Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States

Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation.

NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Govern-
ment nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their
contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express
or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy,
completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or
service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not
necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring
by the United States Government, any agency thereof or any of their
contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do
not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any
agency thereof or any of their contractors.

Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced
directly from the best available copy.

Available to DOE and DOE contractors from

Office of Scientific and Technical Information
PO BOX 62
Oak Ridge, TN 37831
Prices available from (615) 576-8401, FTS 626-8401

Available to the public from

National Technical Information Service
US Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Rd
Springfield, VA 22161
NTIS price codes
Printed copy: A06
Microfiche copy: AO1

Cover design: Gene Clardy, Sandie National Laboratories

Cover photo: Anne V. Poore, Sandla National Laboratories

 Distribution
Category UC-276

SAND87-0804
Unlimited Release

WATERPUMPING:THESOLARALTERNATIVE

Michael G. Thomas
Photovoltaic Systems Design Assistance Center
Sandia National Laboratories
Albuquerque, NM 87185-0753

ABSTRACT

This report was prepared to provide an introduction into understand-

ing the characteristics, including economics, of photovoltaically powered
water pumping systems. Although thousands of these systems exist
worldwide, many potential users do not know how to decide whether or
not photovoltaic pumping systems are an attractive option for them. This
report provides current information on design options, feasibility assess-
ment, and system procurement so that the reader can make an informed
decision about water pumping systems, especially those powered with
photovoltaics.
 Major contributions to this document were made by Solavolt
International, Chronar Trisolar Corp., and I. T. Power. Industry govern-
ment, and private organizations reviewed this information to eliminate
questions and to check its accuracy. The final document, edited by the
Photovoltaic Systems Design Assistance Center staff, is based on the orig-
inal inputs and the comments of the reviewers.

iv
Chapter PAGE

1 INTRODUCTION 1
Background 1

Suitability of System to Moderate Pumping Needs 1

2 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR PV-POWERED 4

WATER SYSTEMS
PV System Power Production 4

Types of Water Pumps 5

Types of Motors 5

Energy Storage: Batteries 7

Energy Storage: Water Tanks 7

Controls: What is Needed 7

Determining Water Needs 7

Daily Insolation Levels 9

Orientation and Location of Photovoltaic Arrays 9

Tilt of Photovoltaic Arrays 9

Determining Peak Water Flow 11

Water Production 11

Static and Dynamic Heads 12

3 SYSTEM SELECTION 15

Sizing Systems and Selecting Equipment 15

The Effect of Varying Solar Radiation on Output 18

Equipment Type vs. Pumping Requirement 21

Specifying System Performance 22

4 COST AND ECONOMICS OF PUMPING SYSTEMS 23

Determining the Cost-Effectiveness of a Pumping System 23

Measuring Cost-Effectiveness of a Pumping System 23

Measuring Life-Cycle Costs of a Pumping System 23

 CONTENTS
(Continued)

Chapter Page

Cost Appraisal of a PV-Powered Pumping System 24

Capital and Installation Costs 24

Pump Costs 25

Pump Replacement Costs 26

Evaluating the Costs of a Diesel Pumping System 29

Special Considerations 29

Comparing Costs of a Diesel System 29

Comparative Costs of Other Pumping Systems 31

5 PREPARING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL 33

Preparing a Technical Specification 33

Scope of Work 34

Qualified Bidders 34

Warranty and Spare Parts 34

Price and Delivery 34

Evaluating Responses (Optional Recommendations) 34

Detailed Assessment 35

BIBLIOGRAPHY 36

LIST OF MANUFACTURERS 37

Appendix
A Insolation Availability A-1
B Sample Calculations of System Sizing, Equipment B-1
Selection and Cost Evaluation

FIGURES

Figure
1 Regions of Applicability for Various Pumping Options
2 PV de-Electric Generator
3 Block Diagram of PV-Powered Water Pumping System
4 Types of Water Pumps

vi
 FIGURES
(Continued)

Figure Page

5 Winter Insolation Contours 10

6 Total Dynamic Head (TDH) Factors 13

7 Hydraulic Energy Nomograph 16

8 Array Power Nomograph 17

9 Typical Daily Variations in Solar Radiation 19

10 Relation between Peak Daily Insulation and

Performance of Centrifugal Pumps 20

11 Relative Energy Output at Various Tilt Angles 20

12 Centrifugal Pump and Volumetric Pump Output 21

13 Pumpset Type vs. Pumping Regime 22

14 Procedures for Cost Appraisal of a Water Pumping System 28

TABLES

Table
1 Comparison of Pumping Options 2

2 Typical Daily Water Usage for Farm Animals 8

3 Maximum Daily Pumped Water Requirements for Crop Irrigation 8

4 Friction Losses in Head (ft) per 100 ft of 1.5-inch Pipe 14

5 Cost, Discount and NPV Examples 24

6 LCCS for the Hypothetical PV Pumping System 27

7 LCCS for a Hypothetical Diesel Pumping System 31

8 Cost Data for Wind-Powered, Animal-Powered 32

and Hand Pumps

vii
 WATER PUMPING: THE SOLAR ALTERNATIVE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Background class of applications. This report describes

the characteristics of PV-powered pumping
The availability of water has never been systems including their ease of procurement
more important than today. The United and installation, and small maintenance
Nations, while naming the 1980s as the requirements, which account for their grow-
“Decade for Water,” estimates that it would ing popularity.
take more than $90 billion to meet the No single pumping technique is suitable
world’s current deficits for clean water for the entire range of existing applications.
alone. As we approach the 1990s, it is clear Each type of pump has its own set of appro-
that even with vast sums of money, the priate applications. Solar pumps are particu-
water needs of tens of millions of people will larity useful for intermediate applications
not be met by the end of the decade. like small villages (100-1,000 inhabitants)
Although methods for water delivery and moderate agricultural needs. This report
have been known for thousands of years, provides a methodology for selecting the
problems still remain. The simplest and best system design for a particular applica-
most economical way is to divert rain or tion. Often a combination of techniques (e.g.,
river water by a gravity flow system to the manual and solar) can dramatically reduce
desired location. This method is not avail- costs and improve the reliability of a pump-
able in much of the world, at least not on a ing network, or provide the design flexibility
regular or demand basis. Where this is not to cover a wide range of applications.
possible, manual pumping has been the
most common method for many years.
Although these pumps require regular Suitability of System to Moderate
maintenance and must be attended, their use Pumping Needs
is critical to water supply, especially for
human consumption, throughout the world. Some circumstances have made PV power
This method, in fact, has been chosen by the the preferred choice, especially where there
United Nations as the primary method in is adequate solar resource and moderate
their programs to alleviate the water supply water demand. Characteristics of the three
problems in the world. pumping options available for water deliv-
Moving large volumes of water and/or ery (manual, solar, and diesel) are listed in
pumping from deep wells cannot be done Table 1.
effectively with hand pumps, but requires These advantages/disadvantages have
the use of mechanical pumps powered by been analyzed many times. Generally these
engines or electric motors. Engine-powered analyses identify three distinct ranges of
systems are providing water to larger com- applicability (Figure 1). Ranges of pumping
munities throughout the world. The infras- requirements are expressed in meters to the
tructure of the large communities can pro- fourth power per day calculated by multi-
vide the fuel and maintenance required by plying the head (the distance the water
the engines. needs to be lifted, measured in meters) and
There are also many thousands of solar- the flow volume (measured in cubic meters
powered systems in the world today, pow- per day). Simply stated, hand pumps are
ered by wind generators or photovoltaic well suited to needs for small volumes at
low-tomoderate head (50 m4). For large vol-
(PV) arrays. The PV-powered systems have
demonstrated higher reliability and lower umes and high head (> 2,000 m4), engines
costs than the alternative methods in a large are required.

1
 For years, the large region between the load, but it must operate inefficiently at par-
two curves in Figure 1 has been met less tial power. Multiple hand pumps require a
than optimally by either oversized diesel- well for each pump and the costs of digging
powered systems or by a number of hand the wells can exceed the cost of the rest of
pumps. An oversized diesel can meet the the pumping system. Because PV systems

Table 1

Comparison of Pumping Options

Pump Type Principal Advantages Disadvantages

Hand Low cost Regular maintenance

(manual) Simple technology Low flow
Easy maintenance Absorbs time and energy
Clean that might be used more
No fuel requirement productively elsewhere
Applicable to Uneconomic use of
hand-dug wells expensive borehole

Solar Low maintenance Relatively high

(PV-powered) Clean capital cost
No fuel needed Lower output in
Easy to install cloudy weather
Reliable Long life
Unattended operation
Low recurrent costs
System is modular
and can be matched
closely to need

Diesel (or Moderate capital cost Maintenance often

gas) -powered Can be portable inadequate, reducing life
Extensive experience Fuel often expensive and
Easy to install supply intermittent
Noise, dirt and fume
problems

2
 500

Head--flow product = 2000

200 -

100 -

50 -
E
s
: 20
c
.
.
.- }icad--flow product = 50
~ 10 -
.
.
5 –

2 -

1 -

o~
o 25 75 100

hi]y f]OW, )])’/day

Figure 1. Regions of Applicability for Various Pumping Options

are modular, sizing to meet the specific PV-powered systems require only that
requirements in this area is easily and eco- there be adequate sunshine and a source of
nomically accomplished. A detailed treat- water. The number of PV-powered systems
ment of these options is in “A Comparative in the world is probably limited only by the
Assessment of Photovoltaics, Hand Pumps, fact that PV-power is a new technology, and
and Diesels for Rural Water Supply, ” many potential users are simply unfamiliar
SAND87-7015, Sandia National Laborat- with it.
ories, Albuquerque, May 1988.

