Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities

Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities:
Achieving Efficiency, Compliance,

and Optimal Operation (TR-113584-V5)
A Hydropower Technology Roundup Report,
Volume 5
Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in
accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7
of the U.S. Export Administration Regulations. As a result of this publication, this
report is subject to only copyright protection and does not require any license
SED WARNING:
N agreement from EPRI. This notice supersedes the export control restrictions and any
A L
LICE
Please read the License Agreement

proprietary licensed material notices embedded in the document prior to publication.
on the back cover before removing
R I
M AT E the Wrapping Material.

Technical Report
Flow Measurement at Hydro
Facilities: Achieving Efficiency,
Compliance, and Optimal Operation
(TR-113584-V5)
A Hydropower Technology Roundup Report,
Volume 5
1004429
Final Report, January 2002
EPRI Project Manager

M. Bahleda
EPRI • 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 • USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • askepri@epri.com • www.epri.com
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN
ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH
INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE
ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)

WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR
SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR
INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S
CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER

(INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE
HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR
SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD,
PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT
HCI Publications
ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to EPRI Customer Fulfillment, 1355 Willow Way,
Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2.
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright © 2002 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CITATIONS
This report was prepared by
HCI Publications
410 Archibald Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64111
Principal Investigators
M. A. Hosko
C. Vansant
This report describes research sponsored by EPRI.
The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities: Achieving Efficiency, Compliance, and Optimal

Operation (TR-113584-V5): A Hydropower Technology Roundup Report, Volume 5, EPRI, Palo
Alto, CA: 2002. 1004429.
iii
REPORT SUMMARY
Many factors can affect the performance and profitability of hydro facilities. The basis of
hydroelectric power production is founded on the quantity, availability, and effective use of
water. The premise of this Hydropower Technology Roundup report is that an improvement in
flow measurement techniques and applications will improve hydroelectric production.
Background
Water is the fuel for hydro plants, and flow measurement is an essential tool for getting
maximum mileage from that fuel. Hydro plant owners and operators need practical guidance for
utilizing cost-effective flow measurement. In meeting the requirements of the rapidly evolving
electricity marketplace, it is especially useful for hydro project managers to have a greater
understanding of the methods, applications, and associated costs of flow measurement
techniques.
Objectives
• To provide a description of the various methods for flow measurement, their advantages and
limitations, and their applicability to various situations
• To provide a framework for assessing costs and benefits of various flow measurement
methods and for estimating plant performance improvements
• To present industry experience in the form of case studies
• To identify present and future trends and opportunities for research and development in flow
measurement technology and applications
Approach
The investigators identified and reviewed pertinent literature and consulted with researchers and
industry personnel having relevant knowledge. Case studies were compiled from a number of
hydroelectric project owners, covering traditional and state-of-the-art techniques in flow
measurement.
Results
This report summarizes the information developed and provides a starting point for looking at
project- or system-specific situations. The report reviews state-of-the-art flow measurement
technologies, presents case studies and lessons learned, and includes descriptions of application
regimes and costs. The report includes descriptions of various methods, their advantages and
limitations, and their applicability to various situations. In addition, the report provides a
framework for assessing costs and benefits of various flow measurement methods and for
estimating plant performance improvements.
v
EPRI Perspective
Faced with a rapidly changing and newly competitive industry structure, hydropower project
owners and operators need up-to-date information about the options available for meeting a
diverse set of new challenges. They need information about the benefits and costs of alternative
technologies and strategies. They need to know what works, what is likely to work, and what
doesn’t work. EPRI’s Hydropower Technology Roundup report series provides a clearinghouse
of information from worldwide sources on key topics including new and emerging technologies
and approaches. This report on flow measurement is the fifth in the Hydropower Technology
Roundup report series. Other reports in the series have been published periodically since 1999.
Keywords
Flow measurement
Hydroelectric
Compliance
Optimization
Efficiency
vi
EPRI Licensed Material
ABSTRACT
While many factors influence the performance and profitability of hydro facilities, the basis of
hydroelectric power production is founded on the quantity, availability, and effective use of
water. Estimates of water availability and optimal use of the water depend upon the measurement
of the flow rate of water. The information compiled for this report will help hydro plant
personnel improve plant performance through the application of appropriate flow measurement
technologies.
Improved production and performance can be achieved through flow measurement in several
ways including:
• Testing and improvement of unit efficiency
• Optimization management of the water resource
• Compliance with regulatory requirements for flow releases
• Measurement of flows for maintenance, safety, and other purposes
This report reviews state-of-the-art flow measurement technologies and outlines corresponding
applications and costs. Through descriptions, case studies, and lessons learned, this report
provides plant personnel with a framework for assessing the costs and benefits of various flow
measurement methods.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special thanks and acknowledgment are made to those individuals and organizations whose
assistance was helpful in the development of this report.
The advice and direction of George Hecker, Alden Research Laboratory, Inc., Holden, MA, and
Patrick March, Hydro Resource Solutions LLC, Norris, TN, are especially appreciated.
The following contributors provided information and perspectives via personal communications:
Paul Bernhardt Orion Power New York Syracuse, NY
Matt Gass Hetch Hetchy Water and Power Moccasin, CA
Mike Haynes Seattle City Light Seattle,WA
Sam Hirschey Orion Power New York Syracuse, NY
Chuck Howard Consultant Vancouver, BC
Joseph Kick Wisconsin Electric Power Iron Mountain, MI
Robert Knowlton New York Power Authority White Plains, NY
David Lemon, ASL-AQFlow, Inc. Sidney, BC
Joseph Lampa,
and Dave Fissel
T.J. LoVullo Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Washington, DC
Frank Lynch Pacific Gas and Electric Company San Francisco, CA
Niels Nielson, Chris BC Hydro Burnaby, BC
Helston, and John Taylor
Cliff Pugh Bureau of Reclamation Denver, CO
Steve Stitt Bureau of Reclamation Denver, CO
Gerold Westermann Acres International Niagara Falls, Ontario
ix
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW..................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 What Is the Value of Flow Measurement at a Hydro Plant?....................................... 1-1
1.2 Why Innovate? .......................................................................................................... 1-2
1.3 Flow Measurement as a Basis for Improved Performance ........................................ 1-3
1.3.1 Flow Measurement for Improving Efficiency ......................................................... 1-4
1.3.2 Flow Measurement for Optimization Models ......................................................... 1-4
1.3.3 Flow Measurement for Compliance and Stewardship ........................................... 1-4
1.4 Strategies for Assessing Flow Measurement Improvements ..................................... 1-4
1.5 Report Organization .................................................................................................. 1-5
2 UNDERSTANDING FLOW MEASUREMENT...................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Flow Measurement Techniques ................................................................................ 2-1
2.1.1 Measurements by Current Meters......................................................................... 2-4
2.1.2 Measurements by Pressure-Time ......................................................................... 2-4
2.1.3 Measurements by Tracer Dilution ......................................................................... 2-4
2.1.4 Measurements by Transit Time ............................................................................ 2-5
2.1.5 Measurements by Acoustic Signals ...................................................................... 2-5
2.1.6 Relative Measurements of Flow............................................................................ 2-5
2.1.7 Measurements by Other Methods......................................................................... 2-6
2.2 Developing Protocols for Efficiency Testing at Hydro Plants...................................... 2-6
2.2.1 The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Performance Test
Code 18 (PTC 18) (1992) .............................................................................................. 2-6
2.2.2 IEC Publication 41 (1991)..................................................................................... 2-6
2.3 Flow Measurement Options....................................................................................... 2-7
3 ACHIEVING EFFICIENT OPERATION................................................................................ 3-1

3.1 Testing Efficiency of Hydroelectric Units.................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Applications of Flow Measurement Techniques......................................................... 3-2
xi
3.2.1 Current Meters...................................................................................................... 3-4

3.2.1.1 Safe Harbor Water Power.............................................................................. 3-4
3.2.1.2 St. Lawrence, USA and Canada .................................................................... 3-5
3.2.1.3 Wisconsin Electric Power .............................................................................. 3-8
3.2.2 Pressure-Time (Gibson) Method........................................................................... 3-9
3.2.2.1 TVA ............................................................................................................... 3-9
3.2.3 Injection Methods—Salt, Tracer, Dye Dilution....................................................... 3-9
3.2.3.1 Acres International ...................................................................................... 3-10
3.2.4 Acoustic Flow Measurement (AFM) .................................................................... 3-11
3.2.4.1 Sultartangi, Iceland...................................................................................... 3-11
3.2.4.2 BC Hydro..................................................................................................... 3-12
3.2.4.3 Clamp-On Transducers ............................................................................... 3-12
3.2.4.4 Pacific Gas and Electric............................................................................... 3-12
3.2.5 Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter (ASFM) ........................................................... 3-13
3.2.5.1 TVA—Fort Patrick Henry ............................................................................. 3-14
3.2.5.2 Hydro-Quebec—Laforge-2 .......................................................................... 3-14
3.2.5.3 Corps of Engineers—Bonneville .................................................................. 3-15
3.2.5.4 Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan Co.—Rock Island Powerhouse U6 ..... 3-15
3.2.6 Thermodynamic Method ..................................................................................... 3-18
3.2.7 Winter-Kennedy Pressure Taps.......................................................................... 3-19
3.2.7.1 Kariba Dam ................................................................................................. 3-19
3.2.7.2 Small Hydro Stations ................................................................................... 3-20
4 FLOW MEASUREMENT: COSTS, BENEFITS, AND LESSONS LEARNED ...................... 4-1

4.1 Who is Testing and How? ......................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Costs of Testing ........................................................................................................ 4-2
4.2.1 Cost Reductions.................................................................................................... 4-5
4.3 The Bottom Line: Improving Production .................................................................... 4-6
4.3.1 Enhanced System Optimization............................................................................ 4-6
4.3.2 Performance Monitoring ....................................................................................... 4-6
4.4 Lessons Learned....................................................................................................... 4-7
5 FURTHER APPLICATIONS OF FLOW MEASUREMENT................................................... 5-1

5.1 Flow Measurement as Input to Optimization Programs ............................................. 5-1
5.1.1 Bureau of Reclamation—Riverware...................................................................... 5-4
xii
5.1.2 FPL Energy Maine—Real-Time Hydro Operations Model..................................... 5-4

5.1.3 Orion Power New York ......................................................................................... 5-5
5.1.4 Wisconsin Electric Power—Vista .......................................................................... 5-6
5.1.5 Other Applications ................................................................................................ 5-6
5.2 Flow Measurement Applications for Compliance and Stewardship............................ 5-7
5.2.1 Seattle City Light .................................................................................................. 5-7
5.2.2 Orion Power New York ......................................................................................... 5-8
5.2.3 Other Compliance Applications............................................................................. 5-9
5.3 Flow Measurement for Penstock Leak Detection....................................................... 5-9
5.3.1 Pacific Gas and Electric...................................................................................... 5-10
5.3.2 Ataturk, Turkey ................................................................................................... 5-10
5.3.3 Other Applications .............................................................................................. 5-10
6 THE FUTURE OF FLOW MEASUREMENT FOR HYDRO APPLICATIONS ....................... 6-1

6.1 Improving Flow Measurement Techniques and Codes .............................................. 6-1
6.2 Improving Methods and Applications at Small Hydro Plants ...................................... 6-4
6.3 Enhancing Water Optimization Model Input............................................................... 6-4
6.4 Improving Streamflow Information ............................................................................. 6-5
7 REFERENCES AND RESOURCES..................................................................................... 7-1

7.1 References................................................................................................................ 7-1
7.2 Additional Resources ................................................................................................ 7-5
A APPENDIX A—FLOW MEASUREMENT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ...........................A-1

A.1 Flow Measurement and Hydroelectric Facilities......................................................... A-1
A.2 Groups Active in the Science of Flow Measurement ................................................. A-2
A.2.1 The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) .................................................................... A-2
A.2.1.1 Streamflow Gaging........................................................................................ A-3
A.2.1.2 Stage Measurements .................................................................................... A-3
A.2.1.3 Current Meters .............................................................................................. A-4
A.2.2 The International Group for Hydraulic Efficiency Measurement (IGHEM).............. A-5
A.3 Flow Measurement Techniques—Additional Background Material ............................ A-6
B APPENDIX B—FLOW MEASUREMENT SERVICE AND PRODUCT SUPPLIERS ...........B-1

Accusonic Technologies, Inc. ............................................................................................. B-3
Advanced Energy Monitoring Systems Ltd. (AEMS) ........................................................... B-4
xiii
Alden Research Laboratory, Inc. ........................................................................................ B-5

ASL AQFlow Inc. ................................................................................................................ B-7
Controlotron ....................................................................................................................... B-9
Fluid Components International........................................................................................ B-10
JBS Energy, Inc................................................................................................................ B-11
Mountain Energy, Inc........................................................................................................ B-13
OTT-Hydrometrie ............................................................................................................. B-14
Polaris Group, Inc............................................................................................................. B-16
Quantum Hydrometrie GmbH ........................................................................................... B-17
Rickly Hydrological Company ........................................................................................... B-18
Rittmeyer, Inc., USA ......................................................................................................... B-19
Stevens Water Monitoring Systems, Inc. .......................................................................... B-20
Unidata America............................................................................................................... B-22
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4-1 Benefits of Efficient Operation—Cherokee Plant, TVA ........................................... 4-7
xv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Flow Measurement Methods ................................................................................... 2-2

Table 3-1 Select Applications of Flow Measurement Methods ................................................ 3-3
Table 3-2 Velocity-Area (Current Meter) Method Requirements .............................................. 3-6
Table 3-3 Clamp-On Versus Wetted Transducer Tests ......................................................... 3-13
Table 3-4 Summary of Recent Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter (ASFM) Comparison
Testing Applications ...................................................................................................... 3-17
Table 3-5 Thermodynamic Method Uncertainties .................................................................. 3-19
Table 4-1 Flow Measurement Methods Used in Rehabilitation................................................ 4-1
Table 4-2 Field Efficiency Tests .............................................................................................. 4-2
Table 4-3 Hydro Facility Flow Measurement Application Guidelines ....................................... 4-3
Table 4-4 Approximate Costs of Flow Measurement Methods ................................................ 4-4
Table 4-5 Flow Measurement Experience and Instrumentation for Different Methods ............. 4-9
Table 5-1 Hydro Optimization Software and Flow Measurement ............................................. 5-3
Table A-1 Groups Active in the Science of Flow Measurement .............................................. A-2
Table A-2 Characteristics of Current Meters........................................................................... A-5
Table A-3 General Acoustic Flowmetering Parameters .......................................................... A-7
Table B-1 Flow Measurement Service and Product Suppliers ................................................ B-2
xvii
1
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
Water is the fuel for hydro plants and flow measurement is an essential tool for getting maximum
mileage, or productivity, from a plant. Hydro plant owners and operators need practical guidance
for utilizing cost-effective flow measurement techniques. In meeting the requirements of the
rapidly evolving electricity marketplace, it is especially useful for hydro project managers to
have a greater understanding of methods, applications, and the costs associated with various flow
measurement techniques.
This report aims to describe the different flow measurement methods that hydro producers can
use for:
• Testing and improving unit efficiency
• Optimizing management of the water resource
• Achieving and documenting compliance with regulatory requirements for flow releases
• Measuring flows at project facilities for maintenance, safety, and other purposes
1.1 What Is the Value of Flow Measurement at a Hydro Plant?
To continue the analogy, if hydro plants use water as their fuel, and mileage is established by
flow measurement, to get maximum mileage consider:
You drive a car with a quantity of fuel. You know you get 22 miles per gallon (mpg) (9.35 km/l)
as stated on the sticker, which is the vehicle’s best performance under ideal conditions—and of
course you are an ideal driver. Therefore, you know what the performance (range) is for a tank of
gas. But, your teenager has a lead foot and drives your car at a poorer efficiency so he only gets
18 mpg (7.65 km/l). Result: he has to fill up the tank more often and gets less performance or
range for the same fuel tank fill-up.
The teenager asks, “How can I get better performance and spend less money?” You suggest that
he watch the instantaneous fuel use gage. So instead of watching the rpm on the tachometer, he
observes the fuel consumption reading as he accelerates. He only gets 4.5 mpg (1.91 km/l) when
he stomps on it and learns to use the gage to pace the acceleration at a rate that improves his
driving habits to that perfect sticker test efficiency of 22 mpg (9.35 km/l).
If, at a hydro facility, we know the efficiency curves for a particular unit and we know how to
move the water about optimally, then, in theory, we are getting the maximum performance of the
unit. What we rely on is that sticker, the calibration of unit performance characteristics such as
1-1
Introduction and Overview
head, flow, power, and, under ideal conditions, its model test efficiency. With certainty we
operate that unit at its best performance point and say this is the most energy we can get out of
the water.
But is it? What if the efficiency curves that relate the flow, which is a set point for operation, are
simply not correct given the driving conditions? You think you are getting 22 mpg (9.35 km/l)
because that is what the calibrated flow gage is saying but, in reality, you are operating on the
efficiency curve 0.1 to 0.5% less. Who cares you say? Multiply it out—the value of even small
efficiency gains on multiple units can equate to a significant number of kilowatt-hours each year.
Doesn’t it make sense then to ensure that the efficiency curves that we know are correct, are
indeed the best we can get in the field? Hydro plant owners and operators are continually being
asked to do more with less and spending additional money and downtime associated with
performing index testing to update those curves might be low on the list. But what if new
methods and technology could be used to cost-effectively measure and improve those set point
curves continuously to get even a few tenths of a percent improvement in efficiency? Would you
support further testing at your own plant and additional research, development, demonstration
and application to put these tools to work?
1.2 Why Innovate?
Recent research and development on flow measurement at hydro plants is based on the body of
knowledge developed in the 1980s by EPRI, in the form of a research project to demonstrate the
technical and economic characteristics of acoustic flow measurement systems. This research was
conducted at BC Hydro’s Kootenay Canal power station, TVA’s Raccoon Mountain pumped-
storage plant, and the Bureau of Reclamation’s Grand Coulee pump/generating station. It led to
Code acceptance, commercialization, and eventual wide-range application of the technique
throughout the hydro industry [1,2,3,4].
As an example of the benefits, in the late 1980s, Seattle City Light (SCL) sought a cost-effective
method to secure reliable data on the performance of its hydro turbines. Relying on the EPRI
studies, SCL decided to install acoustic flowmeters at five powerhouses to optimize plant
operation and facilitate flow regulation. SCL estimates the present value of the 20-year savings
(1996 –2015) to be $5.8 million, based on an estimate of the overall system efficiency
improvement of 0.2%. Likewise, it is estimated that output will increase by 18,500 MWh per
year due to the AFM equipment, thus avoiding energy costs for supplemental power purchased
from Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) [5].
More recently, TVA has aggressively pursued improving flow measurements in conjunction with
optimal operation studies as part of its 2001 R&D program. The primary benefit to TVA will be
from improvements in production and profitability. For the TVA hydro system, a 1%
improvement in average operating efficiency is worth approximately $3,600,000 per year in
increased production, assuming an average price of $25/MWh. A 1% improvement in that part of
the total production associated with generation at maximum load is worth approximately
$4,000,000 per year, assuming an average on-peak price of $50/MWh. These performance
1-2
improvements are real in the competitive market and will continue to be of interest to all hydro
operators trying to maximize the production of their assets.
These market realities are what drive several ongoing initiatives and innovations such as the
Acoustic Scintillation Flow Measurement (ASFM). Optimizing production will promote the need
for further reductions in costs of flow measurement testing. Several lower-cost technical
solutions and experience have already been examined and are presented as case studies within
this report.
These examples demonstrate the potential for significant improvement in hydro plant
performance through the use of flow measurement technology. In future years, as competitive
pressure to optimize performance while meeting tight compliance standards increases, hydro
plant owners need to continue to expand their use of flow measurement technologies to get the
maximum mileage from their fuel.
1.3 Flow Measurement as a Basis for Improved Performance
Many factors can affect the performance and profitability of hydro facilities. However, the basis
of hydroelectric power production is founded on the quantity, availability, and effective use of
water. Of the components of production—head and losses, machine output, and flow rate—flow
rate historically has been the most difficult to measure. Estimates of water availability, related to
hydrologic and institutional constraints, and the optimal use of the water also depend closely
upon the measurement of the flow rate of water. The premise of this Technology Roundup is that
an improvement in flow measurement techniques and applications will improve hydroelectric
production.
Improving the basis for hydroelectric production involves examining flow measurement at all
levels of the power equation, including:
• The estimation of the water flow available for generation, primarily stream flows at gaging
stations. Stream gaging has seen some improvements over the years, particularly in the area
of real time measurement and input.
• The efficient use of water flow through the units. Achieving efficiency involves measuring
and calibrating the efficiency set points of the turbine and, in advanced systems, real-time
data input on flow.
• The optimization of the water flow, often in view of balancing competing objectives such as
regulatory compliance and demands of the power market.
The applications of flow measurement at hydroelectric plants can be fit into a number of general
categories. The purpose, or purposes, to which flow measurements are to be applied will guide
owners in choosing a technique and assessing its cost-effectiveness. Some of the primary
applications for current and developing flow measurement technology are summarized in the
following paragraphs.
1-3
1.3.1 Flow Measurement for Improving Efficiency
One of the leading uses of flow measurement at hydroelectric plants is in turbine efficiency tests.
All efficiency testing (model or field testing, absolute or relative) involves some form of flow
measurement and the reliability of the test depends on the level of certainty achievable with the
flow measurement technique. The update and development of the governing Codes and
standards, as well as ongoing research, continue to advance the methods available to the hydro
operator for improving unit performance.
1.3.2 Flow Measurement for Optimization Models
Whereas the operational improvements for unit efficiency fall largely under a plant owner’s
control, optimization of the use of the water resource is increasingly a function of availability
and competing utilization involving multiple interests. As a result of increasing institutional
complexity and a highly competitive marketplace, there is a trend toward fine-tuning a hydro
facility’s operation, in conjunction with other plants and demands for water. The use of
optimization software for operating hydro plants or systems of plants is becoming commonplace.
1.3.3 Flow Measurement for Compliance and Stewardship
Another evolving element in operating a hydro plant is the increasing need for substantiation and
demonstration of regulatory compliance and stewardship of the resource. Real-time monitoring
of downstream and instream compliance objectives and reporting/alarming of deviations have
been commonplace for years within the industry. Initially, these requirements evolved on the
mandated and watch-dog principle. However, there is an increasing focus on demonstrating the
value and responsiveness of hydro generation units as partners with the river. The evidence
suggests that operating at best efficiency, as determined by flow measurement, can indeed
provide significant stewardship benefits including minimizing fish mortality and optimal water
resource use [6].
1.4 Strategies for Assessing Flow Measurement Improvements
Hydro owners and operators routinely apply flow measurement techniques to their daily
operation. But how can an operator ensure that improving the flow measurement technique will
result in real improvements in performance? The strategies developed in this report focus on the
inherent uncertainties in flow measurement and the costs associated with incremental
improvements in production. To make the best use of the opportunities offered by improvements
in technologies, owners and operators should consider the following strategies:
• Examination of the measurement of flow at the unit and water conveyance level: do the
frequency of measurement and accuracy match the potential gain or loss?
• Assessment of whether a flow measurement instrument is adequate for the type and
importance of the decision that is to be made on the reading.
1-4
• Development of improved measurement and reporting techniques that equate the value of
compliance with the sound stewardship of a resource.
• Review of the effects of cumulative uncertainty in the optimal operation scenarios for
possible improvements in key input variables.
1.5 Report Organization
Based on the clear need for and interest in the topic of flow measurement, this document was
designed around the following elements:
• Audience: the hydro project operator faced with a competitive electricity market and new
operating rules for measuring unit efficiency, optimization of flow, and compliance
measures.
• Scope: A focus on understanding different flow measurement techniques and applications to
improve operation.
This report is organized into seven sections including this introduction. The additional sections
are:
Section 2, “Understanding Flow Measurement,” discusses the background, general concepts, and
provides a summary of flow measurement techniques.
Section 3, “Achieving Efficient Operation,” discusses protocols for turbine efficiency testing,
expands on how particular flow measurement systems are installed and used at hydro plants, and
presents case studies of the methods, application, and experience of hydro producers in
measuring flow through turbines and penstocks.
Section 4, “Flow Measurement: Costs, Benefits, and Lessons Learned,” presents some current
observations on the state-of-the-art in flow measurement related to efficiency testing.
Section 5, “Further Applications of Flow Measurement,” presents case studies on how hydro
operators use flow measurement techniques in optimization models to meet compliance
objectives for flow and penstock leak detection.
Section 6, “The Future of Flow Measurement for Hydro Applications,” presents observations,
possible future enhancements, and research and development.
Section 7, “References and Resources,” provides background information.
Appendix A, “Flow Measurement Additional Information,” provides supporting information on

related topics.
Appendix B, “Flow Measurement Service and Product Suppliers,” provides additional

information developed as part of this report.
1-5
2
UNDERSTANDING FLOW MEASUREMENT
In the context of this Technology Roundup report, we deal with flow measurement in many
different applications related to hydroelectric facility performance. These applications include
measurement of open channel flow in rivers, reservoirs, intakes, forebays, and tailraces, and
measurement of closed conduit flow in hydraulic machinery (turbines). This section summarizes
relevant flow measurement techniques at a conceptual level and Section 3 describes their
implementation at specific hydro plants. Additional details on measurement methods can be
found in Appendix A.
2.1 Flow Measurement Techniques
The measurement of flow involves the measurement of some other parameter proportional to
flow. The unit is a volume per unit time—cubic feet per second (cfs) or cubic meters per second
(cms). Flow measurement techniques at hydro facilities can be loosely grouped into categories
by the variables measured and how they are converted to volumetric flow. These techniques are
summarized in Table 2-1, with more details in Section 3 and Appendix A [7].
2-1
Understanding Flow Measurement
Table 2-1
Flow Measurement Methods
Method Description Applicability Advantages Expected Accuracy

Current Meters Flow is derived from the In closed conduits, a certain minimum Can be used at almost any Usually ±1.0% to ±2.0%
measurements of water velocity at length of straight conduit is required type plant; however, requires
several specific points in a cross- upstream and downstream. In multiple instruments to be
section, which are integrated over channels, a similar uniform inserted into the water
the cross-sectional area. distribution is required. passage or channel and
areas/volumes to be
accurately computed.
Pressure-Time Flow is derived from the change in The difference in pressure is Relative simplicity and Transducer: ± 1.0% to
(Gibson) pressure required to decelerate a measured between two cross- minimal hardware ±2.0%
Transducer or mass of water to zero velocity. sections as a downstream valve or requirements provided that Manometer: ±0.5% to
gate is closed. The measured design accommodates
Manometer ±2.0%
differences in pressure at the two instrumentation. Flow leakage
points are related to the distance at valve or gate must be
between the sections. Not applicable minimal or estimated.
in open channels.
Dye or Tracer Flow is calculated from the dilution Suitable for many hydro installations Relatively inexpensive. Usually ±1.0% to ±2.0%
Dilution of concentration experienced by where sufficient tracer mixing is A chief advantage is that no
carefully measured continuous achievable. conduit area or volume needs
mass of injected dye upstream and to be measured. Also, no
the measurement of the mixed minimum length of straight
(diluted) concentration at a point conduit required.
downstream.
Dye Transit Time Flow is measured by the time it Requires specialized equipment for Suitable for many hydro Not available
Salt Velocity takes a cloud of dye or salt to travel the preparation and injection of dye or installations.
from sensor to sensor. brine.
Acoustic/Ultrasonic Flow is measured by the time of Acoustic transducers are mounted at A certain minimum length of Internally mounted
Flowmeters travel or change in frequency of 45 or 60 degrees to penstock axis of straight, uniform conduit is transducers: ±0.5% to
ultrasonic pulses sent diagonally uniform diameter. Can provide required upstream and ±1.5%
across a penstock. continuous metering. downstream. In channels, a Externally mounted
similar straight and uniform (clamp-on): ±4%
cross-section is required.
References: [7,8,9,10,11,12]
2-2
Table 2-1 cont.

Flow Measurement Methods
Method Description Applicability Advantages Expected Accuracy

Acoustic Scintillation Flow rate is measured by the time of Acoustic paths are normal (90 degrees) Allows for continuous Possibly –2.0% to ±1 %
1
Flow Meter travel of turbulence within flow over a to the axis of the flow and can, flowmetering in bulkhead
small distance between two parallel therefore, be mounted on a rack or or slotted intakes.
paths perpendicular to the flow. frame and inserted into a bulkhead or
gate slot.
Winter-Kennedy Pressure taps located on the inside Provides an accurate test of relative Once installed, ± 2.0 to 2.5 %
(W-K) Pressure and outside radii of the scroll case that performance at other operating points measurements can be
Taps measure differential pressure or performance changes resulting from accomplished often
(Index Testing) proportional to the square of the flow turbine modifications or wear. Can be without outage but taps
rate. calibrated to absolute readings. must be flushed.
Thermodynamic Differential change in water Only applicable at high head, >328 ft. Accurate if proper set-up ±0.5% to ±1.5%
temperature and pressures is (100 m) plants. Does not measure flow conditions are met.
measured upstream and downstream per se, however, is used as turbine
of a unit to calculate efficiency. efficiency test method.
Venturi Meter Measurement of differential pressure Limited, in straight sections of pipe, for Accurate, reliable. Not available
across a Venturi tube is translated into short duration, as a backup calculation.
flow rate using a calibrated curve.
Volumetric Given a suitable head pond, the Steady state flow and a captive pond Basic measurements. Not available
change in level of the pond’s surface are required. Suitable particularly in
can be used to calculate the rate of labs rather than in field tests.
flow over a period of time.
Staff Gages, Wire Water level is measured physically and Simple and easily maintained, Basic, reliable, stage- Not available
Floats visually and flow is determined by particularly for remote areas and small discharge curves must
correlated stage-discharge curves. stations. be re-calibrated
periodically by measuring
the cross-sectional area.
Water Level Water level is measured by pressure Relatively simple but slightly less Instruments readily Not available
Transducers or sonic transducers and flow is durable than wire floats and staff gages. available, stage-
determined from correlated stage- Reliant on correlated stage-discharge discharge curves must
discharge curves. curves. be re-calibrated
periodically.
Weir The height of water above a Weir crest Open channel tailraces or intakes. Basic, reliable. Not available
is related to flow by a discharge
coefficient.
1
Not ASME or IEC Code accepted at this time
2-3
2.1.1 Measurements by Current Meters
In this technique, water velocities at various points are determined by measuring the rate of
rotation of a propeller-type current meter. The point velocities are converted to flow by
integrating local velocities, multiplied by their representative area, over the total area. This
method is suitable for measuring hydro plant flow for efficiency testing and also for open
channel discharge measurements.
A current meter is an instrument used to measure the velocity of flowing water. The principle of
operation is based on the proportionality between the velocity of the water and the resulting
angular velocity of the meter rotor. By placing a current meter at a point in a stream (or a water
passage for hydroelectric applications) and counting the number of revolutions of the rotor
during a measured interval of time, the velocity of water at that point is determined from the
meter calibration. Further information on current meters is contained in Appendix A.
2.1.2 Measurements by Pressure-Time
The pressure-time method of calculating flow is based on Newton’s Second Law of Motion,
which states that the force acting on a mass (of water, in this case) is related to the change in
momentum as the mass decelerates. In practice, the pressure-time technique involves measuring
the change in differential pressure necessary to decelerate a given mass of fluid in a closed
conduit. The method requires the measurement of piezometric head at two cross-sections, located
a few conduit diameters apart from each other in a regular and constant cross-section.
A downstream valve or gate is required for this test. The downstream valve is closed and the
time is measured for the differential head (and velocity of the fluid) to come to zero. Integrating
the differential pressure record over this time gives the force that was necessary to stop the initial
flow momentum. Knowledge of the conduit volume between the measuring sections allows for
the initial flow to be calculated. This procedure originally involved the use of a Gibson
apparatus, consisting of a pair of manometers and a device for recording the pieziometric head
difference photographically. Current Codes allow for pressure-sensing transducers and data
acquisition equipment [9].
2.1.3 Measurements by Tracer Dilution
This method is probably one of the least expensive of the flow measurement techniques. The
procedure involves injecting a continuous mass of dye or other conserved tracer of a known
concentration into the water and then measuring the concentration downstream after the dye has
become fully mixed. The flow (volumetric discharge) can then be computed from the ratio of the
two concentrations and the measured rate of tracer injection.
2-4
2.1.4 Measurements by Transit Time

The salt velocity method is based on measuring the transit time, between two sensors, of an
injected cloud of concentrated salt solution. The average velocity of water in a channel or
conduit can be measured by injecting a salt cloud at an upstream location and measuring the time
that elapses between detection of the cloud’s center at the two downstream measuring locations.
The flow is calculated by multiplying the average velocity by the measured channel or conduit
area. Injection of dye can also be used to measure transit time.
2.1.5 Measurements by Acoustic Signals
Ultrasonic flowmeters and acoustic methods are used to determine the flow velocity by
measuring the travel time for a pulse of sound in moving water. When a sound pulse is
transmitted through water in motion, in a direction other than normal to the mean direction of
movement, the time for the pulse to travel a known distance will differ from that in stationary
water of the same temperature and containing the same dissolved impurities.
If the time taken for a sound pulse to travel a measured distance between two reference points in
one direction is compared with the time taken to travel between the same two points in the
opposite direction, the difference observed in time is directly related to the average velocity of
water in the path bounded by the two reference points. The computed velocities for each path are
converted to the mean velocity for the entire profile and multiplied by the wetted cross-section to
obtain the total flow rate.
An alternate method involves using the frequency shift (Doppler effect) that occurs in the sent
signals versus the received signals. The difference in frequency is used to calculate the flow
velocity along each acoustic path.
Acoustic scintillation, another acoustic method, involves measuring the time of travel of
turbulence within the flow over a small distance between two parallel paths perpendicular to the
flow. The amplitude of the fluctuations of the acoustic pulses (scintillations) is analyzed to
determine the lag time between them. The velocity is calculated from the lag time and the known
distance between the parallel paths and is then converted into total discharge. This method is
currently under investigation and refinement and shows promise for specific applications.
2.1.6 Relative Measurements of Flow
In some instances, the flow magnitude cannot be computed but is known relative to another flow.
An example of this approach is the technique used in index testing of turbines, in which relative
flows are known as a function of the maximum flow or relative to the flow at best efficiency. All
such flows might be proportional to the square root of the same differential pressure between two
locations. The absolute flow rate, however, is not known unless the differential pressures are
calibrated through an absolute type of measurement. In relative or index methods, the flow is
only known relative to another (that is, this flow is 75% of another).
2-5
2.1.7 Measurements by Other Methods
Table 2-1 also lists other methods of flow discharge including the thermodynamic method (see
Section 3) and other methods commonly used, such as the Venturi meter and volumetric method.
Discharge is often calculated by relating an observed parameter (such as water level measured by
staff gages, wire floats, or transducers) to a discharge-rating curve that is developed by
measuring velocities and cross-sectional area. Weir flow is also a method often used in open
channels.
2.2 Developing Protocols for Efficiency Testing at Hydro Plants
There are many groups active in the science of flow measurement (see Appendix A) and the
hydro industry specifically is involved in the development of the two principal Test Codes that
are used in hydraulic efficiency testing. Both Codes are reviewed and continually updated by
committees of practicing engineers. The Codes provide guidance for calculating flow, both in the
field and in the lab. The Codes in use up until the 1980s relied on mostly traditional methods;
however, as a result of changing industry needs and newer technologies, in the mid 1980s EPRI
sponsored a body of research designed to provide good comparisons of various new methods and
their potential applications to hydro units. The body of information that was developed by the
EPRI studies formed the basis for the most recent revisions of the Test Codes.
2.2.1 The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

Performance Test Code 18 (PTC 18) (1992)
The ASME “Performance Test Code 18: Hydraulic Turbines,” [13] defines procedures for the
field performance testing of hydraulic turbines and of pump/turbines operating in the turbine
mode, both referred to herein as turbines. PTC 18 defines methods for ascertaining turbine
performance by measuring flow rate (discharge), head, and power output to calculate turbine
power output and efficiency. Requirements are included for pretest arrangements, types of
instruments, methods of measurement, testing procedures, methods of calculation, and contents
of test reports. The specified test procedures are capable of providing a total uncertainty of not
more than ±1.2% of the calculated turbine power output and ±2.0% of the calculated efficiency
value, calculated in accordance with the procedures of PTC 19.1 and those contained in PTC 18.
The Code goes on to state that, “any test with uncertainties greater than the above shall not
qualify as an ASME Code test. Where good measurement conditions exist and best methodology
can be used, smaller uncertainties should result” [13].
2.2.2 IEC Publication 41 (1991)
A second Code is the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), “Field Acceptance Test
to Determine the Hydraulic Performance of Hydraulic Turbines, Storage Pumps and Pump-
Turbines” (Publication No. 41) [14]. This Code specifies methods for any size and type of
impulse or reaction turbine, storage pump, or pump turbine. The Code is intended to determine
whether the contract guarantees have been fulfilled and deals with the rules governing these tests
2-6
as well as the methods of computing the results and the content and style of the final acceptance
test report.
2.3 Flow Measurement Options
The selection of which flow measurement technique to utilize at a hydro facility will depend on a
number of factors including:
• The accuracy required
• Whether the test must conform with Codes
• The physical configuration of the facility
• Costs—both labor, material, and equipment costs
• Outage time—for installation and removal, area measurements, and testing
• Requirements for repeatability or continuous readings
An overview of the various methods, including the applicability of each method, was presented
in Table 2-1.
2-7
3
ACHIEVING EFFICIENT OPERATION
Many applications of flow measurement techniques at hydro projects are related to achieving the
most efficient operation possible. Efficiency tests give information on the relationship between
flow rate through the turbines and power output. Once efficiency curves have been determined
through testing, continued monitoring of flow rates helps in optimizing operation, tracking
machine performance, and in identifying developing conditions such as penstock leaks.
3.1 Testing Efficiency of Hydroelectric Units
An efficient machine is one that generates the most output from a given amount of water.
Efficiency is a percentage representing the actual rate at which work is done, divided by the
theoretical rate at which work could be done if the machine (turbine) converted all available
energy to work. There are three requirements for measuring turbine efficiency:
• Machine output, measured by electrical instruments attached to the generator terminals
• Available hydraulic head, measured by pressure differences
• Water flow rate
Three different levels of field efficiency testing are generally defined. Acceptance testing is
normally conducted within one year of the commissioning of a unit, and is usually done in
accordance with the guidelines outlined in the International Electrotechnical Commission Code’s
Field Acceptance Tests of Hydraulic Turbines (IEC 41) [14], or the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code PTC 18, Field Performance Testing of Hydraulic Turbines
[13].
Absolute efficiency testing is conducted for enhancement of operation and relates turbine or
turbine-generator output to flow rate and head to provide information on the operational
efficiencies of each unit. Typical measurements include power output of the turbine, gross or net
head as measured from headwater and tailwater readings, and measurements of flow through the
turbine. The results of absolute efficiency testing allow operators to maximize plant output when
discharge is below the plant maximum and also to provide information on machine performance
or degradation.
Index testing is similar to the other two types of testing with one major difference—no actual
discrete measurement of discharge is obtained. Only relative discharges are obtained and all test
results are indexed to peak efficiency, meaning that all values are computed as a percentage of
peak efficiency. Index testing for efficiency measurement is commonly performed because it
3-1
Achieving Efficient Operation
identifies the point of peak efficiency and provides a relative comparison of performance against
a previous acceptance test or absolute efficiency test in a relatively simple manner [15].
An index test measures the relative water flow over the range of operation, assuming that the
water flow is proportional to a pressure differential between two designated points in the water
passage raised to an exponent, which, in principle, is 0.5. The differential pressure is the flow
index, which indicates, for example, that a flow at one operating point is 80 percent of the flow
at another operating point. The recent use of PC-based systems has substantially improved the
acquisition, analysis, and reporting of index test data, and has, thus, reduced the time and labor
required by as much as 30 to 50 percent [16].
Accurate flow measurements provide the basis for assessing a hydro unit’s operating efficiency.
In addition to delivering the greatest amount of generation per unit of water, operating a unit at
its peak efficiency provides other benefits, such as minimizing cavitation and vibration damage,
which, in turn, reduces maintenance costs and increases reliability. Other reasons for measuring
flow and unit efficiency include:
• Checking contractual compliance for new turbine performance or comparing performance to
model tests (computational or hydraulic) for both new installations or upgrades
• Assessing the effects of wear, repair, distortion, and re-contouring
• Providing real-time data on the current operating characteristics as inputs to optimal-use
models for hydro system operation (discussed in Section 5)
• Monitoring compliance and penstock leakage (discussed in Section 5)
3.2 Applications of Flow Measurement Techniques
There are numerous examples in the literature that describe the applications of the various flow
measurement techniques. The text that follows describes these case studies, which are also
summarized in Table 3-1.
3-2
Table 3-1
Select Applications of Flow Measurement Methods
Method Purpose of Case Study MW Head and Flow Results and Conclusions
Application Plant Range
Current meters To update efficiency Safe Harbor 425 MW Not available Improved unit index efficiency curves 1.0
curves (SHWPC) 12 units to 3.0%
Current meters To update efficiency St. Lawrence 1,800 MW 72 to 90 ft. Used current meters with success to
curves and (NYPA) 32 units (22 to 27m) calibrate efficiency curves and apportion
determine river flows (See Table 3-2) flows to derive flow apportionment
Pressure-Time To calibrate Winter- Great Falls 26 MW 105 to 140 ft. Accurate penstock measurements
Kennedy taps (TVA) 2 units (32 to 42.7m) improved discharge accuracy by ±2.0 %
400 to 2,100 cfs
(11.3 to 56.6 cms)
Pressure-Time To compare testing Chickamauga Not available Not available Comparison of P-T, current meters, and
methods (TVA) ultrasonic methods
Dye Dilution, To perform Various 5 to 30 MW units Methods applied as cost-effective at
Pressure Time, acceptance tests small (5- to 30-MW) units
Salt Velocity, after upgrade
and Dye Transit
Time
Acoustic FM For operation and See Table 3-3 Varies Wide application in plants with
leak detection appropriate penstocks
Acoustic For comparison to See Table 3-4 Varies Shows promise for Code acceptance
Scintillation FM current meter testing and application for real-time metering
Thermodynamic For acceptance See Table 3-5 >325 ft Provides results within ± 0.7% of
testing (100 m) machine guarantees
Winter-Kennedy For optimization and TVA (55 units) Varies Index testing can detect performance
index testing level deterioration to 0.5%. Experience
indicates that index testing that shows a
2% decrease in efficiency merits repair.
References: (See case studies in report text)
3-3
3.2.1 Current Meters
Current meters have been used over the years to determine flow velocity, and thus discharge, for
computing hydro turbine efficiency. This method involves the installation of an array of current
meters on a frame located in the water passage. The calibrated current meters are monitored for
the period of the test, usually two to three minutes or until flow has stabilized, and then the test is
repeated at different turbine settings.
Typically, propeller-type current meters are mounted on a rack, which is lowered into a gate slot
in the intake. Discharge is computed on the basis of the weighted average of current meter
readings of velocity, with the weightings determined on the basis of each current meter’s
location and the spacing between meters. The frame must be designed to withstand hydraulic
loads and to provide vibration-free operation at varying loads.
3.2.1.1 Safe Harbor Water Power
Current meter testing is often done as a calibration of index testing. An example of this approach
is a series of tests conducted at the Safe Harbor Hydroelectric Station in Pennsylvania, where
index testing was conducted and then calibrated by the current meter method to revise hydro
operating curves for the station. In this example, an extensive program of testing both Kaplan
and mixed flow units was conducted in order to update the turbine discharge curves and establish
dispatching order of the units [17].
In the index test phase of the study, relative rates of flow at various turbine settings were
determined by assuming that the water flow was proportional to the square root of the pressure
differential between two designated points in the water passage. These tests, however, did not
give absolute flow rates or efficiencies. An absolute measurement of flow was obtained through
current meter velocity readings, allowing the investigators to match points on the power curves
from the index differential pressure tests to known discharges. Once absolute flow rates could be
assigned to each turbine setting, absolute efficiencies could also be computed.
The velocity distributions in each of three gate slots with cross-sectional areas of 541 ft.2
(16.7 m2) were determined using a rack of seven Ott, type-A current meters inserted at
15 vertical positions. Therefore, 315 readings of 120 seconds each were made in conjunction
with recording differential pressures at the Winter-Kennedy taps for each gate position. In this
example, recalibrating turbine efficiencies and discharge curves provided a potential efficiency
improvement on the order of 1 to 3% efficiency at maximum load.
3-4
3.2.1.2 St. Lawrence, USA and Canada
Two recent papers describe in detail the use of current meter flow measurement techniques
[18,19]. These papers are abstracted below.
The St. Lawrence Plant, which is jointly owned and operated by Ontario Power Generation and
the New York Power Authority (also called the Robert Moses Power Dam), has 32 units, 16
units on each of the U.S. and Canadian sides of the border. The units operate under low head
between 72 ft. to 90 ft. (22 to 27 m). The water supply passages to each turbine consist of three
short rectangular reinforced concrete supply intakes and a reinforced concrete semi-spiral casing.
Each supply intake is approximately 70 ft. (21 m) in length, 17 ft. (5 m) wide, and converges
from a height of 61.5 ft. (18.75 m) to 27 ft. (8.25 m) at its downstream end. The units operate at
normal rated head of 82 ft. (25 m) and the head varies from a minimum of 72 ft. (22 m) to a
maximum of 90 ft (27 m). The total flow varies from 300,000 to 360,000 cfs (8,400 to 10,200
cms). Total output varies from 1,600 MW to 2,000 MW.
The most suitable method for testing the field performance at St. Lawrence is the velocity area
method using the current meters in the unit intake. All available Code-accepted testing methods
were evaluated. Turbine performance testing for the St. Lawrence plant was carried out by using
intake current meters. A calibration program was also developed to determine the effect of the
current-meter-supporting frame on the flow measurement to ensure the flow measurement
accuracy.
The principle of the velocity area method is simple: flow velocities at the intake area are
measured using current meters and the flow is computed using a numerical integration of
measured velocities over the intake area (ISO 3354). The main components of the system are
three support frames that each support a row of 11 horizontally spaced current meters. Velocities
are simultaneously measured in all three openings using a separate frame for each intake. Each
frame is lowered into the sectional gate slot at the intake. Under a steady state condition,
velocities are measured at 22 levels for a total of 726 velocity measurements for each flow
measurement. The measurement system is called the Intake Current Meter System (ICMS) by the
parties.
Both companies are upgrading the generating units for higher efficiency and to maximize the
utilization of the water resource. Historically, both utilities agreed to utilize the same methods of
measuring unit flow through the generating units in order to establish equal sharing of river
flows. An analysis was undertaken to select the best-suited performance test methodology to
measure the turbine/unit efficiency. The analysis consisted of a comparison between the different
test methodologies and their applicability to the unit configuration, conformance to the IEC-41
and ASME PTC 18 Test Codes, and the test cost—unit outage, test set-up cost, test cost, and test
equipment removal. A comparison of the various Code items and conformity of the method is
shown in Table 3-2.
3-5
Table 3-2
Velocity-Area (Current Meter) Method Requirements
Test Code Requirements IEC-41 PTC-18

Measurements for each current-meter position shall be at least two 10.2.2.1 4.42
minutes in duration.
At least 25 measuring points in a rectangular or trapezoidal section. 10.2.2.2 Not
If the velocity distribution is likely to be non-uniform, the number of applicable
1/3
measuring points (Z) shall be determined from: 24*(A)
1/3 2
<Z<36*(A) A = Area of measuring section in m .
If the conduit or channel is divided into several sections, 10.2.2.2 Not
measurements shall be made simultaneously in all sections. applicable
Only propeller-type. 10.4.2.1.d 4.89
Electrical Impulse with counting and recording devices.
Current meter shall satisfy ISO 2537.
All meters are able to withstand water pressure.
Current meter propeller shall be not less than 100 mm diameter.
Distance from the trailing edge of the propeller to the leading edge
of the mounting rod shall be at least 150 mm.
Self-compensating propellers, which directly measure the axial
component of the velocity.
All current meters shall be calibrated in accordance with ISO 3455. 10.2.2.4 4.45
The current meters shall be calibrated with the same type of
mounting and mounting rods as those used during the test.
ISO 3354 can be used as a guide. 10.2.4.1 Not
applicable
Self-compensating propellers are best suited for this method. 10.2.4.3 Not
applicable
This method is described in 7.2.2 and 7.3.2 of ISO 3354. 10.2.4.4 Not
applicable
References: [18,19]
3-6
From this comparison, the ICMS method was selected to carry out the turbine/unit performance
testing and to measure the unit flows on the following basis:
• The expected test accuracy (+1.75%) is acceptable.
• The method is economical relative to other alternative test methods.
• The velocity area method (ICMS) applied in the unit intake is approved by the International
Test Code IEC-41.
• The unit geometry is compatible with the Test Code requirements for unit configuration.
• The unit can operate safely during testing, unlike the pressure-time method where the
headgates and the stoplog openings would be sealed.
• Economical factors (unit outage, test set-up cost, test cost, and test equipment removal).
Because of technical limitations in accommodating the current-meter method in the 1950s, the
Gibson method (pressure-time method) was used in the initial rating tests at the projects. The
Gibson test has limitations such as selecting a section with uniform geometry, sealing the
headgate slots, sealing the emergency stoplog openings, and generating safely during the load-
rejection phases of the test without headgate protection.
Performing the Gibson test today would also require significant outage time and scaffolding set-
up in the intake area, which would add significantly to the cost of the test.
Specific details on the tests performed are outlined in the aforementioned papers [18,19]. The
performance test consisted of 35 to 40 test runs covering a range of wicket gate openings from
20% (speed-no-load) to 100% of full servomotor stroke. Turbine flow was measured and
computed using the velocity-area method and the test runs were made at 90-minute intervals. At
the beginning of each run, the wicket gates were set at a fixed opening. About five minutes were
allowed for conditions to stabilize. During the remaining 85 minutes, the data acquisition system
measured all parameters simultaneously at a rate of 100 scans/minute. The following parameters
were measured using the data acquisition system:
• Velocities
• Station and unit headwater and tailwater elevations
• Scroll case differential pressure (Winter-Kennedy)
• Generator output and servomotor stroke
The authors conclude that the current meter method is an effective and accurate means of
measuring flow at the St. Lawrence Power Plant's turbine-generating units. The use of intake
current meters proved to be successful in achieving accurate test data on turbine unit
performance and in providing the baseline data needed to derive the rating tables used to
calculate St. Lawrence River flows.
3-7
3.2.1.3 Wisconsin Electric Power
Wisconsin Electric’s (WE) portfolio of plants, totaling 90 MW, range from 16 to 95 ft. (4.9 to
29.9 m) in gross head. To measure the flow rate discharge for turbine efficiency, WE has used
the current meter method, which directly measures the velocities at the intake and discharge side
of the powerhouse to derive the flow. Additionally, the United States Geological Survey (USGS)
upstream and downstream stream gage flows have been used to derive unit power/discharge
relationships.
Wisconsin Electric reports that the current meter method was used to ascertain flow with mixed
results due to the turbulence found at either the intake or discharge areas of the relatively low-
head plant. In general, WE achieved a better correlation using rating curves at the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) gaging stations to convert river stages to flow rate per unit.
At the Kingsford plant, current meter measurements were taken in turbulent areas of the intake
and discharge areas of the powerhouse with disappointing results. The suspected problem was
that the current meters could not tell which direction the flow velocity was going and would,
thus, measure back eddies as positive velocities when, in fact, the flow of the eddy was going
upstream and should have been negative. Other measurements in the tailrace area were
considered suspect for similar reasons.
In the end, WE actually preferred comparing plant flows to flow data from a network of USGS
gaging stations. The USGS gaging stations, both upstream and downstream of the WE plants, are
funded and maintained in part by WE and provide real-time data. The stations collect flow data
points on an hourly basis over the course of a year. Flow discharge relationships for unit
operation have been developed over the years in tailrace areas that have adequate rating control.
Plant powerhouse unit discharge on a steady state basis can be derived after scrutinizing the
USGS data to remove transient conditions such as flow changes. These comparison studies are
done in-house to check or redevelop the generation/discharge relationships.
These discharge curves have also been used to confirm and measure relative efficiency using
index tests that relate the efficiency points of the units to the tailwater elevation using USGS
rating curves to convert elevations to discharge. However, specific flow measurement studies to
monitor unit efficiency are not always done for the operation of the WE plants. Instead,
determining the plant unit’s optimal efficiency set point is most important, because operating at
the set point is where the most money can be made when capacity and available water are not an
issue. However, when capacity demand is high, efficiency becomes secondary to meeting
demand. Likewise, when water is plentiful, WE’s objective is to minimize spill and maximize
power generation. Understanding and correctly applying the unit set points is important for any
plant because maximum gate opening (and hence discharge) does not always correspond to
maximum generation.
3-8
3.2.2 Pressure-Time (Gibson) Method
To measure flow using the pressure-time method, the difference in pressure between two cross-
sections is measured as a downstream gate or valve is closed to decelerate flow. The velocity of
the flow immediately prior to the shut down can be determined by monitoring the pressure traces
within the two test sections of known (and consistent) area and length. Flow is then computed
from these measurements.
The measurements of pressure differentials can be made by mercury manometers or by

electronic differential pressure transducers. The instruments must be mounted (four at each
plane) in a straight, uniform section of uniform penstock, typically 32.8 to 49.2 ft. (10 to 15 m)
length, which has been accurately surveyed. During testing, the wicket gates are closed for each
measurement and the pressure differentials are recorded over successive times.
3.2.2.1 TVA
In 1986, TVA testing and application of a computer-based Gibson method at the 26-MW Great
Falls plant led to a plant upgrade and the beginnings of unit efficiency testing using
computerized methods. In this application, TVA staff installed piezometer rings on both
penstocks, accurately measured the penstock internal dimensions, and measured the pressure
differences at the piezometers during wicket gate closing. Winter-Kennedy tap differentials,
which measure the differences in pressures across the scroll case as a relative measure of flow
rate, were also calibrated during these tests. It was estimated that using accurately measured
penstock internal diameters increased the accuracy of the flow measurements by 2% so, at full
gate discharge of 1,500 cfs (42.5 cms), the error could have been ±30 cfs (±0.85 cms) [20].
In the early 1990s, TVA performed lab tests applying the Gibson method to low-head hydro
plants with characteristically short, non-uniform, non-prismatic, converging multi-bay designs.
Further field-testing of the pressure-time method was conducted at Chickamauga, where a
comparison of the results of flow measurements with discharges from current meters and
ultrasonic methods supported the need for efficiency testing to determine economical operation
parameters.
3.2.3 Injection Methods—Salt, Tracer, Dye Dilution
These two methods rely on injecting a tracer into the stream and then measuring either the transit
time (in the case of dye transit time or salt velocity method) or the concentration/dilution
downstream (in the case of dye dilution tracer).
For the dye dilution method, a continuous, known concentration of a tracer/dye is injected into
the water passage and then the concentration is measured downstream after the dye has become
fully mixed. The flow can be computed from the concentrations and the known rate of dye
injection.
3-9
The dye transit time and salt velocity method are based on measuring transit time, between two
sensors, of an injected cloud of concentrated dye or salt solution. The average velocity of water
in a channel or conduit can be measured by injecting a dye or salt cloud at an upstream location
and measuring the time that elapses before the slug is detected at a downstream sensor. The
accuracy of the method is dependent on accurate measurement of the penstock length, diameter,
tracer travel time, and center of mass of the cloud/slug at the sampling locations.
Both methods are commonly used to determine flows for efficiency testing of smaller units.
However, they only provide a one-time in situ test of flow rate and cannot be used for long-term
continuous flow monitoring. The installation requires a dye/salt injection frame at the intake and
a sampling device in the draft tube. Multiple runs of the test at varying load and flow rates are
performed to determine the efficiency curves.
3.2.3.1 Acres International
In two recent applications at generating stations in northern Ontario and Newfoundland, Acres
International conducted flow measurement using dye dilution and pressure-time flow
measurement, and, in another situation, dye dilution and dye transit time method [21]. Both case
studies provided excellent test results for clients conducting post-upgrade acceptance tests.
Additionally, these tests have been conducted for clients seeking to justify runner replacement by
collecting information on the degradation of performance of older generating units and
comparison to benefits expected from upgrades.
The first project involved a 2-unit plant owned by Great Lakes Power with Unit 1 being
upgraded and fitted with a new runner, boosting its capacity from 8.0 to 9.5 MW. The water
passage included an unlined rock tunnel and two riveted steel penstocks 9 ft. (2.74 m) in
diameter and 164 ft. (50 m) in length. Dye dilution testing at a continuous rate was conducted
and, independently, the pressure-time method was also used. The results showed good agreement
between the two flow measurements with a difference of less than 2% over the normal operating
range of 7 to 9.5 MW. Further confidence in the results was gained from the comparison with
relative index testing, which fit between the results of the two absolute tests.
Another example was at a 1920 vintage project owned by Deer Lake Power with seven 11-MW
units. Post-upgrade performance testing was conducted on a new unit to determine if guarantees
were achieved. The 9 ft. (2.74 m) diameter, 3,937 ft. long (1,200 m) penstock was ideally suited
for testing by both dye transit time and continuous dye injection. Dye transit time of 570 seconds
was recorded and the continuous injection test followed immediately after the transit time test.
The results showed excellent agreement (generally within 1%) between the two tests and
correlated well with the index testing for the unit.
Initially, the test method used for nearly all flow measurement was dye dilution. Efficiency
testing has been accomplished using other methods such as pressure-time, intake current meters,
and dye travel time methods. Over the past five years or so, Acres has tested well over 50 units,
mostly in the 10-30-MW capacity range. Many of these tests have been carried out in accordance
with IEC Publication 41 for clients such as Algonquin Power, Deer Lake Power in
Newfoundland, Newfoundland Power, and Nova Scotia Power.
3-10
3.2.4 Acoustic Flow Measurement (AFM)
Acoustic flow measurement is performed by recording the difference in the time of travel of a
sound pulse in the forward and reverse directions along a path that is typically at an angle of
between 45 and 65 degrees to the penstock. The difference in the sound’s travel time in the two
directions can be combined with the path length and the angle of the path to give an average
water velocity parallel to the axis of the penstock. Because the transducers are often permanently
mounted, continuous long-term velocity measurements can be made and converted to flow rates
for various applications at the hydro facility, including penstock leakage rates and efficiency
loading of the units. Multi-path systems increase the reliability and repeatability of the
measurements.
For installation, a straight penstock or pipe section that is a minimum of 0.7 times the penstock
diameter, is necessary to minimize the flow distortion and rotation. The transducers can be
installed in several ways, depending on the penstock configuration and long-term requirements.
For exposed penstocks, transducer holders can be installed by drilling from the inside of the
penstock and leaving the holders accessible from the penstock exterior. This method allows for
installation/replacement of transducers at any time, without an outage. Alternatively, the
transducer holders can be installed directly on the wall of a concrete-encased penstock with the
cables brought out through the wall of an exposed section. In this configuration, the penstock
must be dewatered for subsequent installation/replacement of transducers.
An alternative but less accurate variation of acoustic flow measurement is to mount the
transducers externally and calibrate against a temporary two-plane, four-path flowmeter installed
just for calibration.
Between 1981 and 1987 there was considerable effort by EPRI, in conjunction with BC Hydro,
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and TVA, to compare the technical and economic
characteristics of the AFM with other flow measurement methods [1]. As a result, the Codes
(both ASME and IEC) were modified to include AFM as an accepted standard. Since then, AFM
systems have been installed and remain in operation at numerous sites.
3.2.4.1 Sultartangi, Iceland
At the new 120-MW Sultartangi hydro plant in Iceland, two 66-MW Francis units operating
under 141 ft. (43 m) of head, are instrumented for water level and temperature measurement at
the intake and outlet works, and for flow measurement in the penstocks [22]. The layout of the
acoustic flow measurement system included consideration of the influence of the intake structure
and the 8-path orientation was optimized for the particular conditions. The 6-meter diameter
enclosed penstocks to each unit were instrumented with inside-mount ultrasonic transducers and
cableways that were accommodated during the penstock fabrication. Exact geometrical
dimensions of pipe diameter are important to accurate flow measurement using ultrasonic
measures. State-of-the-art theodolite measurements were used for the sensor positioning. It was
reported that, after unit commissioning, various tests to examine each path’s velocity were
conducted and comparison tests were carried out using the Winter-Kennedy differential
3-11
measurements, as calculated from the turbine model tests for the units. The correspondence
between the index flow and the ultrasonic flowmeter’s calculated discharge was satisfactory.
3.2.4.2 BC Hydro
The 1971 to 1988 experiences of BC Hydro with acoustic flow measurement, even before the
acceptance in Code, were performed on several plants [23]. In addition, the Kootenay Canal
tests, which formed a substantial portion of the EPRI research, are well documented [4].
Current application of flow measurement at BC Hydro plants includes applications for efficiency
testing and flow monitoring. BC Hydro has performed recent absolute efficiency testing using a
wetted path ultrasonic flowmeter with two planes of four paths each. Traditionally, these
flowmeters have not been left permanently installed after the testing. However, BC Hydro has
installed permanently mounted flowmeters at 11 units. These systems use an externally mounted
strap-on ultrasonic flowmeter with four paths per unit. BC Hydro also uses Winter-Kennedy taps
at a number of plants for relative flow indication. Relative efficiencies are computed and all of
the information is available in real-time.
BC Hydro has also been involved in some comparison testing between a wetted path ultrasonic
flowmeter and an acoustic scintillation flowmeter but so far has not used ASFM for any
efficiency tests or any permanent flow monitoring installations.
3.2.4.3 Clamp-On Transducers
Innovative research sponsored by EPRI for the fossil and nuclear generation target provides
some interesting parallels for flow measurement at hydro facilities [24,25]. The critical need for
monitoring of feedwater systems has fostered ongoing research for improved flow measurement
and pipe leak detection for plant thermal performance. Recently, an EPRI project that was
sponsored in conjunction with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) under
a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement included the testing of clamp-on ultrasonic
flowmeters from five leading vendors. Phase I of the testing concluded that the use of clamp-on
ultrasonic flowmeters has good potential for application and development. While the research
was focused on small pipe diameters for cooling water, clamp-on transducers that do not require
penetration of the penstock wall have been successfully applied for pipe diameters to 20 ft. (6 m)
and wall thickness as heavy as 1 1/2 inch (38.10 mm) (see Appendix B).
3.2.4.4 Pacific Gas and Electric
The need for a reliable, low-cost, real-time flow measurement input at Pacific Gas and Electric’s
(PG&E) portfolio of 68 powerhouses, ranging in size from 0.9 MW to 404 MW and comprising
a total of 3,300 MW, required further research into flow measurement techniques.
In the early 1990s, PG&E performed studies to compare the accuracy of low-cost ($3,000/test)
clamp-on ultrasonic flowmeters and other methods in the lab and in the field. The tests indicated
that measurements made with portable clamp-on type meters could be useful for verification of
3-12
performance, compliance, and optimization program input. With this type of meter, the water
velocity is computed from the total transit time of the sound pulse between the transmit
transducer and the receive transducer, accounting for the diameter and thickness of the pipe [26].
Laboratory Universal Venturi Tube tests were compared with a clamp-on sonic flowmeter,
suitable for pipes in the 1 to17 ft. (0.3 to 5.2 m) range. The tests were conducted on a 36-inch
(0.9 m) diameter pipe, over a range of flows from 1.5 to 76 cfs (0.04 to 2.1 cms). The mean
absolute percent deviation in measurements was 0.31 ± 0.63.
Another comparative test of a two-path clamp-on sonic transducer system versus an eight-path
internally mounted ultrasonic flowmeter was conducted at three different pumping plants on
pipes larger than 3 ft. (1 m) in diameter. Two different clamp-on transducers were tested: one
manufactured by Tokyo Keike (UFP-1000) and a Panametric’s PCT-68 transducer system. The
internally mounted device was an Accusonic eight-path cross-cordal flowmeter. The clamp-on
transducers were mounted at 10 and 2 o’clock positions. Other than some difficulty with
transducer frequency noise generated in one of the field test setups, the results were encouraging
and are summarized in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3
Clamp-On Versus Wetted Transducer Tests
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3

