Sie sind auf Seite 1von 26

WATERHAMMER PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS IN A LONG PENSTOCK UNDER A SMALL TOWN The Gardone Val Trompia small hydroelectric

plant

PAOLO CARETTI Voith Simens Hydro S.p.A. Milano NINO FROSIO Studio Frosio

Studio Frosio

GARDONE VAL TROMPIA PLANT


Plant location
River Drainage area Maximum flow rate Minimum flow rate Average flow rate Gross head Maximum capacity (installed) Functioning annual times Annual production

Main characteristics
Mella 205 km
3 3 3 2

4,5 m /s 1,2 m /s 3,0 m /s 27,30 m 980 kW 8.000 4.000.000 kWh

Supply channel and penstocks


Type Open air channel Concrete tunnel Cast iron GRP Steel and concrete coating WHOLE PENSTOCK Dimensions 6,85 x 1,50 2,50 x 1,50 m 1.800 mm 1.800 mm 1.800 mm 0,70 m 21 mm 36 mm 6 mm/25 cm Thickness Length 202,8 321,1 m 254,5 m 768,4 m 357,1 m 1.701,1 m 1.180 m/s 940 m/s 750 m/s 1.070 m/s 895 m/s 0,54 s 0,54 s 2,05 s 0,67 s 3,80 s Wave speed Reflection time

Penstocks

Surge tank

Section A: open channel (202,8 m) Section A: siphoned channel (321,1 m) Section A: cast iron penstock (254,5 m)

Section B,C,D1: GRP penstock (768,4 m) Section D2,E: steel & concrete penstock (357,1 m) Section E: tail race (358 m)

Studio Frosio

Schematic profile of the plant

Studio Frosio

Weir

Studio Frosio

The intake structures

Studio Frosio

Supply channel: open air breach

Studio Frosio

Siphon intake

Studio Frosio

Siphon intake

Studio Frosio

Existing open channel changed in depressurised channel

Studio Frosio

Existing open channel changed in depressurised channel

Studio Frosio

Existing open channel changed in depressurised channel

Studio Frosio

Cast iron installation phase

Studio Frosio

Glass reinforced (GRP) penstock installation

Studio Frosio

Connection joint between the GRP and the steel penstock

Studio Frosio

Steel penstock-concrete: before the concrete casting

Studio Frosio

Steel penstock-concrete: after the concrete casting

Studio Frosio

Kaplan unit installation drawing

Lesson learning: a brief history of THE PROBLEMS


PHASES Concept project First bid ITEMS Cross-flow turbine Cross-flow turbine confirmed Kaplan turbine 600 rpm Kaplan turbine 750 rpm Siphoned intake WATERHAMMER PROBLEMS None None Notes Action turbine Action turbine Consequences None None

Second bid

Not significant

Positive pressure stresses

First waterhammer evaluation

Construction project Construction project

Significant

Negative pressure stresses too

Preliminary mathematical model implementation

Dramatic

Vacuum bubbles risk

Sophisticated calculation model and field tests

Studio Frosio

Lesson learning: a brief history of THE SOLUTIONS


ITEMS Preliminary simulations (without surge tank) First field survey ISSUES Worst operating situations Maximum stresses in the penstock Plant operation limits to keep the stresses of the penstocks within safety range Actual penstocks and Kaplan unit critical parameters (wave reflection time, flow rate gradient during the transients) Waterhammer effect on the penstock without the surge tank Set-up of the hydraulic system (wicket gates, runner blades, dissipation valve) to operate the plant in safe condition Most dangerous operation situations taking into account the penstocks and the Kaplan unit together Best closing law of wicket gates and runner Geometric parameters of the surge tank Diaphragm optimum size to fulfil the boundary constrains Dramatically cutting off the negative pressure waves Lowering the positive pressure waves Getting the plant full capacity Checking theoretical calculation Setting-up the hydraulic operating systems (wicket gates, blades and dissipation valve) Removing every plant limitation

Sophisticate mathematical model

Surge tank erection

Final field survey

Surge tank: foundation basement

Studio Frosio

Surge tank: diaphragm

Studio Frosio

Surge tank: assembly phase

Studio Frosio

Surge tank

Studio Frosio

Surge tank
Tower net height Diameter: Material: Thickness : 23,60 m 4,00 m steel S275JR 11 mm

Studio Frosio

CONCLUSIONS
1. 2. 3. Nowadays long penstocks are very often preferred to the traditional scheme open channel/penstock, because those are cheaper, quickly installed, and easier to maintain Lot of care is needed when long penstocks are connected to low inertia units as this causes significant waterhammer phenomenon, most of all where supply open channels dont exist Waterhammer phenomenon doesnt mean only overpressure but negative pressure too, caused by the very quick increase of the flow rate during the shutoff transients, which could be more dangerous for the pipes Typically the waterhammer phenomenon causes negative pressure with low inertia Kaplan turbines or dissipation valves at the end of the penstock If faced in the preliminary designing phase, the waterhammer phenomenon isnt a dramatic problem Good simulation model is necessary to find out the worst working situations of the plant and to design the best solutions: the turbine manufacturers contribution is essential to get suitable results Accurate field tests are essential as well, in order to obtain the actual penstock and units parameters, mainly the wave reflection time and the flow rate gradient during the overspeed time (closing transient) The most suitable solution is the surge tank, where possible The total plant investment was 3.600.000 ; the cost of the mathematical simulation and of the field tests was 20.000 (0,6%); the surge tank cost 130.000 (3,6%)
Studio Frosio

4. 5. 6.

7.

8. 9.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen