attention to that sorta detail). Infact I can vividly recall a crossing in June where the Hyak had to come to a stop after Alki Point to give right-of-way to a Tacoma-bound freighter, and there was no change in exhaust note when I was observing the freighter pass us, and when the Hyak picked speed up again.

Step aboard the Kaleetan, and as soon as the controls are engaged, the exhaust note changes.

Either way, I think you're making too big a mountain out of a small molehill. I too, am a Washington resident and have frequently travelled aboard the Hyak and its sister Kaleetan.

The sheer fact that the Hyak has not - I repeat - HAS NOT received ANY FORM of propulsion/powerplant upgrade in her 44-year service life span so far should be the first clue that WSDOT needs to act now to extend the service life of the ferry.

And IMO, it makes no sense to impliment new technology like this in a vessel that hasn't even yet had its keel laid, when we have a perfect vessel to use as a test. And seeing things from a "glass-half-full" perspective, I have faith in this technology. Give it a chance first before tossing it out with the bathwater!

[Barnacle]

Nov 7, 2011 20:19:36 GMT -8 Steve Rosenow said:

The engines and drive motors on the Hyak are the exact same engines and drive motors that the Hyak was equipped with when she left the NASSCO shipyard in 1967.

Really? I was told they'd been replaced in about 2003-2004 by the rebuilt engines from the Spokane and Walla Walla.

[EGfleet]

Nov 8, 2011 6:18:38 GMT -8 Barnacle said:

Nov 7, 2011 20:19:36 GMT -8 Steve Rosenow said:

The engines and drive motors on the Hyak are the exact same engines and drive motors that the Hyak was equipped with when she left the NASSCO shipyard in 1967.

Really? I was told they'd been replaced in about 2003-2004 by the rebuilt engines from the Spokane and Walla Walla.

They were. That's actually covered back in this thread somewhere. Here's the photo.

[dumbthird]

Nov 8, 2011 6:46:07 GMT -8 EGfleet said:

Nov 8, 2011 6:18:38 GMT -8 Barnacle said:

Really? I was told they'd been replaced in about 2003-2004 by the rebuilt engines from the Spokane and Walla Walla.

They were. That's actually covered back in this thread somewhere. Here's the photo.

x2, 3 are recycled from the jumbos and the 4th is a reman (edit) one.

[dumbthird]

Also to clarify things, the only super that runs the mains constant speed is the Elwha, the rpms on the remaining 3 vary with throttle, fyi.

[Barnacle]

Anything to add about the constant-speed vs. fluctuating-speed argument, bs3? I know enough to not say when I don't know.

[Steve Rosenow]

Hmph, well I certainly stand corrected! I had thought it was the Kaleetan that got the engines from the Jumbos?!

[rusty]

As a side note: the Klickitat went to her grave with the original 1927 control system, and was the preferred boat on the PT/Key route.

For the third time: I am not opposed to a Hyak retrofit. I am, though, opposed to a hybrid Hyak retrofit. It would be extremely complex, expensive, and will not offer any real world benefit that would justify the increase in complexity and cost.

Now back to the Hyak Hybrid Propulsion Project Tiger III Grant Application document. It's time to knock a couple more rungs out of that rotten ladder.

The following quote elaborates and expands on the wildly erroneous description of the Hyak propulsion generators introduced in the opening page of the document : "Generators powering the motors have two speeds: On and Off; they run at a constant 900rpm, and cannot be turned down." "....Because of the Hyak's antiquated design, it's generators run at full speed, even during times when it is not necessary." (pg.5)

As stated before, and confirmed by basically ever engineer and oiler at WSDOT's Ferries Division, the Hyak's propulsion generators do indeed vary in operating speed in response to load conditions. What the grant document is describing is the antiquated alternators of the Elwha, a 1991 retrofit (which, by the way, is on its third propulsion control system.)

A fundamental aspect of the hybrid Hyak is the battery bank. It is stated that : "The batteries planned for MV Hyak will provide at least one full diesel engine's worth of power." (pg 17/18) Without stating the length of time that this battery bank is to deliver that amount of power this is essentially a meaningless specification, and, as such, the size, capacity, and cost of the battery bank cannot be determined. The capacity and battery technology used is needed to determine the charge rate. If, as WSDOT states, the batteries are to be charged at tie-up to bank energy at grid cost, the electrical current demand will determine the upgrades in shore power infrastructure needed supply this vessel's increased tie-up electrical demand.

To be functionally effective, the battery bank will be very large, and to provide robust charge and discharge rates newer battery technologies, such as lithium ion, will be needed. The cost of this battery bank will potentially cost a small fortune, and as batteries have a limited service life, the cost of replacement batteries at the end of their service life needs to be factored into this proposal.

Any plan to plug the boat into the grid while the boat is in the dock during unloading/loading operations would be cost prohibitive, because at every dock which this mode of operation would be used, there would need to be significant upgrades in electrical capacity delivered to the end of the dock--above and beyond that required for charging the bank during the tie-up period. A mechanized plug-in system would also need to installed. These modifications must also be factored into the cost basis, if this capability of the hybrid system is utilized.

The only aspect of the proposed propulsion system modification in this grant application that makes technological and economic sense is the power management system that adds or removes generators from service depending on load. Even this will prove to be technically challenging to design, install, and achieve reliable operation.

Because the Hyak Hybrid Ferry Propulsion Project Tiger III Grant Application is so critically flawed with basic errors of fact, WSDOT should withdraw this application. If WSDOT does not withdraw this application, and at least resubmit a corrected application, WSDOT would be technically defrauding the Federal government.

