Who actually has the Most Powerful Snowmaking System?

[deadheadskier]

how do you determine the circumference of the circumference of anything.

sounds like a circular reference.

I figured HWS is such an engineering master that I'd throw a wrinkle into pi as I imagine he's the only person in history to know it's exact measurement.

 

[Highway Star]

Umm, HS as somebody who runs their own business, trust me, efficiency (and hence cost savings) matters!

And I think that that statement applies across all businesses. So in this day and age, where the main focus of basically ALL snowmaking gun manufacturers IS how efficient their machines make snow to discount that topic from this conversation makes almost as much sense as discounting temps/humidity from this conversation, since I'm sure that even you'll concede to the very fact that when the temps are good, even the mighty K doesn't use all the air capacity it has, and all those tan Ingersoll Rand rental compressors sitting around not in use aren't free. And I think that it is a safe bet that in the coming years, you'll see less of them at K as they, along with most resorts transition to more efficient, and hence less expensive alternatives.

You're missing the point. Of course efficiency is important in a snowmaking system, to every resort including Killington. Why do you think Killington has invested in fan guns, HDK rangers, raticks, and various tower guns? So when optimal temps do roll around they can make snow with less energy used.

However, it is being shown right now that efficiency should not come at the expense of capablity. In the search for better efficiency, Mount Snow has seemingly given up the capablity to produce snow at very marginal temperatures. Killington and Sunday River, OTOH, have retained that capablity, and budgeted for it. They are spending lots and lots of money right now to be open, and will hopefully recoup some of it over this holiday period and in follow on business.

 

[2knees]

I figured HWS is such an engineering master that I'd throw a wrinkle into pi as I imagine he's the only person in history to know it's exact measurement.

 

[Glenn]

You're missing the point. Of course efficiency is important in a snowmaking system, to every resort including Killington. Why do you think Killington has invested in fan guns, HDK rangers, raticks, and various tower guns? So when optimal temps do roll around they can make snow with less energy used.

However, it is being shown right now that efficiency should not come at the expense of capablity. In the search for better efficiency, Mount Snow has seemingly given up the capablity to produce snow at very marginal temperatures. Killington and Sunday River, OTOH, have retained that capablity, and budgeted for it. They are spending lots and lots of money right now to be open, and will hopefully recoup some of it over this holiday period and in follow on business.

As a top skier at Killington, do you find their quality of snow better or equal to other mountains. After all, you do ski at the other mountains you're currently chastising, right?

 

[SIKSKIER]

The appropriate measurement IS volume.Who can pump the most water and turn it into snow.

 

[Highway Star]

The appropriate measurement IS volume.Who can pump the most water and turn it into snow.

Not true in the least.

 

[Highway Star]

As a top skier at Killington, do you find their quality of snow better or equal to other mountains. After all, you do ski at the other mountains you're currently chastising, right?

Killington has fairly average snowmaking and grooming, IMHO.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

HS is a god, prophet and saint rolled into one huge pile of manure.

 

[drjeff]

Not true in the least.

How so??? What good would having say the ability to supply 50,000 cu feet of air into a system and then only be able to pump say 5,000 gallons of water?? Your just not going to get alot of marginal days where the $$ return is going to make excessive air capacity to produce relatively minimal product for what tends to be the minimal crowds typically associated with marginal weather times - since ultimately the biggest limiting factor in a snowmaking system isn't air or water, but the $$ it takes to make snow. And if you're spending far more to make snow then your getting in cash at the ticket window over an extended run, that's going to have an effect on the snowmaking budget in the more favorable times. And remember, if yuor not using the expensive air, you're not taking in money, but you're also keeping the bills down too.

 

[deadheadskier]

HWS for president of the one man debate team!

 

[Highway Star]

How so??? What good would having say the ability to supply 50,000 cu feet of air into a system and then only be able to pump say 5,000 gallons of water?? Your just not going to get alot of marginal days where the $$ return is going to make excessive air capacity to produce relatively minimal product for what tends to be the minimal crowds typically associated with marginal weather times - since ultimately the biggest limiting factor in a snowmaking system isn't air or water, but the $$ it takes to make snow. And if you're spending far more to make snow then your getting in cash at the ticket window over an extended run, that's going to have an effect on the snowmaking budget in the more favorable times. And remember, if yuor not using the expensive air, you're not taking in money, but you're also keeping the bills down too.