3
 2.0 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR
PV-POWERED WATER SYSTEMS

PV System Power Production tens of watts of power. Several modules are

then connected in an array to provide
PV power is produced directly by sun- enough power to run a motor-pump set in a
light shining on an array of PV modules, pumping system. This array is usually
requires no moving parts, and is extremely mounted on a simple, inexpensive structure
simple and reliable. Many materials respond oriented toward the sun at an inclination
to visible light; the most common is silicon, a angle close to the latitude of the site. This
constituent of ordinary sand. A thin, silicon ensures that ample energy from the sun will
cell, 10 cm across, can produce more than 1 shine on the array during all seasons of the
watt (W) of dc electrical power under clear- year.
sky conditions. A PV-powered water system is basically
Generally, many individual cells are com- similar to any other water system (Figure 3).
bined into modules sealed between layers of All PVpowered pumping systems have, as a
glass or transparent polymer to protect the minimum, a PV array, a motor, and a pump.
electric circuit from the environment (Figure The array can be coupled directly to a dc
2). These modules are capable of producing motor or, through an inverter, to an ac

Figure 2. PV de-Electric Generator

4
 ~---- -------%--’=..
4
---
--. \\
POWER %%
MOTOR -.
GENERATOR
PUMP

I WELL
1

Figure 3. Block Diagram of PV-Powered Water Pumping System

motor. For both ac and dc systems a battery Volumetric pumps have a water output
bank can be used to store energy or the that is almost independent of head but
water can be stored. The motor is connected directly proportional to volume. There are
to any one of a variety of variable-speed many different types of volumetric pumps.
pumps. The most interesting for inclusion in PV-
powered pumping systems are the counter-
balanced piston pumps (usually called jack
Types of Water Pumps
or donkey pumps) and the progressive cavi-
ty pumps (sometimes called screw pumps).
Pumps of many different varieties are The efficiency of these pumps increases as
suitable for inclusion in a PV-powered the head increases. Volumetric pumps are
pumping system. They do, however, fall ideally suited for conditions of low flow
broadly into two categories, centrifugal rates and /or high lifts. Pumps of this type
(rotodynamic) and volumetric (positive dis- have been installed with flow rates as low as
placement), which have inherently different 0.3 cubic meters/day and as high as 40 cubic
characteristics. Figure 4 shows three com- meters /day, and with lifts from as little as 10
mon types of pumps. meters to as great as 500 meters.
Centrifugal pumps are ideally suited for
conditions of moderateto-high flow in tube
Types of Motors
wells, cisterns, or other reservoirs. These
pumps are designed for a fixed head and
The choice of the motor for a PV-powered
their water output increases with rotational
system is dependent on the size require-
speed. Their efficiency decreases at heads
ment, need for the motor to be submersible
and flows away from their design point.
or not, and availability of driving electron-
Centrifugal pumps have been installed with
ics. Three basic types are permanent magnet
capacities as high as 1,200 cubic meters/day
dc motors (brushed or brushless type),
and can be used for flow rates as low as 10-
wound-field dc motors, and ac motors.
15 cubic meters/day. However, these pumps
are not recommended for suction lifts higher The choice of a dc motor is attractive
than 5-6 meters. because PV arrays supply dc power.

5
*
.-

L. ,
(VOLUMETRIC)

SELF PRIMING
(CENTRIFUGAL)

VERTICAL TURBINE
(CENTRIFUGAL)

Figure 4. Types of Water Pumps

6
 However, ac motors in conjunction with dc- weather conditions and water use should
ac inverters can be used for high-power determine the optimum size to meet the
applications. needs.
The criteria for choosing a motor are: effi-
ciency, price, reliability and availability.
Generally, the wattage determines the choice
Controls: What is Needed
of the motor: permanent magnet dc motors
under 2,250 watts (3 horsepower), wound- For efficient operation, it is necessary that
field dc motors for 2,250-7,500 watts (3-10 the voltage/current characteristics of the
horsepower), and ac motors above 7,500 pumpset match those of the array. There are
three basic ways in which a pumpset can be
watts (10 horsepower).
connected to a PV array. The simplest is to
Generally, ac motors are limited to high-
directly couple the pumpset and array.
power applications in PV-powered pumping
Another method is to interpose a battery.
systems because they require inverters,
The third is to use an electronic controller.
thereby introducing additional costs and
The operation characteristics of centrifu-
some energy loss. Although ac systems are
gal pumps are reasonably well matched to
usually less efficient than dc motors, special
the output of PV arrays. Therefore, the two
improved-efficiency models are now avail-
are most often directly coupled. This direct
able for PV systems.
coupling requires that gear ratios, motor
speed, and voltage and pump stage charac-
Energy Storage: Batteries teristics be carefully chosen for proper oper-
ation. Array matching to pump characteris-
A pump powered by a PV array supplies tics is complicated by the limited number of
water during sunlight hours only, unless pump sizes.
storage batteries are included. Should batter- Electronic controls can enhance perfor-
ies be included? Introducing batteries into mance of a well-matched array-pump sys-
the photovoltaic-powered pumping system tem by 10-15%. These controls are frequently
may decrease its reliability and increase its used in locations with fluctuating water lev-
maintenance requirements. The inclusion of els or weather characteristics.
batteries is justified when the maximum The operating characteristics of volumet-
yield of the well during sunlight hours is ric pumps are badly matched to the output
insufficient to meet the daily water require- of PV arrays. Batteries can improve this
ment; alternatively, a new well could be dug. match and allow the motor to be started at
low sun levels. However, batteries have
drawbacks, as outlined above.
Energy Storage: Water Tanks
Maximum power controllers (MPCS) are
Water storage is an important considera- usually used with volumetric pumps. They
tion, regardless of the intended use for the employ “intelligent” electronic devices to
water. Pumps without batteries will not pro- transform the array output to match
duce any water when the sun does not pumpset power requirements. These con-
shine. This is least troublesome in those trols allow operation over a wide range of
places where the water is for irrigation. The irradiance levels, water levels, and flow
evapotranspiration of plants is proportional rates. In addition, they solve the volumetric
to the solar intensity: plants need less water pump starting problem. Electronic controls
during those periods when the pump pro- typically consume 4-7% of the array’s power
duces less water. Also, two to three days of output .
water storage is usually available at the root
zone of plants. Water needs for livestock and Determining Water Needs
humans also vary in relation to solar intensi-
ty. However, several days’ water storage in a The designer of a water system needs to
tank or reservoir is recommended. Three know the volume of water required per day
days is a typical storage size, but local and how far the water is to be transported
 Table 2

Typical Daily Water Usage for Farm Animals

Animal Water Usage (liters/animal)

Horses 50
Dairy cattle 40
Steers 20
Pigs 20
Sheep 5
Goats 5
Chickens 0.1

and, for PV-powered systems, the amount of and lifestyle. For planning the introduction
energy available from the sun. The designer of mechanical pumping systems into a vil-
can then design several alternate systems lage currently using hand pumps, a daily
and determine the cost of each. usage of 40 liters/person/day is suggested.
Three different needs should be consid- For a larger town, where indoor toilets and
ered to determine the quantity of water to be showers are more common, a consumption
mm~ed bv, a water svstem: figure of 100 liters/person/day is often
1 .
used.
● Water for drinking and cooking
It is more complex to estimate the water
. Water for livestock
requirements for an irrigation application,
● Water for crop irrigation.
and this is beyond the scope of this report.
Human and animal water needs can be Crop type, meteorological factors (tempera-
estimated by multiplying the daily usage by ture, humidity, wind speed, and cloud
the population. Typical daily requirements cover), method of irrigation, and season of
for farm animals are shown in Table 2. the year are the principal factors to be con-
Determining water needs for humans is sidered. Trickle or low-loss channel irriga-
somewhat more complicated because water tion techniques are more suitable for use
usage varies based on village size, location, with PV-powered pumps than flood or

Table 3

Maximum Daily Pumped Water Requirements for Crop Irrigation

Crop Water Usage

Rural village farms 60ms/ha

Rice 100ms/ha
Cereals 45ms/ha
Sugar Cane 66ms/ha
Cotton 55ms/ha
(ha = hectacre)

8
sprinkler techniques. Water requirements for sunshine on a clear summer day at solar
several common crops are presented in Table noon).
3. However, local practice and local experi- If water needs stay the same year-round,
ence are probably the best guide to water solar design calculations should be based on
requirements for a specific application. the month with the lowest insolation levels
Water usage is the first requirement to be to ensure adequate water throughout the
determined. If water usage varies over the year. If water is to be used for crop irriga-
year, the mean daily water requirements for tion, the months with the lowest insolation
each month must be calculated. For drinking often correspond to those in which crop
and livestock watering, water needs will be demand for water is lowest; thus, calcula-
about the same every month, but water tions do not need to be as conservative as
needs for crop irrigation vary over the grow- those for drinking water only. If water con-
ing season. The critical month from a sumption varies throughout the year, the
design viewpoint is the one with the mini- system design should be based on the ratio
mum ratio of sunlight available to the of water required to insolation available. The
amount of water required. The month with month in which this ratio is largest will
the least sunlight is the month in which the determine the PV array size. When deter-
least power is produced by the PV system. mining irradiation for a specific location,
data should be obtained from the nearest
**W+*
available meteorological station and
allowance made for any known local climate
differences.
The hypothetical village has 115 people
who are presently limited to water from a Orientation and Location of
hand-dug well. Water for crop irrigation and Photovoltaic Arrays
livestock watering is available from another
source. The village is growing and is expect- Orientation refers to the position of a sur-
ed to double in population in a few years. face relative to true south. Although photo-
Therefore, using the 40-liters/person/day voltaic arrays that face within 15° of true
figure for water consumption, the village south receive almost full sunshine, any
will soon need a minimum of 40 liters x 230 unobstructed, generally south-facing surface
people = 9,200 liters (9.2 m3) per day, year- is a potential array location. In many areas, a
round. * slightly westerly orientation is preferable to
due south to avoid morning haze or fog. An
****** array should not be shaded by obstructions
like buildings or trees. Obstructions that
cause no interference in summer may cast
Daily Insolation Levels long shadows when the winter sun is low in
the sky.
The power produced by a PV system
depends on the insolation (amount of sun- Tilt of Photovoltaic Arrays
light) available. This insolation varies for
each site and month-to-month, due to sea- Module surfaces tilted at a right angle to
sonal and climatic variations. Insolation is the sun’s rays catch the most sunshine per
usually measured in sun-hours (1 sun hour unit area. An angle equal to the local latitude
—
— 1 kWh/m2, about equal in intensity to is the closest approximation to that tilt or
slope on a year-round basis. This means that
the ideal pitch of an array for year-round
*In this report, paragraphs or calculations operation is about the same as the number of
set off from the rest of the text by rows of degrees of local latitude. If the water needs
asterisks are portions of a typical worked are not the same throughout the year, a high-
example of a water-pumping system design. er or lower array-tilt angle may be advanta-