[chokai]

Ok so then. If you had to put a hybrid system in place what boat would you put it in? Or are you simply opposed to the very concept of hybrid propulsion period in a ferry? In all honesty I'm having a great deal of trouble keeping your concerns straight as it's all interspersed.

If you still believe it should be under new construction as you've advocated then backed away from several times now then I'm curious as to why? Given that such action would fly in the face of many common engineering practices that advocate introduction of major sub-system changes be tested out within the context of a larger existing well understood system first, in this case the system being a boat.

I'm fairly neutral on the value of the hybrid concept itself, though I would obviously hope it would work if done. But I strongly believe that new construction is *not* the place to conduct such an experiment. (see 787, DDX, Windows Vista ;-))

[Deleted]

It seemed that when I read the document it implied that the normal operation would be that the boat would run on normal diesel power, and that the battery was a back up for emergency power (stopping at the dock?). The advantage was that they would not need another power plant online and available for an emergency maneuver. It seems originally that this is the only use for the batteries. There is talk later in the document that they may experiment with running the boat more on battery, but the main design is for backup/emergency power. Also, unlike a hybrid car, it seems that most of the fuel savings is in the new, smaller power plants, not running on battery power.

[rusty]

The reason to do a marine hybrid system on new construction is that you can recover the high initial cost of of the propulsion package over a longer period of time. Also, it would be a clean install, and not be crippled by compromise due to the limits imposed by an existing vessel's layout and retained equipment. The smart and less costly way of doing what is probably an extremely high initial cost on a prototype propulsion system is to do the install on a smaller vessel.

Currently, WSDOT, has been building new vessels that consume significantly more fuel than the boats they replaced,and that is with no increase in vehicle capacity.

If WSDOT wanted to be bold and install a prototype hybid propulsion system on an existing vessel, pick the Chetzemoka. It's propulsion system is currently broken (cracked propeller, & I really don't know the specifics of that). The installed propulsion system is substandard (no CPP'S), and it's a smaller vessel. Yes, I know that will not happen, because WSDOT will admit to no mistake.

[chokai]

This is a glorified R&D project, it's very very high risk for a state agency to do something like this. What if it does not work and must be ripped out? With a new boat you might have to spend tens of millions more fixing it or attempting to get it to work right to no avail and then having to rip it all out and putting back in a standard system, which might well suffer from the inverse compromises you have to make to put a hybrid system in a old boat. At that point you can do the cost/benefit analysis of simply retiring Hyak and walking away.

I don't believe a smaller vessel would get WSF the answers I think they are looking for and that underly the real reason behind this proposal. Refitting one of the KdTs, even if it works better could be very costly, you would potentially have to throw out an engineering plant with 20+ years left on it, though you maybe able to resell it given it's age, and it is possible that the fuel savings *might* pay for what you lose on it. However they are tiny boats compared to most.

It seems the general consensus is that Hyak needs new everything pretty much which means you are throwing nothing away in that regard, and a hybrid plant would need substantial work in the 10 - 12 year time frame when the first battery replacement is needed. At that point if it's a bad apple you could also walk away avoiding a huge maintenance bill in the process.

My suspicion here is that they specifically selected Hyak to prove it out in vessel similar in size to the new 144's and gather information for later use in that program, without the risk of having a brand new $120M hull that they can't even use for many years.

[rusty]

Ok, OK! I just woke up from a nap and I figured out a solution that will make everybody happy. This will save fuel, be simple, and work on the Hyak retrofit.

First off, WSDOT's model of a hybrid is not a Prius, it is a harbor tug, of which there are now quite a few successfully incorporating marine hybrid propulsion units.

I know most of you are thinking that a harbor tug and a ferryboat are very different in two major ways. One, most obviously is size, the other is the nature of how the units operate.

Harbor tugs spend a lot of time idling, not doing much of anything, then engage in a powerful thrust of limited duration. A ferry boat spends most of it's time in transit at full operating speed, with a relatively brief maneuvering period during which are bursts of potentially full power demands. Somewhere in the middle is the time that the ferry pushes the dock. This is a predictable low power situation.

Now get this, it's pure genius, and I'm sure the next Governor will make me WSDOT's new chief, I'll even hire some of you guys that agree with me.

My control system modification is a push button in the wheelhouse. You push the button when the boat is safely in the dock: excess generating capacity is then removed from the bus and the engine is secured. When it is time to leave, the button is again pushed; the engine is restarted and placed back on the bus and the boat accelerates to transit speed, which so happens to coincide with peak engine efficiency.

Pretty cool, huh! I await my kudos and high-fives. ;D

[rusty]

In WSDOT's Hyak Hybrid Ferry Propulsion Project basic facts of the Hyak's propulsion system are used as justification for this project. It has been determined that the referenced propulsion system is not that of the Hyak, but strongly resembles that of the Elwha.

If WSDOT used the Elwha's propulsion system as an example of an inherently inefficient propulsion system, they most likely used the Elwha's fuel consumption in the cost basis calculations that are used to economically justify this project.

As the Elwha consumes more fuel than the Hyak, and if the Elwha's fuel consumption figures were, in fact, used in the cost basis calculations, then the cost basis benefit of this project would be unrealistically inflated, and the cost basis benefit of this project would be erroneous.

My previous finding of an error in the expected service life used in the cost benefit analysis can be characterized as a fuzzy kind of error, in that WSDOT's policy of a 60 year life span can at any time be changed by executive fiat. But a gross error in fuel consumption, the primary factor in the cost benefit calculation, could possibly be a criminal manipulation of the cost basis analysis in order to fraudulently obtain Federal dollars.

At the very least, the grant application is so obviously flawed that it should be rejected.