LOL.....The senario you describe is very close to how Killington has been running it's system the last few days, but with probably even less water at some points. And thus, they are going to be the only area in VT open this weekend.

Obviously, no one today is going to purposely design a system to be inefficient in using lots and lots of air all the time.......but Killington's is a legacy system that was originally set up when snowmaking on average DID use lots of air, running k3000's most of the time. Thus they retain the capablity to be inefficient and make snow in warm temps, but they can also switch to more efficient guns as temps allow. In fact, I've seen 3 types of guns set on superstar at one time - k3000's, rangers, and the tower guns - they were switching between them day/night. The K3000 remains a workhorse for them though and it wouldn't be Killington snowmaking without it.

The converse of that is many new systems have been setup to be too efficient, at the expense capability in marginal temps........such as mount snow's.

 

[vcunning]

LOL.....The senario you describe is very close to how Killington has been running it's system the last few days, but with probably even less water at some points. And thus, they are going to be the only area in VT open this weekend.

Although I resisted getting into this thread . . . I'm thinking the answer is MAYBE

From Killington's Full Snow Report: "For Sunday, we are planning to remain open; however, pending weather and snow conditions, some walking may be required on the lower portion of the mountain."

I've done the walking at Killington . . . It's kinda a "yep I did it" or "once in a lifetime" experience. Although I must admit I skied on Columbus day at K quite a few years ago.

I'm kinda thinkin' we're all anxious to be skiing top to bottom on our respective mountains. If we don't have some better temperature/humidity/inversion conditions soon, I'm guessing some of us might be showing up here:

 

[Highway Star]

Although I resisted getting into this thread . . . I'm thinking the answer is MAYBE

From Killington's Full Snow Report: "For Sunday, we are planning to remain open; however, pending weather and snow conditions, some walking may be required on the lower portion of the mountain."

I've done the walking at Killington . . . It's kinda a "yep I did it" or "once in a lifetime" experience. Although I must admit I skied on Columbus day at K quite a few years ago.

Que??

There will be walking required, from the bottom of the lift to the K-1 gondola. There is no precip forcast after Friday night, with partly cloudy skies. Temps are going to be in the 40's saturday, freeze overnight (some snowmaking?) and warm again sunday. Aside from a bit of ice -> spring conditions, there should be plenty of cover and good skiing. There is no way it's going to melt out enough to require you to take off skis and walk, midway down.

 

[drjeff]

Que??

There will be walking required, from the bottom of the lift to the K-1 gondola. There is no precip forcast after Friday night, with partly cloudy skies. Temps are going to be in the 40's saturday, freeze overnight (some snowmaking?) and warm again sunday. Aside from a bit of ice -> spring conditions, there should be plenty of cover and good skiing. There is no way it's going to melt out enough to require you to take off skis and walk, midway down.

Cool, so now not only is HS K's official lift designer and mountain ops manager, but he's also taken over the job of snowreporter

 

[vcunning]

Cool, so now not only is HS K's official lift designer and mountain ops manager, but he's also taken over the job of snowreporter

NO WAY! I've got dibs on the snowreporter job:

 

[mondeo]

Last time I checked, "power" is the rate at which worked is performed.

True, but the most powerful isn't a very specific statement. Where are you measuring power? Sure, you can measure it as shaft power output of compressors/pumps/motors, the easiest to calculate given the fact that fan motors, air compressors, and pumps are rated for power output. Going in the completely useless direction, you could even include the rate of heat generation due to system inefficiencies, which gives the diesel air compressors a further "advantage" over the electric fans given the lower efficiency of a diesel simple cycle engine to a combined cycle power plant.

Better would be to look at the useful power output of the fans, compressors and pumps; my guess is that the air compressors used in a traditional system are slightly more efficient than fans, but both would be in the mid-90% efficiency range, so not much change. Then you could adjust for the power done against the system by gravity, equalizing the systems with respect to any advantage gained by elevating the snowmaking pond or size of the mountain.

