- Company Info
- Professional Staff
- Employment Opportunities


- Watershed/Hydrology
- Hydraulics/Hydrodynamics
- Water Quality
- Environmental
- GIS/Databases
- Natural Resources/NEPA
- Powerplant Cooling Systems
- Sediment Transport Modeling
- Total Maximum Daily Loads
- Operational Readiness Reviews


- EFDC_Explorer
- SWMM_Set
- ADCP_Tool
- Discharge_Reporter
- Temperature_Profiler
- DTM_Tool
- DASLER
- Project Animations


Dynamic Solutions, LLC
322 Nancy Lynn Lane, Suite 1
Knoxville, TN 37919
(865) 212-3331
Fax: 212-3398
cmwallen@dsllc.com

Copyright 2008
Dynamic Solutions, LLC

Powerplant Cooling Systems

Power Plant Cooling System Performance Modeling

Dynamic Solutions LLC has assembled an outstanding staff of mechanical and environmental engineers with extensive experience in evaluations of cooling tower performance and the impact of thermal effluent discharges on ambient temperature in rivers, lakes, reservoirs and estuaries. Dynamic Solutions personnel have performed numerous cooling tower performance and water temperature modeling studies at over 25 public and private electrical utilities including the TVA, Duke Power Company and others.

Both nuclear and fossil fuel electrical generating plants often use natural draft cooling towers to dissipate some, or all, of a generating plant's waste heat into the atmosphere. Cooling towers are typically designed in conjunction with a submerged outfall diffuser system for the discharge of the heated cooling water effluent to comply with State and federal water quality standards for water temperature to protect aquatic life in the river, lake, reservoir or estuary The performance of the natural draft cooling tower of an electrical generating facility is thus a critical component of the overall system designed to minimize the thermal effluent load discharged to surface waters.

Cooling tower performance degrades over time due to broken and displaced components as well as an accumulation of organic matter and debris withdrawn from the source of cooling water. Severe deficiencies in cooling tower performance can sometimes lead to involuntary reductions in electrical output of the generating plant because of operating constraints governed by either cooling water NPDES permit limits for waste heat or the turbo-generator. This operational penalty is frequently paid on top of the loss of efficiency penalty that occurs during the hottest days of the year, when replacement costs are greatest.

Unfortunately, simple empirical statistical models simply are not able to capture the inherent hour to hour and day to day variability of local climatology , ambient water temperature and flow conditions of the river, lake, reservoir or estuary that is required to accurately estimate the potential impact, and costs, of a poorly performing cooling tower on the overall cooling system of the electrical generating plant. As a result, Dynamic Solutions has developed an innovative numerical modeling approach to accurately predict electrical generating plant performance using actual historical weather data. With our proprietary modeling software, Dynamic Solutions can help you get a clear picture of your actual costs. Our modeling software can be applied to accurately estimate your electrical generating plant's heat rate penalty.


In developing a model of your cooling system, we will account for the electrical service load, ambient receiving water conditions, weather conditions, and operating conditions of the cooling system’s mechanical equipment. We will obtain years of historical data to characterize hourly fluctuations in wet-bulb and dry-bulb air temperature and daily changes in ambient water temperature, water surface elevation and flow of the receiving water. Working with your engineering staff, we will also compile data to define the following electrical generating plant operational parameters for your facility:

  • Heat balances for individual units
  • OEM performance correction curves for the steam system and electric generators
  • Condenser design
  • Heat Exchange Institute condenser performance
  • Cooling water pump curves
  • Historical service load
  • Cooling tower performance curves
  • Standard operating procedures, including maximum low-pressure turbine backpressure, to estimate what your plant could be generating and help you reach that goal.

The results of our modeling analysis will tell you how much money is being wasted, on an annual basis, because of poorly performing natural draft cooling tower equipment. Our model will also give you the information you need to optimize cooling tower efficiency and pump operations to maximize net power generation.

Dynamic Solutions, LLC Power Plant Modeling Experience

Plant Basic Steam Cycle Model Detailed Steam Cycle Model Complete Cooling System Model Basic Cooling Tower Model Detailed Cooling Tower Model Cooling Pond Model Multi-Port Diffuser Model Compre-hensive Plant Model Long-Range Historical Simulations
Allen Units 1-3 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Arkansas Nuclear One (nuclear WH PWR)                
Arkwright (coal-fired subcritical)                
Bellefonte Units 1-2 (nuclear ABB PWR)      
Braidwood (nuclear WH PWR)        
Browns Ferry Units 1-3 (nuclear GE BWR)      
Byron Station Units 1-2 (coal-fired supercritical)                
Bull Run (coal-fired supercritical)              
Colbert Units 1-4 (coal-fired subcritical)                
Gallatin Units 1-2 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Gallatin Units 3-4 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Grand Gulf (nuclear)                
Hartsville (nuclear WH PWR)      
Hope Creek (nuclear)                
John Sevier Units 1-2 (coal-fired subcritical)                
Johnsonville Units 1-4 (coal-fired subcritical)                
Johnsonville Units 5-6 (coal-fired subcritical)                
Johnsonviille Units 7-10 (coal-fired subcritical)                
Miller Units 1-2 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Mohave (coal-fired supercritical                
Nine Mile Point (nuclear WH PWR)              
Paradise Units 1-2 (coal-fired subcritical)      
Paradise Unit 3 (coal-fired supercritical)      
Scherer Units 1-2 (coal-fired supercritical)                
Scholz (coal-fired subcritical)                
Sequoyah Units 1-2 (nuclear WH PWR      
Shawnee Units 1-10 (coal-fired subcritical)                
Stuart (coal-fired supercritical)              
Widows Creek Units 1-4 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Widows Creek Units 5-6 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Widows Creek Unit 7 (coal-fired subcritical)              
Widows Creek Unit 8 (coal-fired subcritical)