9
 I I I I I II Q I I I I 1
3 a{
I I I II I I I s
0
I J 5 Y o
L---l-4
Figure 5. Winter Insolation Contours
10
geous and lead to better system perfor- Since the village’s projected growth
mance. For example, if the summer months requires that 9,200 liters be pumped each
have the highest water needs, an array tilt of day, and 5 sun-hours per day of insolation is
15° less than the latitude angle is recom- available, the peak flow rate from the system
mended. Similarly, if the winter months will be 9,200 liters/5 sun-hours = 1,840
have the highest water needs, increasing the liters/h = 0.5 liters/s.
tilt by 15° should be considered.
The daily total insolation incident on a ******
south-facing surface tilted at an angle equal
to the local latitude during the winter season
is shown in Figure 5. A set of insolation The next step is to determine whether the
availability maps for all seasons of the year village well is capable of producing that
and for three tilt angles is contained in flow.
Appendix A. This seasonal value will be
adequate for preliminary design and costing
purposes. Note that the number of sun- Water Production
hours at a site is different from the total
number of hours the sun is shining. The The amount of water produced by the
worldwide yearly avera e insolation is 5 well, like the amount of water needed by a
sun-hours (or 5 kWh/m P/day). Base your village, is one of the most important factors
design on the site closest in both distance in the design of a pumping system. A cor-
and climate conditions to your own. rectly operating pumping system should not
exceed the well’s production. For example, if
***X-**
a well can produce only 0.5 liter/s, a pump-
ing system capable of pumping twice that
amount will only pump the well dry. For
that reason, and for future planning, it is
The hypothetical village receives 5 sun-
important to know how much water a well
hours/day during the winter. Based on
can produce. (In the illustrative example, the
Figure 5 the village could be located in cen-
productivity of the well is presumed to be
tral Africa, north-central South America, etc.
known. If new wells are required, the
hydrology of the site must be assessed.)
******
There are techniques commonly used to
determine the amount of water a well can
produce. The method presented here will
Determining Peak Water Flow work with both shallow, hand-dug wells
and deep-tube wells. To perform this test, a
As mentioned above, insolation is mea- portable pump is needed that is capable of
sured in sun-hours. If, for example, 5 sun- pumping at a rate at least as high as the
hours/day are available at a site, this does peak required rate. A means is needed for
not mean that the sun produces 1 full sun- measuring the water level in the well, either
hour for 5 hours. In actuality, the sun pro- a measuring rule or a line with knots tied
duces less than 1 “full sun” for a period every half-meter, for example.
longer than 5 hours. The maximum required First, measure the depth-to-water in the
water flow in liters/h will be approximately well (the static water level). Install the
the system’s requirement divided by the pump, and let it pump water until the water
number of sun-hours. Dividing this figure level stabilizes. Now, with the pump still
by 3,600 seconds/hour gives the maximum operating, measure the depth-to-water
expected water flow in liters/s. again. To ensure that the level has stabilized,
check it at several time intervals. Now, mea-
****** sure the water flow rate by filling a contain-
er of known volume and measuring the time
required to do so. For accuracy, perform this

11
 Table 4
Friction Losses in Head (ft) per 100 ft of I. S-inch Pipe

Flow Rate Head Loss

(gal/min)/(1/see) Steel Copper Plastic

6/0.4 0.57 0.36 0.31

8/0.53 0.96 0.61 0.52
10/0.67 1.45 0.92 0.79
12/0.80 2.04 1,29 1.10
1 5/1.0 2.95 1.86 1.59

20/1 .33 5.24 3.31 2.83

25/1 .67 7.90 5.00 4.26
30/2.0 11.1 7.00 6.00
40/2.67 18.9 12.0 10.2
50/3.33 28.5 14.9 15.4

60/4.0 40.0 25.3 21.6

70/4.67 53.2 33.9 28.7
80/5.33 68.1 43.1 36.8
90/6.0 84.7 53.6 45.7
100/6.67 103 65.1 56.6

14
 3.0 System

In the previous chapter we looked at a graphy can be used to determine the size of
number of options for a PV water-tmm~irw the PV array required to meet the hydraulic
system. We ~lso discussed the eval~ati~n o~ load during the critical design period. In
water requirements and the capacities of addition, they generate the information
existing wells. In this chapter we will com- needed to select motor and pump size.. If
bine this information to choose the system after reading this section, you have ques-
configuration and its components. The tions on this procedure, there is a complete
choice of components is dependent on the example provided in Appendix B. The
configuration. Several possible designs may nomography replace the following basic
emerge. If the availability of components is steps in system sizing:
restricted, then the choice of configurations 1. Calculate the hydraulic load —The
is limited to those that use the available average daily energy load in kilowatt
components. Otherwise, the choice can be hours is calculated for the peak month
made by several techniques in current use. in each season. The hydraulic load is
The basic design of a PV water system is directly proportional to the daily water
straightforward. After the water need has volume-head product.
been determined the water source is tested 2. Estimate system losses — This
for its capacity, If the capacity is equal to or includes mismatch effects and losses in
greater than the need, selection of compo- the wires, electronic controls, pump,
nents begins. and motor. The losses in the pump (40-
6070) and motor (10-20%) dominate.
Sizing Systems and Selecting 3. Determine local insolation —The
appropriate amount of input solar radi-
Equipment
ation (insolation) to the photovoltaic
system at the application site may be
As used in this guide, the term “sizing”
obtained from Appendix A for various
means estimating the required size or capac-
tilt angles. Average daily values for
ity of all major photovoltaic system elements
spring, summer, autumn, and winter
so that the system will be able to satisfactori-
are included in the charts.
ly serve the intended load.
4. Determine the “critical” design peri-
Potential users of PV-powered water-
od — The available solar insolation
pumping systems will want to estimate sys-
varies as the seasons change, as may the
tem size, performance, and cost in order to
water requirements or water level in the
gauge usefulness for a particular applica-
well. For this reason, the worst combi-
tion. Most methods to do this are complex
nation of load and insolation must be
and require computer programs to obtain
identified. It is this combination that
precise answers. This section outlines a sim-
determines the “size” of the system.
ple method intended to assist potential buy-
ers in making rough estimates. These esti- This worst combination can be identified
mates should be within 2070 of the “true” by constructing a table of average seasonal
value for systems with some sort of voltage insolation and load values, and then deter-
regulation. (Without voltage control, as is mining the season with the lowest ratio of
the case for a direct-coupled system, array insolation to load.
efficiency can be decreased by as much as This value is then used in the next step:
50%.) 5. Calculate the array power —After
This chapter contains two nomography steps 1-4 have been completed, the
(Figures 7 and 8) to assist the potential array power is calculated. PV arrays are
buyer, freeing this person from making the usually rated by specifying their output
above detailed calculations. These nomo- in watts under “standard” conditions of

15
 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II
......... .......................
1 I I I A I I I
1 t I
r 1 1
:P /
1000
Do .... .............................+ ...... E
“~ .+
+< ~<
& @
~o
/
100
/
1 1
1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1
50
20 100 1000
Daily Hydraulic Energy, w~day
Figure 7. Hydraulic Energy Nomograph
16
 I I I I I I 1I I I I I
100C ///
.............................. .. //
E 8
Insolation,
kWh/’m2-day
/
100
I 1 I I I I II
50 1 I I
1000
(
I
... .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . ... .. . .. . . .. .. . .. .
*
100
Ambient air
temperutum
20
20 100 1000
Anuy Power Required, W (peak)
Figure 8. Array Power Nomograph
17
 100 mW/cm2 insolation with the cell design capacity. In contrast, the efficiency of
temperature at 25”C. This output is, a volumetric pump is constant throughout
however, adversely affected by temper- its operating range. The following section
ature, falling approximately 0.570 per describes some of the interactions among
degree centigrade above this standard. insolation, PV array output, and pumping
Since normal cell temperature is efficiency. The nomography account for
approximately 30° C above ambient air these phenomena over the long-term aver-
temperature (which, in turn, is often age.
well above 25°C), actual array output
may be significantly less than rated
The Effect Of Varying Solar
power.
Radiation On Output
The starting point is Point A on the
Hydraulic Energy Nomograph. This water
A major factor in sizing systems is the
requirement must be specified by the user.
nature of solar radiation—it changes
Moving next to Point B, (the pumping head
throughout the day is affected by the weath-
at the well site) leads to point C (the
er, and changes from season to season.
hydraulic energy) Point D (an estimate of
This variation in input power does not
system efficiency) leads to Point E (which
gives the daily required motor energy). greatly affect systems that are able to deliver
Now, move to the Array Power water in proportion to the ambient solar
intensity: they produce less water when the
Nomograph.
solar level is low and produce more when
Starting at Point E (daily required motor
the solar level is high. This evens out over
energy, as determined on the previous
time.
nomography), move to Point F (the insolation
This variation does affect pumping sys-
level). The value for insolation level can be
tems where water output is nonlinear with
obtained from local sources or Appendix A.
Point F leads to Point G (the array power solar intensity, e.g., the water output does
requirement). The motor rating should not vary directly with the speed at which
the pump operates. The implications for
exceed the array power by 2570 to protect
output are complex. In addition, they high-
against motor overloading. Last, Point H
(the ambient air temperature obtained from light the importance of properly defining
local weather data) leads to the rated array the desired average daily water delivery in
the purchase specifications, and requiring a
power, WP, Point I.
well-defined acceptance test.
Daily Variations — The most important
*****
characteristic of insolation is its diurnal pat-
tern. The expected power available to a
fixed flat-plate array over a 24-hour period
Following this procedure, we obtain an under clear skies is represented by a hill-
array size of 160 Wp for the hypothetical shaped curve that increases from sunrise to
system. noon and decreases thereafter until sunset.
In general, volumetric pumps are linear, and
*X-*** when coupled to a “smart” electronic con-
troller, can fully utilize the available solar
radiation. Centrifugal pumps are nonlin-
Centrifugal pumps achieve maximum ear—efficiency and, hence, water produc-
efficiency only when operating at design tion decrease when these pumps are operat-
capacity; when pumping at less than design ed away from an optimum design condi-
capacity the efficiency is less. Since the tion. Manufacturers should take these
power output of a PV system is constantly effects into account when quoting average
changing, the long-term average efficiency daily flow rates. Figure 9 illustrates these
of a centrifugal pump is hard to predict, but variations. The preceding sizing nomo-
will be less than its rated efficiency at graphy (Figures 7 and 8) allow for this.

18
 Weather Variations — Cloudy weather gy striking a fixed array will vary seasonally.
considerably reduces the amount of insola- Note that these effects are due only to annu-
tion, and thus the output of photovoltaic al changes in sun angle and are distinct from
systems. Solar insolation tables include typical seasonal changes in insolation due to
adjustments for weather variations because changing weather patterns.
these variations are normally present as Figure 11 illustrates the effect for array tilt
average daily levels over a full month. angles equal to the latitude and equal to lati-
Therefore, weather variations do not, on the tude plus or minus 15°. In this figure, array
average, affect the water delivery of linear outputs are normalized and appear as frac-
systems, e.g., volumetric pumps. However, tions of the output from an array at latitude
centrifugal pumps are considerably affected. tilt.
The accompanying curve (Figure 10) shows The output of a volumetric pump
the drop in water output with the drop in depends on the the amount of total daily
solar radiation. When sizing photovoltaic- solar insolation striking the array. By con-
powered centrifugal pumps in areas that trast, the output of a centrifugal pump is
experience weather conditions of generally affected by the peak value of the solar inso-
decreased or overcast insolation (fog, haze, lation as well as by the amount. For a fixed-
dust, dispersed clouds, or smog), use a max- tilt-angle array, peak power will vary sea-
imum value of 80 mW /cm2 instead of 100 sonally as the sun’s angle with respect to the
mW/cm2 for the daily solar profile. This array changes. Figure 12 illustrates this
lower peak value at noon, coupled with the effect.
average daily insolation level (kWh/ Purchase specification should require
m2/ day) in the solar tables, should account manufacturers to account for this effect and
for those weather variations. th~ Other effects described in this section
Seasonal Variations — Since there are ““
when presenting expected water output. The
seasonal differences in the daily path of the techniques presented earlier did account for
sun across the sky, the amount of solar ener- these effects.

100

\ OVERCAST DAY

75

50

25

0
SUNRISE NOON SUNSET

Figure 9. Typical Daily Variations in Solar Radiation

19
 100

TYPICAL PUMP NO. 1

75
TYPICAL PUMP NO. 2

50 .

25 .

I
0
0 25 50 75 100

PEAK INSOLATION DURING DAY (mW/cm2)

Figure 10. Relation between Peak Daily Insolation and Performance of Centrifugal Pumps

1.2 I 1 I I I I I I I 1

1.1
+
>
n 1.0
1-
3
0
$ 0.9
a
U
$ 0.8
w
>
F
y 0.7
w
K
0.6

1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1
0.5
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

TIME OF YEAR

Figure 11. Relative Energy at Various Tilt Angles

20
 1.25 I I I I I I I I I I
I
VOLUMETRIC PUMP

p/L
4
(NORMALIZED YEARLY
OUTPUT = 1.00)

1.00

\
/ \

/ -~ \
0.75
i
\
CENTRIFU&AL PUMP
(NORMALIZED YEARLY
OUTPUT = 0.89)
‘1
0.50

0.25

I I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I

Figure 12, Centrifugal Pump and Volumetric Pump Output

(Array at Fixed Tilt Angle Equal to Latitude Angle)

Equipment Type vs. Pumping m3/day) and high heads (30-500 m).
Requirement Submersible centrifugal pumps are best for
high flow rates (25-100 m3/day) and medi-
The best type of equipment for a particu- um heads (10-30 m). Self-priming pumps
lar pumping application depends on daily should be investigated for high flow rates
water requirement, pumping head, suction and low heads (under 5 m). Figure 13
lift, and water source (e.g., tube well or open presents the most suitable pump types for
well). Generally, positive displacement the different ranges of head and flow when
pumps are best for low flows (under 15 using photovoltaic power.

21
 L
flVolumetric pump

200

/
100 \

Al /w - ric or ac submersible I

L
p- Hand pump size

I
~d~ self-priming,
surface-mounted
1
I
I
o 75 100
o ;5 50

Daily flow, m3/day

Figure 13. Pumpset Types vs. Pumping Regime

Next, Chapter4 allows the buyer toesti-

Specifying System Performance
mate the economic worth of the system. In
many cases, this determination leads to the
Utilizing the information in this chapter in
conjunction with the nomography and other preparation of purchase specifications and
to the acquisition of one or more photo-
computational aids should allow a potential
buver voltaic-powered pumping units.
J

. to determine the technical viability of

using photovoltaic-powered pumping
systems, and
● to estimate the “size” of the system.

22
 4.0 Cost and Economics of Pumping Systems

Determining the Cost-Effectiveness benefits. In this case, the lower cost option is
of a Pumping System preferred.
In LCC analysis, the net present value
To be cost-effective, the PV option must be (NPV) of all the capital and recurring costs
less expensive (over the system’s life) than for the test project (in this case, PV-powered
feasible mechanical pumping alternatives, pumps) is compared to the NPV of all the
such as diesel, wind, or other electric sys- costs of competitive projects. If the NPV of
tems. In many remote areas, hand pumps costs of PV-powered pumping is less than
will be the norm for village water supply, the costs of the alternatives, PV should be
and the costs of hand pump use will be the first choice for the power source.
baseline against which other mechanical sys- For irrigation systems, the benefits—
tems are compared. potential increases in agricultural
In order for PV-powered pumping sys- output—are quantifiable, that is, an addi-
tems to come into widespread use, they tional volume of water translates into a larg-
must be attractive to users and investors, as er herd of livestock or additional hectares of
well as to policy makers. For example, crops under cultivation—items that have a
although a policy maker may place a high measurable market value. However,
premium on foreign exchange savings, the attempting to measure these benefits is
individual farmer will be more concerned beyond the scope of this document, since
with the money saved on fuel (based on benefits to crop and livestock production
delivered local fuel prices) and by such vary widely with local circumstances. In
issues as reliability and availability of power these circumstances, it must be shown both
or fuel. This is particularly important in that the pumping system selected is the least
more remote areas, where logistical con- cost option and that the value of increased
cerns, i.e., delivery costs for fuel, system yields (benefits) more than offsets the added
downtime caused by missing spare parts or cost of the pumping system. The value of
lack of trained repair personnel, etc., can these benefits over the life of the project is
often result in a pumping system being calculated in the same manner as the costs,
abandoned. i.e., the NPV of all the annual benefits is cal-
culated and compared to the NPV of the
costs. In this chapter, step-by-step instruc-
Measuring Cost-Effectiveness of a tions are provided for evaluating costs. In
Pumping System Appendix B, a worked example of system
cost evaluation is provided via a nomo-
Although there are several acceptable graph, eliminating the separate steps.
measures of economic cost-effectiveness, the
most objective and widely used by large
organizations is the life-cycle cost (LCC) Measuring Life-Cycle Costs of a
analysis. We will also keep track of initial Wmping System
capital, because this measure is also impor-
tant. In practice, when the pumping system A pumping system will last a certain time
is to supply drinking water, it is most impor- before it needs replacement. In a PV system,
tant to establish the comparative life-cycle for example, the panels should last 20-30
cost of PV versus other pumping systems, years, whereas the pump may have to be
because the economic benefits of supplying replaced every 5-10 years. The “life of the
drinking water are difficult to quantify. For system” is the life of the component with the
example, if both a diesel and a PV pump can longest replacement interval (the modules in
reliably furnish the same quantity of water, this example). The LCCS are the initial cost
it is safe to assume that they provide equal of the complete, installed system in year O,

