Construction monitoring and risk management –

Wind and PV

Richard Doyle, Managing Director,

3E Renewable Energy Services, South Africa

3E history and activities

Founded in 1999

Spin-off of imec, nanoelectronics

and PV research centre

Currently employ 120 experts, 18

nationalities

Projects in over 30 countries, 5

continents

Offices in Brussels, Toulouse,

Beijing, Istanbul, Milan and Cape

Town

3E Projects and Offices

Key projects 3E offices

3E Clients

Multidisciplinary technical teams

Services over project lifecycle

Technical

advisory

Owner’s

engineering

Performance

optimisation

Due diligence

Software for renewable energy portfolio

operation

Higher availability | Lower maintenance costs | Less time spent on admin

Independent performance

analysis for all portfolio

Alarm and intervention

management

Reporting and data analysis

Measurement campaign

follow-up

Short-term forecasting

1000 parks, 1000,000 components

The wind and PV project construction

phase

Construction is the most risky phase of

the wind and PV project lifecycle

Operation Construction Development Contracting Project

lifecycle

Costs

Risk

• Low % of total

project costs

• First

commitments

and payments

• Payments made

for equipment/

contractors

• Largest % of total

project costs

• Medium % of total

project costs

• Risks generally

well mitigated

through technical

advisory

• First liabilities

• Schedule

sensitive to

unforeseen events

• Possible snowball

effect on delays

and costs

• Strong warranties

from OEM in first

5-10 years,

• Insurance and

guarantees on

production

Multiple players with different

objectives and incentives

• Owner(s) - Developers and Sponsors

• Lenders

• Contractor (EPC) – Responsible for project delivery

• Sub-contractor – responsible for a particular task

• Owner’s Engineer – monitoring construction with

duty to owner

• Lender’s Technical advisor - monitoring construction

with duty to bank/lenders

• Independent Engineer - monitoring construction with

duty to utility and developer

• Legal and Financial Advisors – guiding bank/lenders

on legal and financial aspects

Construction phase

~ 2- 3 weeks

Project specifications

definition EPC contract negotiations

Construction and Grid connection

Work acceptance by

ESKOM Operation

VVVV

VV

Technical due diligence

Financial close

Commissioning /

provisional acceptance tests

Facility completion/COD

~12 months

~24 months

VVVV

Project Milestones: the rush for gold

Project milestones such as foundation completion,

turbine/module delivery and commissioning trigger payments

of a % of the contract value.

However

• Project milestones and criteria for acceptance of Works often not

clearly defined by contract

• Claims for milestone completion are often not fully backed-up by

adequate certificates or sign-offs and cannot be accepted by LTA

• Contractors tend to claim milestone completion and walk away

• Contractors invoice for non-contractual milestones (due to lack of

contract-related knowledge)

• There is sometimes no or limited incentive to force contractor to finish

the work and fix snags

• Turbine/Module tests on completion are often overlooked

The need for independent

technical advisory services Independent technical guidance & construction monitoring

can reduce risk:

Identify issues faster and communicate them objectively to owners

Identify full completion of proper milestones

Scope of work should especially cover:

Contractor approval

Design document approval

Work progress monitoring

Drawdown approval

Quality management program verification

Factory Inspections

Wind turbine / PV Plant take over approval

Facility take over approval

Wind project construction risk, in detail

Managing project specifications

throughout wind project construction

can be difficult Project specs processed by many

departments in EPC → delays and complex

changes

Lengthy, complex contracts often with

technical details in appendices → these are

sometimes omitted or poorly distributed

No track-record of RE construction in RSA

Many subcontractors for turnkey projects with

little on site supervision from manufacturer

Commissioning team usually not involved

from start, intervene after very long chain of

people/services

Wind project construction risks

Earthworks

Civil

Logistics

Structures

Electrical

Grid connection

Commissioning / Acceptance

Operation

Crucial step to ensure

proper functioning of plant

Health and safety risks –

to be carefully assessed

Many issues observed

Not always straightforward

Grid compliance aspects

require careful check

Large country with roads

of non-uniform quality

Not such an issue in

Europe but environmental

and fossil etc issues in SA

SAWEA and Logistics

• Green Cape raises logistical concerns mid 2011

• SAWEA took over logistics concerns

• Working group formalised in June 2012

• Meetings with authorities, developers and hauliers

• No one willing to share info (except with an

independent party) – SAWEA task group formed

• NDA drafted and sent to all BW1 developers

• 4 NDA’s signed, 3 plans received + Eskom Sere

• Mixed response from developers/contractors/suppliers

Transport and Logistics

• Logistics not included in the RFP

(sometimes part of EIA)

• No central authority for collation of

transport plans

• Only 154 days for abnormal loads

• Multiple parties involved

• Plans linked to financial close

• Only 2 haulage companies have trailers

and cranes in country

• Transport contractors advertising not

always consistent with availability

• Contractors act as agents for other

larger contractors

Typical issues encountered in civil

engineering

19

Roads (common)

• Insufficient vertical transition curve or

incorrect bending radius for long trailers

(blades)