Diameter 109.1inches (9 ft.) 109 inches (9 ft.) 151 inches (12.5 ft.)
(2.8 m) (2.8 m) (3.8 m)
Eight-path measured flow 633.05 cfs 728.8 cfs 1,266.1 cfs
(17.9 cms) (20.6 cms) (35.8 cms)
Two-path clamp-on 629 to 636 cfs (mean) 724 to 731 cfs (mean) 1,267 cfs (mean)
Transducer (17.8 to 18.0 cms) (20.5 to 20.7 cms) (35.9 cms)
The authors conclude that clamp-on sonic flowmeters performed well in both lab tests and field
applications. The clamp-on method of flow measurement provided high accuracy, repeatability,
and low cost (about $3,000 per test) for flow measurement. At that time, 1995, the authors
recommended that the clamp-on method be included in the Test Codes. Although this has not
occurred to date, the experience of the authors suggests that clamp-on transducers can be utilized
to produce accurate and repeatable results, provided there are at least 10 pipe diameters upstream
and downstream from the probe locations.
3.2.5 Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter (ASFM)
Acoustic scintillation is a technique for measuring flows in a turbulent medium by analyzing the
variations (with position and time) of sound passing through this medium. Scintillation refers to
random variations in the intensity of sound caused by the variations in the speed at which the
sound waves are traveling. The ASFM measures the along-path spatial average water velocity by
measuring the time required for the scintillations caused by the turbulence to be carried between
two closely-spaced (35 mm) acoustic paths, one downstream of the other. The technique was
first studied in the late 1940s for wind effects, in the 1980s for ocean currents, and since 1992 for
3-13
applications at hydro facilities. This method is being applied by ASL AQFlow (see Appendix B)
as the only license holder on the technology patent, which is held jointly by the U.S. and
Canadian governments.
With this method, because the acoustic paths are normal to the axis of the conduit, the flow
transducers can be mounted on a rack and inserted into a bulkhead or gate slot but, unlike a set-
up for current meter testing, the transducers are located in the slots rather than in the flow.
Therefore, the method can be used for continuous long-term real-time flow measurements and
monitoring at plants that lack the penstock configurations that are required for the conventional
multi-path AFM methods described above. To account for flows that are not perpendicular to the
acoustic paths, a third path at each measurement point allows the calculation of the inclination as
well as magnitude of the laterally averaged velocity vector. The ASFM computes the discharge
through each bay of the intake by integrating the horizontal component of the flow velocity over
the cross-section of the bay.
Following are details about several comparative measurements that have been conducted at
hydro facilities recently. While these studies are currently aimed at comparing the scintillation
method to the well-established acoustic methods, continued commercialization for wider
application is anticipated.
3.2.5.1 TVA—Fort Patrick Henry
In 1997 TVA compared ASFM testing to current meter measurements at its Fort Patrick Henry
Plant, a low-head (65 ft., 19.8 m) facility. Both sets of measuring equipment were mounted on a
moving frame installed in the intake gate slot, which traversed the flow from top to bottom
(intake height 21.6 ft., 6.6m) at 13 discrete elevations. The flow into the intake had a significant
vertical component so that the ability of each method to resolve the horizontal component
required to determine the discharge was critical. The initial results indicated that the overall
agreement between the two methods ranged from 0.2 to 0.5 percent and the single largest
deviation was 1.0% [27].
3.2.5.2 Hydro-Quebec—Laforge-2
Similar studies were conducted at Unit 22 of Hydro-Quebec’s Laforge-2 hydro plant in 1997 to
determine the correlation between discharge through the turbine as measured with current meters
and the ASFM [28]. The current meter test frame, containing four rows of ten current meters,
was inserted into the trash rack slots and used to measure velocity at 190 points in each of three
intake bays. The ASFM transducer array, consisting of four transmitters, four receivers, and data
logging canisters, were mounted on the same frame just downstream of the current meters, on the
side members of the test frame, which were fitted in the intake gate slots.
The test was run on a variety of flow profiles, including varying Kaplan blade angles of 53 to
94% and varying wicket gate openings. The test results, despite some signal interference
difficulties, showed good agreement between the current meter discharge and the ASFM
readings. A systematic difference of 1.6% was observed between the results of the two methods,
3-14
leading the investigators to conclude that the ASFM method is capable of the accuracy required
for measuring turbine discharge in the field.
3.2.5.3 Corps of Engineers—Bonneville
At the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Bonneville hydro plant, ASFM studies were conducted to
test overall unit efficiency with submerged traveling fish screens, without screens, and with
submerged traveling screens and prototype surface fish collectors installed [29]. Relative
efficiencies were also measured using Winter-Kennedy taps for the same test conditions.
Because the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 1995 Biological Opinion requires that
turbines be operated within 1% of their best operating point efficiency, measurements of turbine
absolute efficiency and, thus, flow are critical. The results related to flow measurement included:
• Winter-Kennedy differential pressure taps provided a reasonably accurate prediction of
performance by measuring relative discharge.
• The utilization of the ASFM technique greatly improved the definition and estimation of the
effects of fish diversion devices on Kaplan turbine performance by developing absolute
discharge data.
3.2.5.4 Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan Co.—Rock Island Powerhouse U6
Recent optimization work by Public Utility District (PUD) No. 1 of Chelan Co. at Rock Island
Powerhouse Two on the Columbia River, has afforded the opportunity to use the ASFM to
perform discharge measurements in a run-of-the-river bulb turbine [30].
Rock Island Dam is located at river mile 453.4 on the Columbia River in Washington State.
Powerhouse Two is equipped with eight bulb turbines manufactured by Neyrpic, each rated at
72,000 horsepower. Each intake has two bays, 49.5 ft. (15.1 m) high by 66.8 ft. (20.3 m) wide at
the location of the head gate, which is 60.2 ft. (18.3 m) downstream of the trash rack at its
midpoint elevation. The intake converges from 65 ft. (20 m) vertically at the entrance to 49.5 ft.
(15.1 m) at the head gate. Approximately 3 ft. (1 m) downstream of the head gate, the intake
again converges sharply both horizontally and vertically as it approaches the nose of the bulb
turbine. The intakes to these turbines present particular problems in making absolute
measurements of the turbine flow.
The ASFM was chosen for the absolute flow measurements at Unit U6 because of its ability to
measure flow using unobtrusive acoustic paths oriented directly across the intake. The absolute
flow was measured at two heads—38 and 42 ft. (12.5 m and 13.8 m)—over a series of discharges
covering the full operating range of the turbine. Because there are only two bays per intake at
Powerhouse Two, sufficient transducers were available for the instrument during the tests to
install ten acoustic paths in one bay and twenty in the other. Frames installed in the head gate
slots were used to mount the instrument’s acoustic transducers.
Successful operation of the ASFM requires that the transducer mountings be free of vibration
within the frequency range of the acoustic fluctuations caused by the turbulence, otherwise
3-15
significant contamination of the data will occur. The possibility of structural vibration was a
major concern for the bulb units prior to the installation of the ASFM. Consequently, Chelan
PUD conducted a vibration analysis of the headgate slot rails to identify the existing vibration
environment. The frames performed exceptionally well and vibration was not a factor.
Cam curve verification was done by performing index tests with Winter-Kennedy taps
independently of the ASFM tests.
Comparison of 2000 ASFM results with 1983 current meter-based results showed that the
general shape of the gross efficiency curves for the ASFM compare to those of the current
meters, as do the positions of the peak efficiency, which fall roughly 1.1% above the current
meter curves for both of the head runs. The net head efficiency curves fall roughly 0.6% and
1.1% below the model curves for both of the head runs, respectively.
The results for the ASFM indicate a high degree of consistency, particularly at midrange
generator power, compared to the current meter results. Also, the ASFM efficiency curves lie
between the model and 1983 current meter results, consistent with the likelihood that the actual
efficiency lies somewhere between the two previous values and, thus, adding credibility to the
ASFM-derived efficiencies.
This comparison test demonstrated again that successful measurement of discharge in

converging, short-intake, bulb turbines is possible with an ASFM. The presence of horizontal
cross-members supporting trash racks causes variation in the flow with elevation; however, 10
sampling levels are adequate to resolve the discharge to within 0.3%.
Table 3-4 presents a summary of the comparative measurements conducted recently at the
aforementioned hydro facilities.
3-16
Table 3-4
Summary of Recent Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter (ASFM) Comparison Testing
Applications
Plant MW Head Flow Testing Purpose/Result