23
 Table 5

Cost, Discount, and NPV Examples

Year cost ($) Discount Factor NPV ($)

o 100 1/1 1 00/1 = 100

1 110 1/1.1 110/1.1 =100

2 121 1/(1.1)2 121/(1.1)2=100

plus a replacement pump (with installation) monly used for LCC analvsis. However, a
in year 10, plus annual operation, repair and highe~ or lower value may ’be chosen, based
maintenance expenses. on the specific investor’s financial require-
For an irrigation example, the “life-cycle ments.
benefits” can be measured in terms of This discussion assumes that the costs asso-
increased agricultural production in each year ciated with the project follow the overall infla-
of the pumping system’s life (for this example tion rate. If certain costs are expected to
the minimum life is assumed to be 20 years). change at a different rate (fuel costs, for exam-
Benefits and costs are likely to occur at dif- ple), it maybe advisable to apply a differential
ferent points in time. The economic method inflation rate to these items.
for making future costs of benefits directly
comparable to those that occur today is to
apply a discount rate to all future costs and
Cost Appraisal of a PV- Powered
benefits. For example, with a 10% discount Pumping System
rate, this means that a $100 cost today may be
considered equivalent to a $110 cost incurred The following information is needed for the
1 yr from today, or a $121 cost incurred 2 cost appraisal of a water-pumping system:
years from today etc. This is because the capi- Economic: Period of analysis
tal, when otherwise invested, would provide (usually ecpni to the lifetime of the
the investor with additional funds over future longest lived component)
time. Alternatively, each of the costs has an Discount rate
NPV of $100.
Differential inflation rates for cer-
Mathematically, NPV = C/(l+d)Y where tain items (if any)
NPV = net present value, C cost at year ‘y’, d
Technical: Lifetime of each main component
= discount rate, and y = year in which the cost
in years
occurs. For the above example, the NPV of
costs: Capital cost for complete system
year 2 cost is NPV = 121/(1.1)2 = 121/1.21 =
100. The relationship among cost, discount Capital cost for replacement com-
factor, and NPV is shown in Table 5. ponents
Annual maintenance and repair
Note that the discount factor (10% /yr in the
cost
present example) is based on a chosen rate of Installation costs
return (after inflation) of monies that could
Capital and Installation Costs — There are
have been invested in an alternative financial
endeavor. If this analysis were performed four major elements in the capital costs of a
based on an economy with an annual inflation PV-powered water system:
rate of 10%, the discount factor would be 20% 1. PV array modules
to keep the net discount factor at 10Yo. A dis- 2. Balance-of-system (BOS) components
count factor of 1070 (after inflation) is com- (structures, wiring, control devices, etc.)

24
3. Water pump and motor Costs of PV equipment are expected to
4. Water storage and distribution network stabilize over the next few years, with a pos-
NOTE: All costs given in this section are sible decline in prices thereafter as new tech-
general estimates to be used for project feasi- nologies become available. The BOS compo-
bility analysis only. nent costs will remain about the same.
Future water pump costs should go down as
Since the storage and distribution system
the demand for PV-powered pumping goes
would be the same for all power sources for
up worldwide.
the water-pumping projects, we will disre-
gard it for the purposes of this analysis. Installation costs for PV systems, due to
their requirement for array foundations,
Note, however, that a larger capital expendi-
ture for the storage system may be required additional shipping cost, labor to assemble
with a PV system than for other types of the structures, etc., are higher than costs for
water-pumping systems. This is because of diesel systems and roughly equal to those
the recommended 3 sunless days’ water costs for a wind-power system. As a guide-
storage for PV systems. line, a figure of $0.50 WP of PV array can be
used. For pump installation, the following
PV modules: Current (1987) costs from the
estimates can be used:
factory are about $8.75/ W for 50 or fewer
modules and about $7.50/% for quantities . Submersible centrifugal - $200 +
of 100 to 250 modules. Even f ower costs (as o.50/wp
● Surface-centrifugal -$100 + 0.50/ Wp
low as $6.00/WP) are available for larger
procurements but would usually require ● Lineshaft turbin~ or jack pump -$500 +
that the modules be bought in large single o.50/wp
purchase-order lots. Significant reduction in
module costs is anticipated in the future. ******
(See your local supplier for specific costs.)
The array BOS components are those ele-
ments directly associated with the PV array. For the hypothetical water pumping sys-
Experience indicates that these components tem, capital budgetary costs would be exti-
represent about 159’o of the PV module costs, mated as shown below.
or $1.13 to $1.31 /WP.
1. 160-WP array@ $8.75/
Water pumps: Costs for pumps vary WP (delivered) $1,400
depending on the type required for the
2. Balance-of-system
application. The various types of pumps and
components (1570 of
their respective selection criteria were
array costs) 210
discussed previously. The following esti-
mates include all electrical and mechanical 3. Submersible centri-
fugal pump 2,000
hardware required but omit pipework and
other costs associated with the distribution 4. Installation ($200 for
system. pump + $0.50/WP) 280
. Submersible centrifugal pumps: Use a TOTAL: $3,890
base cost of $2,000.
This example is marginal between a sur-
. Surface centrifugal pumps: Use a base
face centrifugal pump and a submersible
cost of $500 plus $1 /WP. (Example: A
pump. The cost for the more expensive sys-
200-WP system would cost approxi-
tem is shown.
mately $500 + $200 for a total pump
price of $700.)
******
● Lineshaft turbine and jack pumps: Use
a base cost of $2,500 = $1 /WP.
(Example: A 5-kWP system would cost
approximately $2,500 + $5,000 for a Note that for these analyses, installation
total pump cost of $7,500.) costs are based on local technical personnel
performing installation tasks. Turnkey

25
installations, for which the PV equipment Pump Replacement Costs —Experience
supplier performs pre-installation site visits, has shown that the pump and motor subsys-
actual installation/checkout, and detailed tem is likely to need replacement after about
documentation, will cause the installed 10 years, perhaps earlier in a difficult rural
costs to rise. Note also that site work (well environment. For pump replacement costs,
drilling, clearing and leveling the land, use the information for initial capital and
trenching for pipes, etc.) is not included in installation costs given earlier.
these installation cost estimates.
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) ******
Costs — The operating costs of a PV pump
are nil. The cost of maintaining the pump is
difficult to estimate because of variations in For the hypothetical pump system,
local repair capabilities, but a figure of $20 replacement costs are $2,000 (capital) + $200
plus $0.02/WP per year can be used as a
(installation) = $2,200.
general guideline, depending on the system
size and pump type used. Repair costs can
***X-**
vary greatly from year to year, depending
on the nature of the repair and whether it
can be handled within the country con-
cerned. Table 6 lists these costs over a 20-year pro-
jected system life, using the LCC method
**%’***
described earlier. The example used is the
hypothetical village water pumping system.
Table 6 uses a 10% discount rate and, for
simplicity, assumes zero differential infla-
For the hypothetical 160-W pumping
tion. The discount factor is obtained by d =
system, the O&M costs would Be approxi-
1 /(1 .l)Y, where y = year. For example, the
mately $20 = (0.02 o160) = $23.20 per year.
discount factor in year 9 is 1/(1.1)9 = 0.424.
NPV is found by taking the sum of capital,
****** replacement, and O&M costs multiplied by
the discount factor for the same year.
The overall step-by-step procedure is
summarized in Figure 14.

26
 Table 6
LCCS for the Hypothetical PV Pumping System
Replacement
Capital Cost for Discount
Year costs ($) Subsytem O&M ($) Factor NPV($)

o 3,890 23.20 1.0 3,913.20

1 23.20 .909 21.09
2 23.20 .826 19.17
3 23.20 .751 17.43
4 23.20 .683 15.85
5 23.20 .621 14.41
6 23.20 .564 13.10
7 23.20 .513 11.91
8 23.20 .467 10.82
9 23.20 .424 9.84
10 2,200 23.20 .386 858.14
11 23.20 .350 8.13
12 23.20 .319 7.39
13 23.20 .290 6.72
14 23.20 .263 6.11
15 23.20 .239 5.55
16 23.20 .218 5.05
17 23.20 .198 4.59
18 23.20 .180 4.17
19 23.20 .164 3.79
20 23.20 .149 3.45

Total NPV 4,959.91

27
 STEP 1
DETERMINE THE ARRAY PEAK WATTS AND
PUMP TYPE REQUIRED FOR THE SYSTEM

STEP 2
DETERMINE THE INSTALLED CAPITAL COST
OF THE COMPLETE SYSTEM

STEP 3
DETERMINE RECURRENT COSTS SUBDIVIDED INTO
O & M COSTS AND REPLACEMENT COSTS
/
I

STEP 4
DETERMINE NPV OF ALL CAPITAL
AND RECURRING COSTS

Figure 14. Procedures for Cost Appraisal of a Water Pumping System

28
Evaluating the Costs of a Diesel parts, or services. The costs associated with
Pumping System these periods are difficult to quantify but
should be factored into any remote system
When comparing PV with diesel as an costing analysis. This is also a problem for
option for a pumping system, an NPV calcu- PV systems, but the anticipated frequency of
lation of intital replacement, and O&M costs maintenance is much less.
should be made for both systems to deter- Based on these considerations, we note
mine which is the most cost-effective over that the projected costs of a remote diesel
the projected system life. This section dis- system are increased by 100% over the same
cusses the factors in costing diesel pumping system located near a major urban area.
systems. Detailed design of diesel pumping Comparing Costs of a Diesel System —
systems is beyond the scope of this docu- A rigorous procedure to estimate the
ment. required size of the diesel pump is beyond
Special Considerations — the scope of this document, but for many sit-
1. Minimum Diesel Engine Sizing. Due uations, the simplified procedure given
to efficiencies of scale, diesel engines suit- below will be adequate.
able for pumping systems are usually 2.5 On the assumption that, for practical rea-
kW (3.35 HP) or larger. This means that for sons, it would not be acceptable to run a
pumping systems requiring lower power, diesel pump for more than 8 h/day, the
almost any procured diesel engine will be hydraulic power rating of the diesel pump is
underutilized. As a result, diesel capital obtained by dividing the peak month daily
costs are higher than needed based on hydraulic energy requirement, Eh, by 8,
power requirements; however, this is partial- where
ly offset by lower fuel and maintenance
Eh = [9.8 TDH (m) “ Daily Water
●