All of these are fairly useless calculations of energy. The most useful I can think of is the rate of heat transfer of water to air after exiting the snow making apparatus but before reaching the ground. As the heat of fusion is much greater than the heat loss over the range of temperatures relevant in snowmaking, we can approximate power as mass flow times heat of fusion. Given heat of fusion is a constant and the density of water is nearly constant, this means that the power of a system, under this definition, can be calculated solely by the flow rate of water in the system. Of course, this definition is still not complete, as the water flow in the system is set based inputs from operators, decisions made based on things like wetbulb temperatures, static temperature of the air exiting the nozzle, hang time in the air, etc.

But all these definitions (and others I didn't mention) allow for the possibility of many different mountains claiming, correctly so, that they have the most powerful snowmaking system.

Class dismissed.

 

[hrstrat57]

I suppose the appropriate measure would be some measure of volume / time; something like acre feet / hour. But that only tells how much area can be covered and not what percentage of an area's acreage can be covered and opened. I agree with folks who are giving Mt. Snow admiration. We skied there last year over Thanksgiving and we thought they had done a terrific job getting terrain open. Not only did they get quite a bit of terrain open but conditions were much better than we'd anticipated. Crotched comes to mind as a place that's able to cover a large percentage of their terrain fast. Doesn't really matter how "powerful" a snowmaking system is until we get some sustained cold.

Cmon RISkier, we all know the real answer here is Yawgoo Valley Ski Area, Exeter, RI!!!

 

[threecy]

The pumps still have to pump it uphill. There may be some storage though.

My point was that uphill pressure doesn't necessarily matter directly, if one is running guns on the downhill side of the loop. If one manages the downhill pressure correctly and balances the load of guns/hydrant turns/etc., one could have minimum pressure at the top of the pipeline, but still retain decent pressure for guns on the downhill as gravity does it's thing. One could also have a reduction in pipe diameter on the downhill loop, adding more pressure. Of course, such practices can also increase the chances of pipeline freeze.

 

[bvibert]

True, but the most powerful isn't a very specific statement. Where are you measuring power?

Blah blah blah...

But all these definitions (and others I didn't mention) allow for the possibility of many different mountains claiming, correctly so, that they have the most powerful snowmaking system.

Class dismissed.

I'll drink to that. :beer:

 

[Highway Star]

True, but the most powerful isn't a very specific statement. Where are you measuring power? Sure, you can measure it as shaft power output of compressors/pumps/motors, the easiest to calculate given the fact that fan motors, air compressors, and pumps are rated for power output. Going in the completely useless direction, you could even include the rate of heat generation due to system inefficiencies, which gives the diesel air compressors a further "advantage" over the electric fans given the lower efficiency of a diesel simple cycle engine to a combined cycle power plant.

Better would be to look at the useful power output of the fans, compressors and pumps; my guess is that the air compressors used in a traditional system are slightly more efficient than fans, but both would be in the mid-90% efficiency range, so not much change. Then you could adjust for the power done against the system by gravity, equalizing the systems with respect to any advantage gained by elevating the snowmaking pond or size of the mountain.

All of these are fairly useless calculations of energy. The most useful I can think of is the rate of heat transfer of water to air after exiting the snow making apparatus but before reaching the ground. As the heat of fusion is much greater than the heat loss over the range of temperatures relevant in snowmaking, we can approximate power as mass flow times heat of fusion. Given heat of fusion is a constant and the density of water is nearly constant, this means that the power of a system, under this definition, can be calculated solely by the flow rate of water in the system. Of course, this definition is still not complete, as the water flow in the system is set based inputs from operators, decisions made based on things like wetbulb temperatures, static temperature of the air exiting the nozzle, hang time in the air, etc.

But all these definitions (and others I didn't mention) allow for the possibility of many different mountains claiming, correctly so, that they have the most powerful snowmaking system.

Class dismissed.

This is solid theory. Can we get a calculation for work per volume of snow vs. wet bulb temp? That would be super awesome.