• Crane pad and roads on an embankment

prone to soil erosion

• Road and crane pad at different levels

Foundations (less common but do occur)

• Connection piece between foundation and

tower section does not fit rebar arrangement

• Some foundations needed to be destroyed

and rebuilt due to poor concrete quality

(concrete fails 28 day cube test)

WIND - Case study # 1

Impact

Delivery of correct

cans 2 months

later

Foundations

completed with 5

months delay

Actual COD

6 months later

than schedule

Wind plant

12 3MW

turbines

In France

Description of issue

Steel can did not fit

the rebar arrangement

Civil contractor was

able to prove its rebar

arrangement was

according to EPC

specs

EPC actually delivered

the wrong steel can

type

WIND - Case study # 2

Impact Blade had to

be replaced

Significant

costs

incurred

Project

take-over

delayed by

6 weeks

Wind plant

Turbines

In France

Issue

During blade lifting, one of 2 slings

broke loose - blade almost dropped

to the ground. 1/3 of the stud bolts

engaged in the blade-bearing

partially supported blade.

High wind for 3 days after the

incident. Blade root finally secured

from inside the hub and fully

attached 2 weeks later

However, cracks quickly developed

in blade root area

A note on Health and Safety

Over the last few years, several fatal accidents occurred

during construction of wind plants and made news headlines:

• Cefn Croes (UK): 1 employee killed in a car crash on site

(2008)

• Mostyn Port (UK): 1 employee killed by 80t tower section

dropped during an unloading operation (2011)

• Mannhagen (Germany): one blade was dropped on a crane

during a lifting operation, killing the operator (2012)

Such tragic accidents paralyse works and require thorough

investigation. Incurred delays (in Europe at least) are

generally several months.

Common issues with electrical

engineering

• Delays in grid connection with turbines

completed but standing still for months

• Substation equipment does not fit

substation, requiring new permit application

→ 2 months of delay common

• Protection relays on substation switchgear

require fine-tuning

→ downtime, since WTGs do not restart

automatically after a grid fault;

• Burial depth of cable not compliant with

specifications

→ high risk of damage

Commissioning should be key step to

eliminate remaining issues but is often

rushed • Hand-over by erection teams to commissioning

teams → commissioning always takes longer than

excepted

• Mechanical and electrical parts of commissioning

require 2 sets of skills, but are often carried out by

the same technician

• Non “essential” features (reference to magnetic

North, wind sensor alignment,..) are overlooked to

speed up commissioning .

• Turbine start-up does not fully comply with run-in

requirements to speed up tests on completion

• WTG parameters tend to be uploaded on a

general basis and site specific settings are ignored

WIND - Case study # 3

Impact

6 years after

commissioning,

luckily no claims

had yet been

raised

Project was in

breach of

building permit

for 6 years

Wind plant

6 2MW

Turbines

In France

Description of issue

Due to noise constraints, 2 WTGs

were to operate at reduced noise

mode at night

Mode was not implemented at

commissioning, in breach of building

permit requirements

Owner chose to continue unrestricted

operation of WTGs

WIND - Case study # 4

Impact

Recurrent

component

damage and

unscheduled

services

accounted for

25% of

production

loss

Wind plant

24 Turbines

In Spain

Complex terrain

requiring WTG-

specific

management

(turbine stopped

or curtailed in

specific wind

directions

/speeds)

Description of issue

Wind Sector Management (WSM)

implemented in 7 WTGs, mostly in the

Eastern direction. After 6 months, high

failure rate and severe

underproduction.

It was then discovered that reference

to Magnetic North had not been

correctly calibrated in the WTG

controllers.

Detailed SCADA data analysis and

inspections revealed that WTG were

not curtailed in the Southern rather

than the Eastern direction.

WIND - Case study # 5

Impact

WTG

commissioning

delayed by 6

weeks

Take-over and

COD delayed

by 2 months

Wind plant

5 WTGs

In France

Description of issue

Commissioning crew locked rotor to service hub - did not fully unlock it before leaving nacelle

Crew restarted turbine from tower bottom with one of the two locking pins still partially engaged in the rotor locking disc

Front main bearing had to be changed - one of the locking pin housings was severely damaged

The incident damaged the high-speed shaft of the gearbox which had to be replaced

WIND - Case study # 6

Impact

Poor sensor

positioning

caused a yaw

error and an

estimated 2.7 %

of production

losses for the

first 6 months of

operation

Wind plant

Wind farm in

Belgium

Description of issue

Power curve of one WTG well

below the others despite

successful take-over

Regular power curve checks

showed consistent under-

performance

Inspection revealed that vertical

booms supporting wind sensors

were incorrectly positioned

Potential issues for SA

• Comfort around condition of the delivered turbine parts?

• Comfort that site-specific features are enabled in your

turbines?

• Ensuring that project schedule is robust enough to cope

with all uncertainties and possible delays?

• Contingency in business model to cope with delays and

potential additional works?

• Verification of compliance of the work with applicable

Laws, Permit Requirements (RoD) and grid codes

• How do you mitigate the risks related possible long delays

in grid connection works by Eskom?