costs, since the diesel engine will be able to

Requirements (m3)] /3,600.
pump the required water in a shorter period
of time. Care must be taken in an NPV calcu- Assuming an average pump efficiency of
lation to ensure that the pumping rate of this 50%, the required power rating of the diesel
relatively large diesel pump does not exceed engine, pd, k giVen by Eh/4. Since the mini-
the well’s recharge rate. It may thus be mum size of a diesel engine suitable for use
impractical to use a diesel engine in some with pumping systems is about 2.5 kW if
small-system applications, and no economic Eh/4 <2.5 kW, P~ should be taken as 2.5 kW.
analysis is required in this case. In this case, the pump would run for less
2. Logistics of Fuel and Parts Supply. than 8 h/day to ~rod~ce the required out-
Comparisons between diesel and other sys- put. The engine rating is
tems may take into account costs for diesel Pd = Eh/4 kW, but not
fuel and parts based on both being readily less than 2.5 kW .
accessible. However, remote pumping sites
Havirw thus estimated the Dower ratimz
are often removed from the nearest location
of the diesel engine, the install~d capital COST
where parts, fuel, and repair persons are
of the pumping system can be estimated. If
available. Thus, fuel costs are escalated
the installed cost per kilowatt is cd, the capi-
because of logistics and transportation
tal cost is
requirements. More important, though, is
the difficulty in getting a qualified repair- cApd = cd “ Pd
man to the scene of a disabled system.
The current value of cd for typical diesel
Importing a service technician from another
pumping systems is about $1,600/kW,
area can substantially raise the costs of a ser- including delivery and installation.
vice trip. If the repairman requires an addi- Therefore, a 2.5-kW system (the minimum
tional part, repair is often delayed for sever- practical size) would cost about $4,000.
al days, placing the village’s water supply in
The next step is to calculate the replace-
jeopardy. The remote system is often inoper-
ment cost. Experience has shown that the
able for days or weeks while awaiting fuel,
life of the engine and pump in the difficult

29
operating conditions typical for rural instal- of fuel over the period of analysis should be
lations is 5 to 10 years, depending on operat- used for the calculation, taking into account
ing hours and the quality of maintenance. any expected real price inflation of fuel (i.e.,
For present purposes, an average life of 7 the inflation of fuel prices relative to general
years is assumed, after which time the com- inflation).
plete system must be replaced at the original
capital cost. ******
Assuming that the owner of the diesel
pump makes no charge for operating the
system, operating costs (excluding fuel) are For our hypothetical system,
nil. Maintenance costs for a diesel pumping
Eh 9.8 “ 10 “ 9.2 -0.25 kwh ,
system vary widely. Sometimes this can be
3,600
estimated on the basis of running hours or
as a proportion of capital cost. However, and
maintenance costs are largely independent pd = Eh/4 = 0.063,
of size up to about 10 kW engine rating,
since they are mainly determined by the fre- so a minimum-sized diesel of 2.5 kW is
quency of servicing visits and the charges required and the capital cost is 2.50$1,600 =
made for each service. For diesel pumps in $4,000. Now, total annual hours of operation
this size range, typical maintenance costs are are
$200to $900 per year. Td = 20 Eh, ~O~/pd
= 2 “0.25 kWh
To calculate the annual fuel cost, AFC~,
the total number of running hours is “ 365/2.5= -75 h .
required, as given approximately by: Note that this relatively large diesel
engine must operate for only 75 h/yr to pro-
Td = 2 “ Eh, ~O~/p&
vide the required water. It therefore would
where Eh, ~Otis the total annual hydraulic pump water at a far higher rate than the PV-
energy requirement in kilowatt-hours (i.e., powered pump, possibly overpumping the
the sum of the daily hydraulic energy well. It also represents a case where diesel is
requirements). pd is the diesel engine rating, not a reasonable technical choice.
as determined above. This relationship Nonetheless, we shall look at the costs for
assumes an average efficiency of 509Z0for the comparison purposes.
ratio of hydraulic power to engine-rated The annual fuel cost is
power.
The average fuel consumption under typi- AFCd = 75 ● 0.5 “ 2.5
cal operating conditions depends principally “ 0.5= -$50.
on engine size, but other factors include the
quality of maintenance, the ambient temper- Since our example system will operate at
ature, and the actual hydraulic load. If the a very low duty cycle, low maintenance
cost of diesel fuel delivered to the site is costs will be incurred. For the near-urban
Cf/liter, and the average fuel consumption is case, we will assume $200/year O&M costs.
fd liters/kW of engine rating per hour, the Table 7 is an LCC cost analysis for this sys-
annual fuel cost is tem.
NOTE: Discount and inflation assump-
AFCd=Td”fd”pd”C~. tions as in PV case (Table 7). NPV is the sum
Based on field observations, typical aver- of capital, replacement, O&M, and fuel costs
age consumption figures for engine sizes up multiplied by the discount factor. Note that
to 10 kW are rating per hour of operation, this analysis was done for a near-urban site.
about 0.5 liter/kWh of engine rating per For a remote location, the costs of diesel
hour of operation. Delivered fuel costs range operation would be even higher.
from $0.20 to $1.50 per liter. We take For the same amount of pumped water as
$0.30/liter as the base assumption for a in the PV case, the NPV for the diesel system
near-urban area. The estimated average cost case can be directly compared to that for an

30
equivalent PV-powered pumping system. Comparative Costs of Other
Thus, for this application, a PV-powered sys- Pumping Systems
tem would be significantly more economical.
The results of the comparison between PV The procedures outlined above for calcu-
and diesel pumping systems will be influ- lating the cost for a solar or a diesel pump
enced by changes in any of the key assump- system may be applied to other types of
tions used. Increases in fuel price sharply pumps, such as wind-powered pumps, ani-
increase the cost of pumping with diesel, rel- mal-powered pumps, and hand pumps. It is
ative to PV. The use of a higher discount rate particularly important to make the compari-
improves the relative cost of the diesel, son for identical hydraulic duties, i.e., the
because most of the cost of the PV system volume of water supplied per day to a com-
occurs in the first year and is not sensitive to mon point, for the same degree of reliability.
the discount factor. When water costs are calculated for differ-
For the same reason (that recurrent costs ent pumping systems and for the conditions
of PV are low), PV-powered systems are lit- relating to particular applications at speci-
tle affected by rising future prices, whereas fied sites, the results will be strongly depen-
the cost of diesel pumping may be strongly dent on certain assumptions. For example,
affected. PV-powered pumps will, in general, provide
cheaper water for low-head and low-water-

Table 7
LCCS for a Hypothetical Diesel Pumping System
Capital &
Replacement Fuel Discount
Year costs ($) O&M ($) cost ($) Factor NPV($)

o 4,000 200 50 1.000 4,250.00

1 200 50 .909 227.25
2 200 50 .826 206.50
3 200 50 .751 187.75
4 200 50 .683 170.75
5 200 50 .621 155.25
6 200 50 .564 141.00
7 4,000 200 50 .513 2,180.25
8 200 50 .467 116.25
9 200 50 .424 106.00
10 200 50 .386 96.50
11 200 50 .350 87.50
12 200 50 .319 79.75
13 200 50 .290 72.50
14 4,000 200 50 .263 1,117.75
15 200 50 .239 59.75
16 200 50 .218 54.50
17 200 50 .198 49.50
18 200 50 .180 45.00
19 200 50 .164 41.00
20 200 50 .149 37.25

Total NPV 9,482.50

31
volume situations, provided the water tors plus the cost assumed for labor needed
demand is reasonably well matched to the to operate them. An important point con-
solar energy availability. cerning both animal-powered and hand
pumps is that their input powers are limited,
**X-*** and as the lift increases, the flow rate
decreases and the pump and borehole need
to be re~licated. This is uarticularlv im~or-
tant if tke borehole is e~pensive. Bore~ole
Wind-powered pumps may produce
costs for deep wells may exceed all other
cheaper water at sites where the average
costs.
wind speeds during the period of maximum
water demand are higher than about 3 m/s The final choice of a pumping system
(10.8 km/h). should not be based solely on costs. Other
factors, such as reliability and ease of main-
The costs of animal-powered pumps are
tenance are also important; in these respects,
strongly dependent on the assumptions
PV-powered pumps offer significant advan-
made regarding capitaI costs, Iifetime,
tages over diesel and hand pumps. Table 8
power input, and feeding costs. Hand
overviews various costs for wind-powered,
pumps are similarly dependent on these fac-
animal-powered, and hand pumps.

Table 8
Cost Data for Wind-Powered, Animal-Powered, and Hand Pumps
Pump Type
Wind Animal Hand

Hydraulic output Depends on 21OW 36 W

rating of one wind regime
pump

Capital cost 330/m2 of 300/animal = 240 to 320 per

of pump rotor area 6.2fW of hy- pump unit =
(1 m < dia draulic power 6.50 to 9/W of
<lOm) hydraulic power

Borehole cost ($) 25 to 75/m

Storage tank 100 to

cost ($) 300/m3

Liftetime
- power source 20 to 30 yr 10yr nfa
- pump 5to10yr 10to15yr 5to10yr

Maintenance cost ($)

- per year 50 10 50
- per 1000 h 6 — —

Operating time Uf3 to 24 5t08 6t08

(h/day)

Operating cost ($) — 2.5/animal-day 1 per man-day

32
 5.0 Preparing a Request for Proposal

The proposed water-pumping site has Preparing a Technical Specification

now been evaluated, and both water needs
and the power required to produce that The technical specification, combined
water have been determined. How to esti- with standard procurement requirements
mate the costs of a PV-powered water- and terms, must be stated. Since the bidders’
pumping installation and how to make designs are based on this specification, you
economic comparisons between PV-pow- should incorporate, at a minimum, the fol-
ered and competing systems have been dis- lowing information:
cussed. If a PV-powered system is best for ● Daily water needs (on a monthly basis)
your application, the next step is to begin and use of the water
the procurement process.
● Type and quality of water source
Buying the components from individual ● Static water level
vendors and assembling them on-site to
● Drawdown (water level in the well) as a
your own design specifications can be a
function of flow rate
problem. The difficulties of proper design,
● Height (or pressure) of the storage tanks
installation, and checkout, coupled with
the difficulty of securing a system warran- and the type of tanks used
ty, may make purchasing a system on a ● Type, length, and diameter of required
component level inadvisable except for the pipework
most knowledgeable and experienced c Average monthly insolation data (over a
users. l-year period) for the site
The choices are two: (1) purchase a total ● Average monthly temperature data
system designed by a qualified vendor and (over a l-year period) for the site
have it installed and checked out for you or ● Soil conditions (used to determine the
(2) perform the installation and test of a optimum array and tank foundations)
vendor-designed and supplied system If any of these data are unavailable to you,
yourself. The first of these choices, the it should be specifically stated, along with
turnkey system, is recommended for agen- instructions to bidders regarding the
cies with limited experience in PV pump- assumptions they are to make regarding the
ing applications. Although capital costs for missing data. Also, include any other data
a turnkey system can be higher than for a you might have for the site. Occasionally, an
customer-installed system, these additional apparently unrelated item of information
costs can be more than offset by the guar- may provide the bidders with the means to
antee of a properly installed and opera- offer a more cost-effective system. As much
tional system. If the turnkey option is cho- information as possible regarding environ-
sen, a training session is a good option to mental conditions should be listed, includ-
be included as a proposal requirement, so ing average and extreme values of ambient
that your agency can acquire the expertise air temperature, relative humidity, wind
to install this type of system in the future. speed, water temperature, and water quality
In either case a performance specifica- (physical and chemical). The possibility of
tion must be prepared that requires design sand storms, hurricane winds, and other
calculations and performance guarantees. environmental extremes should be men-
This technical specification is a critical tioned.
component in procuring the system. We Remember, though, not to include design
recommend using the local standard pro- choices or equipment selections in the speci-
curement practices along with the technical fication. Doing so will compromise the
specifications for the PV-powered pumping buyer’s position should the unit fail to pro-
system. duce the required water output. Instead, the

33
technical specification should specify questionnaire to demonstrate their experi-
required performance only. ence and resources to meet the requirements
Scope of Work — The specification of the project. The questionnaire should
should include details of any special require- cover such matters as experience in PV-
ments for packing for shipment, documenta- pumping technology and recommended
tion, and insurance until the system is deliv- maintenance requirements.
ered to the purchaser. Warranty and Spare Parts —The buyer
A list should be given of the work and should require a full-coverage warranty for
services to be carried out by others, for a period of time sufficient to assess the
example, clearance through customs, trans- pumping system’s acceptable performance.
port to the site, construction of foundations, Typically, this period is 1 year, but the period
erection and s ystern startup, operation, and can be negotiated. Warranties up to 5 years
routine maintenance. are common.
Bidders should be required to specifically Buyers should also request separate cost
state any assumptions and deviations from information for an extended warranty peri-
the specification in their design analysis. od of an additional 2 to 5 years, at least. This
Acceptance Test — The best protection will allow the buyer to evaluate the cost of
for the buyer is to include an acceptance the warranty separately.
test in the specifications so that the bidder The supplier should be asked to include a
knows final payment will not be made list of required tools and spare parts for the
unless the equipment passes the test. extended warranty period, plus extra num-
The acceptance test is of utmost impor- bers of small items that may be lost during
tance and should be designed with care installation or maintenance (e.g., nuts, bolts,
because the output of a PV-powered pump- cable clamps, etc.).
ing system is heavily dependent upon many The supplier should also be asked to
variables, including weather conditions, detail in his proposal the warranty period
ambient temperature, and time of year. and technical support after installation,
Further, the output of most PV-powered including manuals. Especially important to
pumping systems is nonlinear: a drop in the warranty service is the availability of service
level of solar radiation leads to a dispropor- within the region, or at least in a timely fash-
tionately greater drop in the amount of ion.
water being pumped. For these reasons, the Price and Delivery — The bidder should
acceptance test should consist of a series of complete a schedule of prices covering the
measurements of pump water output as a main items, including the design, manufac-
function of irradiance level and temperature ture, and testing of the complete system;
to determine system performance under the transportation of materials from the factory
various conditions that will be encountered. to the point of delivery; spare parts and
Qualified Bidders — After including the tools; preparation of documentation, trans-
acceptance test in the technical specification, portation, and labor for turnkey installa-
the next greatest protection is to buy the unit tions; and any other items. The currency and
from a bidder who is active in the field. terms of payment may be specified or left
These manufacturers supply systems that open for the supplier to complete. The sup-
work. It is unwise to buy a system from a plier should also state the delivery period.
manufacturer of limited experience—such Evaluating Responses (Optional Recom-
manufacturers do not yet understand what mendations) — Each proposal received
level of experience is needed to make the should be checked to ensure that the system
proper choices in designing a PV-powered offered is complete, that it can be delivered
pumping system. Including criteria to quali- within the maximum delivery period, and
fy bidders will guard against inexperienced that an acceptable warranty can be provid-
bidders. Buyers should follow the old adage, ed.
“Ask the person who owns one.” Detailed Assessment — The proposals that
Bidders should be required to complete a satisfy the preliminary evaluation should then

34
be assessed in detail under the following four ered. Emphasis should be placed on the field
headings, with approximately equal impor- reliability of the system design being pro-
tance being attached to each: posed, since this can significantly impact the
1. Compliance with the Specification. The long-term success of the water pumping pro-
performance of the proposed system should ject.
be carefully assessed to ensure that it meets 3. Capital and Life Cycle Costs. Besides
the requirements of the specification. comparing systems on the basis of initial capi-
Justification for any deviations should be care- tal cost, a comparison should be made using
fully evaluated. life cycle costing, based on maintenance and
2. System Design. The suitability of the repair costs incurred during the life of the sys-
system for the intended use should be tem.
assessed, taking into account such matters as 4. Overall Credibility of Supplier. The
ease of operation and maintenance, general experience and resources of the supplier rele-
complexity, reliability, safety features, lifetime vant to PV-powered pumping technology in
of individual components and parts subject to developing countries should be assessed,
wear and tear, etc. The adequacy of the sup- together with the proposals for warranty, after-
porting documentation should also be consid- sales service, training, and documentation.

35
 Bibliography

1. “Small-Scale Solar-Powered 8. Irrigation 8. “Crop Water Requirements,” J.

Pumping Systems: Phase I Project Doorenbos and W. O. Praitt, FAO, Rome,
Report,” Sir William Halcrow & Partners 1977.
in association with Intermediate
Technology Development Group Ltd., 9. “Community Water Supply and Sewage
World Bank, July 1981. Disposal in Developing Countries, ”
World Health Statistics, Vol. 26, No. 11,
2. “Small-Scale Solar-Powered Irrigation 1973.
Pumping Systems: Technical and
Economic Review,” Sir William Halcrow 10. “Small Scale Irrigation,” P. H. Stern, I. T.
& Partners in association with Publications, 1980.
Intermediate Technology Development
Group Ltd., World Bank, September 11. “Evaluating the Technical and Economic
1981. Performance of Photovoltaic Pumping
Systems: A Methodology” (Prepared for
3. “Small-Scale Solar-Powered Pumping USAID, Africa Bureau), I. T. Power,
Systems: The Technology, Its Economics Washington, DC, 1985.
and Advancement” (Report prepared for
World Bank under UNDP Project 12. “Field Performance of Diesel Pumps and
GLO/80/003). Halcrow/ I. T. Power, Their Relative Economics with
World Bank, June 1983. Windpumps,” I. T. Power, Reading, UK,
1985.
4. “Solar Water Pumping - A Handbook,” J.
P. Kenna and W. B. Gillett, I. T. 13. “A Guide to the Photovoltaic
Publications, London, 1985. Revolution,” P. D. Maycock and E. N.
Shirewalt, Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA,
5. “Village Water Supply,” WorldBank, 1985.
Washington, DC, 1976.
14. Meridian Report on Evaluation of
6. “Small Community Water Supplies: International Photovoltaic Projects, 1986,
Technology of Small Water Supply SAND85-7018, Sept. 1986.
Systems in 15. Developing Countries,” I.
R. C., The Hague, August 1981. 15. “Solar Pumping Update, 1986,” World
Bank and I. T. Power, Inc.
7. “Wind Technology Assessment Study”
(for UNDP/World Bank Project
GLO/80/003). I. T. Power Ltd., February
1983.

36
 List of Manufacturers

For the most recent and comprehensive Copies of these documents are available
list of U.S. manufacturers, distributers, and from Linda Ladas, Solar Energy Industries
suppliers, see: Association, 1732 North Lynn Street, Suite
“The Solar Source Book 610, Arlington, VA 22209, U.S.A. Telephone
“Solar Electricity: A Directory of the (703) 524-6100.
U.S. Photovoltaic Industry”

37
 Appendix A
Insolation Availability

The following charts are included for use winter) are those for the northern hemi-
when information regarding local insolation sphere. In the southern hemisphere, the sea-
is not available. It is suggested that prior to sons will be reversed. Also, the tilt angle,
using these charts, in-country meteorologi- defined as the angle at which a PV array is
cal stations, universities, government min- raised from the horizontal in order to cap-
istries or other information depositories be ture the sun’s rays, is measured with the
contacted to determine if they have more array pointing south in the northern hemi-
complete or accurate data. sphere and with the array pointing north in
The seasons mentioned in the titles for the southern hemisphere.
each chart (spring, summer, autumn and

A-1
 ‘a o 20 40 60 24 loo 120 MO 160 180 160 1’$o 120 100 60 60 40 20

_- I 1 J/’J+-l
n

G“
K
z

55

50
55
-.
E.5-

20 — — ~
70

70- — — — — — . — . _ _

40

40

60

20 0 20 40 60
60 60 100 120 140 160 160
I I
160 MO 120 1(24J 20 60 40
WINTER - lilt Angle equals the IatItude mgle +15° 20

Dady total solar radmtmn mcldent cm a t!ltec surface m kWH/rn2/day

 c
0
c)
*
R
Figure A-2. Insolation Availability (Latitude + 15° Tilt, Summer)
A-3
 20 0 20 40 60 so 100 120 140 160 180 160 140 m 100 so 60 w 20

G“
c ● 80
a
p
w

~m
c
-.
0

s -40
=
Q1
> =
-.
A
n

*-.
o“
k
m
+
. ,
ul~ — — -7?

4 45
=
@ 40

M ~.

# - — ,%0
s

3
m
~

60

20 0 20 40 60 so 100 120 140 mo lea 160 la 120

SUMMER- Till AWk equals tb Iatit@e ang~ +150
100 m
-. .en. ..A .-
m

Dady total solar radmt,on mcndent m a treed surf... I. kWH/m2/day

 20 0 m 40 60 60 100 120 140 160 180 160 l-to 120 100 80 60 40 20

80 e — — a

. p
I

L 1 l\ x 1 I \ I t I I I I ! j I I I

w x. w-1~ v.
\
+ 5.5- 80-
60. \
’65 ‘o
60 &o
m
(< : 55 ,.0
>. SD-
40 / — — — — — — — _ _ _ _ 5.
;
-w 40
M %0-
5+-- - --

60
LLL 60
I
20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 m
AUTUMN -T,lt Angle equals the Mtude angle +15”

Da41y total solar rad!atm lmc,dent M a ttlted surface t. kWH/rn2 /day

l--t—h/m$d—Ht
t
.
I
Figure A-5. Insolation Availability (Latitude Tilt, Winter)
A-6
‘w (IL
I I
t I
Figure A-6. Insolation Availability (Latitude Tilt, Spring)
A-7
 .. --- .. ..- —-

IE
I

!/1 I I I I I I &o- 40
.5 5
-50
*
I I I I
%!7. I 120

-H--k!& 20

In
l,, l—–-, ,,ti, ,
, 40

FP
2!3—
15,—

m. — 4 0

I II II II II iI II II
I !
m-

60 1 1 I 1 1 1 , , 1 1 , r I I I , , , J
20 0 20 40 m 80 m 120 140 Im 1s0 160 140 120 100 &z 60 40 20

SUMMER -Tilt Arxje equals the lat#tude angle

Da,ly total SOla, rad,at,.n ,nc,dent rx a t,lted surface ,. kWH/!n21day
 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 w 160 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20

a
60 — — —
● 60
n

>
&l

..
%9!p7) “ /
5 60 b.,
*5
‘1
/
/[
A / ,,,

TI
20

fl , , , , I A 1 I 1 I I I I I w

& I 1n ,
, , 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I ..,.

— , . 1 , 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 ,.b

— 6.0 8D7
r
f\hY&O I I 1111 / ‘ M
T K.d-
]‘– ~ 7/ r 50
55- - 5.5-
40
5,0 5.— / 40
5.0-

,5 45

60
60
20 0 20 40 I
60 80 100 120 140 160 180 160 140 120 100 60 60 m. m
.-
AUTUMN - T,lt angle equals the Iat,tude angle

Dady total SOlar rad,at,.n ,nc,de.t w a t,l!ed surface 4. kWH/rn2/day

$)~ I I I I I
/ 1 . 1 1 I 1 i I 1
\ I
M!
0
s
R
0
R
lJJR Q
Figure A-9. Insolation Availability (Latitude -15° Tilt, Winter)
A-1 O
I--+--I-H” ‘“ ‘ ‘“’”“’wd’ “
-Au
Figure A-1 O. Insolation Availability (Latitude -15° Tilt, Spring)
A-1 1
-n
G“
c
7

Y 1/ A 1
(
55
,0

-JQ-j~
,5

n
r
a
-.
F I I I I I I I
Q
m
I I I I I I I
20
I ,ANl I m

%0
4540
,

k I W31 , ,I I I I I I I
40
40 \ Ifiv I I I I I I 2

I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 t 1 1 , , ,
+0
60 I 1 I I 1 I I I J
20 0 20 40 60 so too 120 140 mo 1S42 leo MO 120 100 so 60 40 20

SUMMER -Tilt Angle equals the IatttuJe angle -15”

Daalv t.tal solar radat,cm mc,de.t cm a t,lted surface t“ kWHfm21daY

 m o 20 40 m m <m ,,0 U. .=,,
--
.,.,.
---
..- ..-
.- ..-
..-
..-
--- -- “- .- .,.

80
,53 H TiE5
A&$4 K-
60

40

20

fi /
0

50-

20

5,0 y

40 k

45

60
60
20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 160 m 120 100 80 60 4a 20
. .
AUTUMN -Till Angle equals the Ialdude angle -15°

Da,ly total da, rad,at,cm ,nc,dent m a ttlted surface m kWH/m21day

 Appendix B
Simple Calculations of System Sizing, Equipment
Selection, and Cost Evaluation

A typical case is shown for the sample calculations. The following assumptions were made:

1. Flow& Head:

Required total Average

Daily Flow Dynamic Ambient
Season (mS/day) Head (m) Temperature (°C)

Spring 11 12 24
Summer 22 15 36
Autumn 18 15 30
Winter 15 12 14

2. Location: Phoenix, Arizona

3. Array tilt angle: latitude -15°

4. Discount rate: 7.5% per annum

Step 1: Determine whether pump is centrifugal or volumetric from Figure 13, p. 24. From the
figure it is seen that the pump will be of the centrifugal type.

2C0

100

50

E
m-
!0
20
2 ,0
M
G
.+
!2!5
E
d

1
Ldc ~e]f. p,jmjng,
L Hand pump size
surface-mounted
o I i 1
0 25 50 75 100

Daily flow, m31day

Pumpset Type vs. Pumping Regime

B-1
Step 2: Calculate hydraulic load and motor input energy from Figure 7, p. 17. This shows the
following:

Daily Hydraulic Energy Motor Input Energy

Season (watt-hours/day) (watt-hours/day)

Spring 360 1030

Summer 900 2570
Autumn 740 2100
Winter 490 1400

1 1 1 I 1 1 II 1 I I ! 1 1 I 1I

/’” /

1000

100

50
20 100 1000
Daily Hydraulic Energy, W1l/day

Nomograph of Hydraulic Energy

B-2
Step 3: Determine insolation from Appendix A charts. Tilt angle equals latitude -15 deg. This
shows the following:

Insolation
Season kW/m2/day

Spring 7.5
Summer 7.5
Autumn 6.5
Winter 4.6

120 100 80 60 40 20
140

SPRING SUMMER

AUTUMN WINTER

B-3
Step 4: Determine array power at standard conditions from Figure 8, p. 18. This shows
the following:

Array Power
at Standard Conditions*
Season (WATTS-PEAK)

Spring 150
Summer 390
Autumn 360
Winter 310

* Standard conditions are insolation equal to 100 mW/cm2 and cell temperature equal to 25° C.

—7
—8

Insolat[ork
kWh/m2-day

1 I I 1 I 11

20 100 1000
Array Power Required, W (peak)

Array Power Nomograph

B-4
 Step 5: Determine approximately system cost and annualized system cost from the figure below.
The system cost exclusive of installation is approximately $13/watt. This yields an esti-
mated system cost of $5,070 (exclusive of shipping and installation) and an annualized
system cost of $500/year at 7.5% discount rate.

2000

$
& 1500
(h
1-
1-
<
~ 1000
w
N
SYSTEM
G
>
<
a
500 /Y////
/ UNIT PRICES
WWPI

%
15 20 25
o I I I
Q
u)
1-
500 w SYSTEM COST ($K)

: 1000
0
: 1500
1-
U) ~
> 2000 .
co
n 7.5%
W 2500
N 10%
i \
< 3000 DISCOUNT RATE-
2
~ 350(3

Annualized System Costs for Specified Array Size System Prices and Selection Discount
Rates (N =20 Years)

Summary: Thus, a centrifugal-type pump with an array of 390 watts rated at standard condi-
tions (100 mW/cm2 insolation with cell temperature equal to 25”C) will meet the
flow and head requirements in all seasons. The system’s estimated cost, less installa-
tion and shipping, will be $5,070 with an annualized cost of $500/year at a 7.5% dis-
count rate.

B-5/6
.* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1995–774–125-02333
Printing History

Printed April 1987

Second Printing, September 1987
Third Printing, December 1988
Fourth Printing, November 1989
Fifth Printing, May 1990
Sixth Printing, March 1991
Seventh Printing, January 1992
Eighth Printing, October 1992
Ninth Printing, October 1993
Tenth Printing, August 1994
Eleventh Printing, January 1996