Range Date
Ft. Patrick 40 MW, 2 65 ft. 2,700 to 1997 Comparison of ASFM versus
Henry, TVA units (19.8 m) 4,100 cfs 1999 current meters; flow
(76.4 to measurement correlation
116.1 cms) between 0.2% and 0.5%
(subsequently revised to -
2.0%)
Laforge-2, 300 MW, 2 89.9 ft 5,120 to 1997 Comparison of ASFM versus
HQ units (27.4 m) 7,062 cfs current meters; statistical
(145 to deviation of 1.6%
200 cms)
Bonneville 85 hp Kaplan N/A N/A 1998 Use of ASFM for
Dam, Unit 5 measurement of absolute
USACE discharge and as calibration
for Winter-Kennedy taps to
predict performance with and
without various configurations
of fish screens
Rock Island, 72 MW, Bulb 38 - 42 ft. N/A 2000 Comparison of 10 and 20
Chelan Co. Unit 6 (12.5 - transducer paths
PUD 13.8 m)
References: [27,28,29,30,31,32,33]
Note 1: Based on a re-examination of the TVA Fort Patrick Henry results by applying these improved
understandings, ASL now finds that those results were, in fact, also biased low.
These comparison tests and studies demonstrate both the need for and the value of further
development and refinement of the method. While the application of ASFM is not accepted by
either ASME or IEC Code to date, ASL AQFlow is actively working toward Code acceptance
and there is every expectation that inclusion of the method has promise in the near future (three
to five years).
A detailed initiative is underway to definitively establish the performance of the ASFM for the
short intake applications described above. Advanced test methods have been developed to better
estimate bias and precision errors. From these initiatives, there is consistent evidence indicating
that the ASFM output is biased by a small amount (less than or equal to about –2.0%).
Correction procedures are being developed that support a robust approach to predicting
performance over a wide range of hydraulic conditions existing in various low-head plants with
short intakes. Collaboration with external experts recently engaged by the US Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) for an independent technical review of the technology is an important
component of these activities.
3-17
3.2.6 Thermodynamic Method
Thermodynamic efficiency testing is not commonly used in North America because of the
requirement for head in excess of 328 ft. (100 m). The procedure does not actually utilize
measurements of flow, but instead is based on the evaluation of the total energy of the turbine
and the fact that losses are manifested by a rise in the temperature of the water passing through
the turbine. By accurately measuring this temperature rise, and the pressures at the inlet and
discharge, it is possible to determine the efficiency of the machine.
The thermodynamic method and procedures are governed by IEC 41, although recent research as
presented to the International Group for Hydraulic Efficiency Measurement (IGHEM) suggests
that some modifications, particularly in the standards for uncertainty, should be updated [12].
In a recent article in Hydro Review Worldwide, the three types of measurement uncertainties—
those related to instrumentation, inlet conditions, and discharge conditions—result in
uncertainties in computed turbine efficiencies that decrease with increasing head. The author
suggests that modifications to the IEC 41 Code might be in order to account for these variations
in head. Several other contributors to IGHEM also suggest this.
A couple of case studies that illustrate the thermodynamic method are summarized below. A
summary of uncertainties associated with the thermodynamic method is shown in Table 3-5.
Mamquam Northern Utilities Inc. in Vancouver, BC, tested two 60-MW units at 820 ft. (250 m)
of head in 1997 using the thermodynamic method [34]. The purpose of the testing, which was
conducted by Hydro-Quebec, was to confirm the efficiency guarantee of the general contractor.
The testing was also conducted to prove that the thermodynamic method could be applied by
placing industrial thermometers directly in the main flow. The results were positive and this
research suggested an improvement to the method in cases where the use of typical sampling
probes are difficult, such as not having ports installed for sampling and deposits within the water
that cause the traditional sampling probes to block.
At the Toro 1 plant, two 12.4-MW units were tested at three different heads, 570, 587, and 620
ft. (173.6, 179, and 189 m), with the thermodynamic method. These tests were performed in
1997 for new unit performance testing and index setting of Winter-Kennedy taps. The flow range
was 123 to 140 cfs (3.5 to 13.3 cms) [35]. The results indicate that the actual turbine
performance matches the machine guarantee with an estimated accuracy of 0.7%.
Of interest is the acquisition time for collecting the data points. The paper reports that the
installation and calibrations (without water) took two days and then a few preliminary runs were
made on the third day. Day 4 saw the testing of one machine at one head range, with testing at
two other head ranges conducted on Day 5. Dismantling of the instrument setup was completed
on the sixth day.
3-18
Table 3-5
Thermodynamic Method Uncertainties
Net Head Uncertainty in Measured Turbine Efficiency Overall

as a percent, at rated output
Ft. (m) Due to Due to Inlet Due to Discharge Due to Combined
Instrumentation Conditions Conditions Measurement
Uncertainties
328 0.45 0.44 0.88 1.10
(100)
656 0.24 0.22 0.44 0.55
(200)
984 0.18 0.15 0.30 0.38
(300)
1,312 0.15 0.11 0.22 0.29
(400)
1,640 0.14 0.09 0.18 0.25
(500)
1,969 0.14 0.07 0.14 0.21
(600)
Reference: [12]
Note: IEC 41 indicates uncertainties due to inlet conditions at 0.20% and discharge conditions at 0.60%
3.2.7 Winter-Kennedy Pressure Taps
Winter-Kennedy pressure taps provide a measurement of the differential pressures between the
stay-ring side and the outer radius on a plane in the scroll case of the turbine unit. The procedure
is used to measure performance levels relative to other operating levels and, when calibrated
with a primary flow measuring method, relative to model tests.
The Winter-Kennedy method does not make an actual discrete measurement of flow (discharge).
However, the differential pressures can be directly correlated to flow, if calibrated against either
a direct flow measurement procedure or an accurate set of turbine efficiency model test curves.
Once the taps have been calibrated, the differential pressures and, thus, the flow can be
monitored continuously. Winter-Kennedy taps are usually installed during turbine installation or
retrofitted during a dewatered outage and use differential pressure transducers (cells).
3.2.7.1 Kariba Dam
Another example taken from the literature involves measurement using a combination of
differential pressure transducers and Winter-Kennedy taps to provide a real-time calculation of
the flow at two powerhouses—Kariba North and South in Zambia and Zimbabwe [36]. Before
the Winter-Kennedy approach was developed, the procedure for estimating flow rates and
allocating flow between the two powerhouses involved computations based on lake level,
tailwater level readings, and total generation. This procedure for estimating flows was inherently
3-19
inaccurate for several reasons, primarily due to the assumption of a steady-state daily average
rather than real-time conditions.
In 1996, a new flow measurement system was specified and installed, based on the Winter-
Kennedy method, using a differential pressure transmitter. The measurement of pressure was
accomplished by equalizing both sides of the pressure transmitter using the high-pressure tapping
points of the existing configuration. The differential pressure was then transmitted to an
intelligent controller used to calculate the flow, sending the signal to both powerhouses to
apportion and balance operation. Verification between the old method and the new SCADA
system are reported as still underway. However, it has already become clear that the benefits of
real-time, simultaneous reporting are important to the operation.
3.2.7.2 Small Hydro Stations
Several other relatively inexpensive testing methods can yield the same results, in the absence of
installed Winter-Kennedy taps. These have been applied at smaller hydro stations, and include
the air vent and hose pipe test, as detailed in a recent Hydro Review article [37]. These methods
involve measuring a water level drop, either in an air vent immediately downstream of an intake
or in a section of hose attached to a penstock drain valve near the spiral case. In both of these
applications, flow was assumed to be proportional to the head drop between the static reservoir
level and the level in the air vent or pipe. Relative flow rates could then be computed from the
gate opening and power output, and efficiency curves for unit operation over a range of flows
could be derived. These two simplistic tests describe how power output and efficiency vary in
response to gate openings and relative flow rates and give hydro owners and operators a basis for
comparing turbine performance to others of similar design, or to model test values.
3-20
4
FLOW MEASUREMENT: COSTS, BENEFITS, AND
LESSONS LEARNED
Based on the contacts and case studies developed for this Technology Roundup report, there
appear to be several measurable areas where prospective improvement in production and benefits
can be seen from the application of improved flow measurement techniques.
4.1 Who is Testing and How?
The extensive use of established and state-of-the-art flow measurement techniques was
demonstrated in a recent study of the rehabilitation practices of 29 responding hydro owners and
operators. The benchmarking data, representing 485 conventional plants and six pumped storage
facilities with a combined capacity of 54,000 MW, was developed by survey in 1998 [38]. Table
4-1 summarizes the responses to the question: “If turbine field tests were performed (in
conjunction with rehabilitation), what method was used to measure the water discharge before
and after rehabilitation?”
Table 4-1
Flow Measurement Methods Used in Rehabilitation
Percent of Projects Where

Flow Measurement Method Method was Used
Index Test 30.5
Acoustic Flow Measurement 25.4
Current Meter 22.0
Thermodynamic 16.9
Pressure-Time (Transducer) 13.6
Acoustic Scintillation Flow Measurement 8.5
Pressure-Time (Manometer) 8.5
Dye Dilution 6.8
Salt Velocity 3.4
Reference: [38]
Clearly, hydro owners and operators are utilizing flow measurement techniques, balancing
improved efficiency with the significant costs of testing.
4-1
Flow Measurement: Costs, Benefits, and Lessons Learned
4.2 Costs of Testing
Testing the field efficiency of operating turbine-generator units, both to understand the best
efficiency and to prove compliance with contractual warranties, is commonplace. There are
essentially three methods to accomplish this: the acceptance test, the absolute efficiency test, and
the index test that were discussed in Section 3. Table 4-2 summarizes these methods, expected
accuracy, and costs. Note that the expected accuracy and costs are dependent on site-specific
variables and can vary significantly with the field conditions and specifications for accuracy.
Table 4-2
Field Efficiency Tests
Type of Test Expected Accuracy Typical Cost per Turbine

(% efficiency) Generator Unit (1993 US$)
Acceptance Test 1 to 1.5% $50,000 to $100,000
Absolute Efficiency Test 2 to 6% $2,500 to $30,000
1
Index Test 2 to 4% $2,000 to $20,000
Reference: [15]
1
The efficiencies are relative to the peak efficiency of a given unit. True efficiencies are not possible unless an
absolute efficiency test has been previously performed as the basis for the index test.
As discussed during a recent roundtable session on flow measurement at Waterpower XII in July
2001, the determination of which flow measurement method to use is dictated by several factors
as summarized in Table 4-3. Considerations include:
• What are you trying to achieve?
Are you conducting acceptance testing of an upgraded runner? In this instance, you will no
doubt need a method in conformance with either the ASME or IEC Codes.
Are you updating unit performance curves on a periodic basis? Are you considering
rehabilitation, or suspect degradation of performance? Do you have a previously performed
basis absolute test to use? Under these conditions, either a relative index method or a method
applied with some modifications to Code requirements might be practical.
Are you installing optimization software that requires real-time, continuous flow
measurement? If the plant configuration allows, acoustic methods could be used, otherwise,
some calibrated method developed with updated performance curves can be used.
• What plant configuration do you have?
As discussed in previous sections, certain flow measurement methods require specific

configurations.
• What are the installation and outage considerations?
4-2
Table 4-3
Hydro Facility Flow Measurement Application Guidelines
Flow Current Acoustic Acoustic Other Methods

Measurement Meters Scintillation
Methods
Goals
Efficiency testing Common Common Comparison All methods including
testing Winter-Kennedy
underway
Efficiency (real-time N/A Common Comparison Winter-Kennedy can be
monitoring) testing applied in certain
underway configurations
Plant Configuration
High head Applicable Applicable Applicable but Salt or dye dilution
1
> 65 ft. (20 m) secondary Thermodynamic
Multiple intakes, Applicable N/A Comparison Salt or dye dilution
low head, < 65 ft. testing
2
(20 m) underway
Penstock with N/A Common N/A at this time Salt or dye dilution and
3 4
suitable length pressure-time can be cost-
effective
Small hydro Applicable Applicable N/A at this time Salt or dye dilution can be
(5 to 20 MW) but costly but costly cost-effective
Installation and Outage
Installation time Medium Once, Minimum Varies with method but can
medium be medium to high
Testing outage Low, Minimum, Minimum Varies with method but can
duration several none with be two to five days
hours clamp-on
transducers
N/A: Not Applicable
1
Suitable only for heads in excess of 328 ft. (100 m)
2
Multiple intakes with little or no penstock to units and head in the range of 30 to 65 ft. (9 to 20 m)
3
Suitable penstock length equal to greater than 0.7 times penstock diameter
4
Downstream valve or gate is required for test
Assessing the total cost of flow measurement includes considerations for set-up, actual testing—
which, depending on the method, can include plant outage durations and loss of generation—
demobilization and the costs of equipment, instruments, data reduction and reporting. While the
individual costs for index and flow measurement testing vary with the plant and site
configuration, Table 4-4 provides a reasonable order of magnitude summary of expected costs.
4-3
Table 4-4
Approximate Costs of Flow Measurement Methods
Flow Setup Time Test Duration Demobilization Approximate Costs