• Shortage of heavy lifting equipment in the South Africa?

PV project construction risk, in detail

PV project construction risks

Technology choice

Earthworks and civil

Logistics

Structures Structures

Electrical

Grid connection

Commissioning / Acceptance

Operation

Long-term reliability

is an issue

Problems exacerbated by

repetitive structure of plants

Often poorly executed and

leading to dangerous

situations (overheating,

fires…)

Large country with roads

of non-uniform quality

Not such an issue in

Europe but environmental

and fossil etc issues in SA

Certification alone is insufficient to

ensure long-term reliability of selected

components

• Based on CE, IEC, EN, UL or other standards.

• EU: IEC61215 (xSi), IEC61646 (thin film) → design qualification and type approval.

• EU/US: IEC61730, UL1730 → safety qualification.

BASIC QUALITY

?

• Insufficient statistical data from PV plants

• Lack of data for reliability standards

• Long-term reliability not addressed in certification scope

• Many issues observed during MTA and commissioning by 3E teams

RELIABILITY

OK: Checked through certification

and compliance instruments

1 in 3 modules have significant

quality-related issues

Results of 3E Module Technical Assessments worldwide, 2010-2012

Suppliers with issues are not country-specific or technology-specific

Key issues identified

Module aspect Issues

Concept & design Incorrect certification and compliance marks.

Insufficient parameters in the module data sheet.

Compliance Certification missing, outdated or incorrect product designation.

Certification on incorrect factory site.

Modules produced and shipped with components that have not been approved by certification test.

Manufacturing aspects Discrepancies between implemented protocols vs protocols in-practice.

Insufficient quality control protocols risk in resulting in defective module.

Absence or outdated equipment calibration.

Incorrect module power rating.

Application Ambiguous installation manuals.

Unclear terms and conditions in warranty documents.

PV - Case study # 1

Impact

Mismatch losses

increasing

Module distributor

claimed snail trails

are only a visual

phenomenon and

not a defect

Legal case under

way

PV plant

3MW PV plant

In Belgium

Description of issue

Module defects (snail trails)

identified at provisional

acceptance tests on

significant portion of installed

modules

Directly related energy loss

was estimated

Snail trails caused by micro-

cracks in the module cells,

will lead to further

degradation and impact on

efficiency

Common Issues with PV project

construction Lack of contractor experience

Example: Inverters are often not

placed properly or according to

specification, to allow for sufficient

ventilation or easy access

Contractors focused on speed rather

than quality

Example: Contractor not recording

flash test results for specific plants –

serial numbers had to be manually

recorded on site by technicians for 3

weeks when assets were sold

Insufficient tests performed on site

Common Issues with PV project

construction

Use of different or wrong equipment

Example: Use of wrong bolts leading to

corrosion – all bolts (>10000) replaced

Poor cabling work

Example: No respect of bending radius

/ high cable tightness to allow thermal

dilatation →DC cabling had to be

modified by connecting extra junctions

and cable extensions to avoid cable

damage / fires

Poor electrical connections

PV - Case study # 1

Impact

Adapted construction

planning and delays

Maintenance schedule

of green zones adapted

to account for fast

growing vegetation

Changes and

adaptations to some

components to account

for unusually high

humidity levels

PV plant

9 x 1MW PV plant France Islands

Description of

issue

Projects on islands with

poor grid, inexperienced

team of large EPC/O&M

contractor

Specific micro-climate

not taken into account in

initial design and

technical specifications

Some civil/installation

works were impossible

during rainy season

PV - Case study # 2

Impact

Severe

damage to the

installation

Mounting

structures and

modules

replaced

Work had to

be redone

PV plant

4MW PV plant

In Belgium

Description of issue

At provisional acceptance tests

serious issues were identified:

Structural stability issues of

mounting structure

Non-compliant mounting of

modules in terms of manufacturer

specs: >250 modules were blown

off the rooftop

Non-compliant installation of

inverters (lack of ventilation, non-

compliant installation)

PV - Case study # 3

Impact

Municipality did not

accept revised permit

and forced the

developer and

contractor to correct

mounting structure

height at significant

cost

Technical building had

to be removed entirely

PV plant

12MW PV plant

In France

Description of issue

Construction permit

compliance was

overlooked during

construction phase

Mechanical completion

tests identified 1.5m

difference between

constructed plant and

permit

One technical building was

built in breach of building

permit

Potential issues for SA

• Comfort around the condition of the delivered modules (flash and

EL testing?

• Comfort that site-specific features are enabled in BOP?

• Ensuring that project schedule is robust enough to cope with all

uncertainties and possible delays?

• Contingency in business model to cope with delays and potential

additional works?

• Verification of compliance of the work with applicable Laws, Permit

Requirements (RoD) and grid codes

• How do you mitigate the risks related possible long delays in grid

connection works by Eskom?

• How do you identify triggers for product related insurance claims?

Thank you

For any additional information, please do not

hesitate to contact Richard Doyle:

Email: richard.doyle@3e.eu

Phone: +27 21 300 9922

Mobile: +27 82 454 7066

www.3e.eu