Measurement Time
Method
Acoustic Varies, requires 1-2 days or 1-2 days to $40,000 to $45,000 per unit
(ultrasonic) Flow dewatered provides remove or left (1987$).
Measurement penstock continuous permanently in (Accusonic ORE system: 2
(AFM) internally Estimate: 2-5 days monitoring if place crossing 4-path system)
1
mounted permanently
installed
Acoustic Clamp- 2 persons 3 persons Nominal Equipment: two sets of
2,3
On Transducers 1 day 6 -10 hrs 2 days to report transducers $12,000
(2001$).
Acoustic Varies, requires 2-5 days or 1-2 days to Not available. Recent
Scintillation Flow stoplog or gate provides remove or left comparison tests vary
4
Meters (ASFM) insert continuous permanently in widely and are for large
monitoring if place multiple intake projects.
Estimate: 2 days permanently
installed
Current Meters Varies, requires Varies, 1-5 days 1 day to remove $20 - $30,000 (2001$)
stoplog or gate depending on stoplog slots (labor but not
insert complexity including current meters)
plus downtime for
Estimate: 2 days installation and testing.
$50,000 to $100,000
(2001$) to test in a closed
conduit.
Dye-Dilution Limited downtime required to install and remove the $20 - $35,000 (2001$)
injection rack. (labor and materials) plus
downtime to install the
manifold. Manifold to inject
dye increases costs $8,000
for additional units.
Pressure-Time Nominal Requires Nominal $15 - $35,000 (2001$)
(Gibson) startup- (labor and materials) plus
shutdown cycles downtime for installation
and testing; $6,000 for
additional units.
Salt-Velocity Time varies to install equipment for injection within the $12 - $65,000 (2001$)
(Allen) or Dye penstock and the measurement of penstock geometry. (labor and materials),
Transit Time $5,000 for additional units.
References: [10,39]
1
Requires suitable straight/exposed penstock length
2
Requires suitable straight/exposed penstock of at least 10 pipe diameters upstream and downstream of probe
locations [26]
3
Not ASME or IEC Code accepted at this time
4
Not ASME or IEC Code accepted at this time, in comparison tests
4-4
4.2.1 Cost Reductions
It has been noted that advancements in data collection instrumentation and the use of personal
computers to record and analyze data has reduced the costs of testing in the last 10 years.
Additionally, depending on the objectives of the testing, and the real need for an efficiency test
that is conducted in accordance with Code practices, several hydro owners have seen marked
improvements and relative reductions in costs.
For example, Hetch Hetchy Water and Power in northern California invested in acoustic four-
path systems 10-12 years ago at its three stations—Moccasin (two units, 100 MW), Kirkwood
(three units, 123 MW), and Holm (two units, 169 MW). Since the initial investment of over
$250,000 for instrumentation, subsequent installation of pressure transducers at individual units
has allowed real-time performance monitoring to be installed for approximately $5,000 at each
unit. Hetch Hetchy found that this on-line performance testing instrumentation can provide
relative unit efficiencies for a fraction of the cost of index testing. The equipment allows the
Hetch Hetchy operators to read the relative performance of several different units from any
plant-networked station with the proper software.
One of the concerns with flow measurement and machine condition monitoring is the ability to
cost-effectively apply these information-gathering techniques to small hydro stations and units.
Acres International routinely performs flow measurement and performance efficiency testing for
owners with small units in the capacity range of 5-15 MW. Acres notes that because of
advancements in data collection and logging, as well as multiple applications, technicians and
contractors can perform efficiency tests that provide excellent results for a fraction of the costs
that are generally stated in the industry. For example, a dye dilution test infrequently run at
$35,000 can be reduced to $20,000 for a small unit (a 43% reduction) with the use of
experienced contractors and repeat set-ups. Given this magnitude of reduction, possibilities exist
for testing small units that have previously been considered uneconomical to test [39].
Acres notes that it is important to provide services appropriate to the requirements of the client.
An acceptance level (Code standard) efficiency test program with 10 runs for every test is not
necessary for a small hydro unit where the owner is only interested in the feasibility of uprating
the turbine. Where acceptance tests are required, Acres prefers to use relative methods due to the
high level of confidence in the results as well as a lower cost. Acres utilizes their in-house
experience, detailed planning, automated data acquisition, and innovation to provide a successful
testing program. The assistance of the owner’s staff in the preparation for and execution of the
test is also a factor in reducing test cost to minimum levels as shown in Table 4-4.
There are many areas for improvements, which are discussed in Section 6. First and foremost,
however, is the continued dialogue of experience within the industry to promote better flow
measurement efforts because of the real benefits to the bottom line—improved production.
4-5
4.3 The Bottom Line: Improving Production
If indeed costs have been reduced by improved methods and newer techniques, what are the new
benefits that can be gained?
4.3.1 Enhanced System Optimization
As previously discussed, Seattle City Light (SCL) believes that the initial EPRI work, and further
improvements to real-time availability of performance information, has enabled SCL to enhance
system optimization, unit, and economic dispatch.
SCL installed acoustic meters on all units at its Gorge, Diablo, Ross, and Boundary stations, and
included combinations of single-path and multi-path installations. The meters provide real-time
data for use in power and flow scheduling, performance testing, and condition monitoring.
In 1994, SCL estimated the present value of the 20-year savings (1996-2015) to be $5.8 million,
based on the estimate of the overall system efficiency improvements of 0.2%. They estimated
that output would increase by 18,500 MWh per year due to the AFM equipment, thus avoiding
energy costs for supplemental power purchased from BPA. This calculation assumed the
installation costs of two complete acoustic flowmeter (AFM) systems and transducers on 19
units at a net cost of $550,000 (1994), which is the AFM system cost of $870,000 less the
avoided cost of performance testing of $320,000 [5].
Since the 1994 EPRI study, SCL believes that the benefits of acoustic flow measurement due to
monitoring and replacing runners at the Boundary Project are real, but the jury is still out on the
magnitude. Indeed, SCL has not contracted any independent testing for their machines since the
flowmeter program was initiated. All performance testing has been conducted by in-house
engineering and operations staff. The real benefit is in the enhanced system optimization, unit,
and economic dispatch.
On the cost side, SCL estimates that it has spent about $750,000 in acoustic flow measurement
equipment over the last 5 years, with an annual cost of maintenance of about $15,000, which
includes an inventory of spare transducers and periodic training of plant personnel.
4.3.2 Performance Monitoring
Flow measurements for TVA’s hydro system are primarily provided by acoustic flowmeters or
Winter-Kennedy taps calibrated with either current meters or pressure-time flow measurements.
On-line data and daily data files, available by modem and over the TVA wide area network,
provide the capability for frequent, low cost performance evaluations over the entire range of
operating conditions for each plant. Figure 4-1 provides a graphic reminder of the economic
benefits that can be achieved through accurate flow measurements and improved performance
monitoring [40]. As can be seen from Figure 4-1, the convergence of the two curves after the
installation of more accurate, real-time flow measurement systems and improved operation to
meet best efficiency represents dramatic power benefits. The bottom curve represents the
4-6
historical – actual operating efficiency, which was based on a reliance on infrequent index
testing and recalibration of unit operating curves. The top curve represents the plant’s best
efficiency. The overall efficiency is radically improved with the installation of more accurate,
real-time flow measurement systems, coupled with optimal operation at the theoretical plant best
efficiency. Results on the order of a 4% gain in efficiency, equating to a $1.4 million cumulative
power benefit were demonstrated for the test period.
Figure 4-1
Benefits of Efficient Operation—Cherokee Plant, TVA [40]
4.4 Lessons Learned
The experience of hydro owners to date with flow measurement technologies continues to
rapidly change, as do demands for improved, real-time operation, better condition monitoring,
cost-effective data collection, and advances in technology. The following are a few of the lessons
learned from flow measurement applications:
• Traditional index testing remains the backbone for efficiency testing of small- and
intermediate-sized plants. However, calibration of index testing with alternate flow
measurement techniques is becoming increasingly affordable and necessary for generation
improvement.
• Current meter applications are continually being improved and, with advancements in
computational fluid dynamics that account for the flow vector inversions, current meters can
deliver accuracies of 1% to 3% in determining unit efficiency.
4-7
• Installation of various types of flow measurement systems at several TVA plants in the 1990s
saw a 4% power efficiency improvement, equating to a total of $1.4 million in benefits in
five years. With installation costs in the $100,000 to $250,000 range, benefit/cost ratios of
this magnitude indicate that improving and applying flow measurement technology should be
a high priority among hydro operators.
• The development and application of acoustic (ultrasonic) methods, in wetted (internal)
applications, has significant benefits. Ultrasonic methods have been implemented
successfully at plants having a variety of configurations. System-wide efficiency
improvements in the range of 0.2% to > 20% more than offset the capital cost of installation
if used to regularly update performance curves.
• Although ultrasonic clamp-on transducers are not Code-accepted, the experience of hydro
operators suggests that clamp-on transducers can be utilized to produce accurate and
repeatable results, provided there are at least 10 pipe diameters upstream and downstream
from the probe locations.
• ASFM methods, if further developed for cost-effective application, might provide an
accurate method of real-time flow measurement at hydro facilities without penstocks or with
complex intake geometries. The technology has been applied in several plant sites in
comparison tests. However, some limitations in the results lead to recommendations for
further study, particularly with respect to the boundary conditions and signal interference.
The general consensus is that the application cost should decrease with ongoing development
and more portable systems. Code acceptance is expected within three to five years.
• One of the concerns with flow measurement is the ability to effectively apply existing
technologies to small units. ASFM can be applied to measure flows at intakes as small as
about 4.9 ft. (1.5 m) by 3.3 ft. (1 m) high. The same equipment can be used, only with a
smaller number of measurement levels taken, thus reducing the cost of the flow
measurement.
Additionally, based on the industry’s experience with flow measurement and testing, several
observations can be made as shown in Table 4-5.
4-8
Table 4-5
Flow Measurement Experience and Instrumentation for Different Methods
Test Measurement Instrumentation Instrument Relative Cost and

Measurement Method Accuracy Applicability
Relative Flow Measurement (Index Test)
Relative flow Winter-Kennedy Pieziometer taps ±0.1% Generally
rate taps inexpensive; can be
Add-on W-K taps Surface-mounted N/A applied to a wide
pieziometer plates range of units
and sensing lines
installed on penstock
Pressure-Time Flow Measurement (Digital Method)
Pressure Differential Differential pressure ±0.25% Practical and useful;
difference Pressure Cell cells (Validyne) plant configuration
between tap Differential Differential pressure ±0.1% must have valve or
plates Pressure Cell cells (Rosemount) closure mechanism
(alternate)
Current Meter Flow Measurement
Flow rate Array of eight Ott Type A self- N/A Short intakes;
current meters in compensating (see configuration-
service gate Appendix B) dependent
slots
Relative flow Winter-Kennedy Differential pressure ±0.1%
rate taps cells
Acoustic Flow Measurement (Multi-Path)
Flow rate Pairs of Internally mounted 1 to 3% Sufficiently long
transducers transducers (see penstock with multi-
mounted within Appendix B for paths required
penstocks suppliers)
Acoustic Scintillation Flow Measurement

Flow rate Pairs of frame ASL AQFlow Shows Short intakes, lower
mount equipment promise TBD head applications,
transducers bias at – 2% complex geometries
References: [18,30,40]
N/A = Not Available
4-9
5
FURTHER APPLICATIONS OF FLOW MEASUREMENT
Flow measurement techniques are also vital to other operations parameters. This section
describes case studies of flow measurement related to developing input for use in water
optimization models and flow measurement for compliance. In addition, flow measurement is
used for more routine purposes such as penstock leak detection. The following sections outline
how improved flow measurement can fit into the overall improved operation of hydro facilities.
5.1 Flow Measurement as Input to Optimization Programs
The competitive electricity marketplace has intensified the pressure on hydro plant owners to
optimize the use of water resources. The use of commercially available software packages and
applications for single units, individual powerhouses, and multiple hydro portfolio river basin
control saw extensive application in the 1990s.
In a 1998 Hydro Review article, several different approaches to hydro optimization were
reviewed [41]. There are three main methods of optimizing the sharing of load among individual,
available units:
• Fixed schedule, which is based on set points that have been derived by testing and are input
directly
• On-line monitor, which measures the real-time flow rate and unit efficiency and attempts to
operate at the best set point for each unit
• Software optimization that instantaneously solves for the optimum solution for any given
situation, given real-time data and previously set efficiency profiles
A growing number of hydro plant owners are installing optimization software. Table 5-1
summarizes the salient features of some of the commercially available software. However, with
so many inputs and variables necessary to apply these optimization models, two questions arise:
• What effects do the measurable parameters for flow rate, both open channel and unit
discharge, have on a model’s prediction of optimal water usage?
• Have the flow measurement instruments kept pace with the required inputs to reduce the
uncertainties associated?
In general, it is observed that the vast majority of current applications of the water optimization
models rely on the input parameters on a per unit basis and, further, that these are based on
infrequent index testing and efficiency curves rather than on the more sophisticated state-of-the
5-1
Further Applications of Flow Measurement
art linkages of real-time flow measurement. Indeed, at some facilities that have flowmeters, the
readout of discharge is often displayed rather than used for input to an optimization model.
In addition, in a 1998 EPRI-sponsored discussion paper, “Needs and Opportunities for a Hydro
Asset Management Tool” [42], various available hydro asset management tools were reviewed.
Although the focus of this analysis was to assess tools for the hydro asset manager to compute
the value of water in order to make run/ don’t run decisions and, ultimately, to price ancillary
service products in a competitive marketplace, the information is useful in understanding the
flow measurement inputs required to accurately optimize the fuel.
5-2
Table 5-1
Hydro Optimization Software and Flow Measurement
Software Distributor, Year Key Components Flow Measurement Inputs

Package Released
CHEOPS Duke Engineering & Linked spreadsheets for Instream or bypass flows,
Services, 1997 modeling operating minimum flows, and ramp
constraints rates, hydrology from
historical or typical water
year, unit performance
curves, and availability
HYDROPS C. Howard & Real-time Explicit model of inflow
Associates, 1986 Short- and long-term uncertainties; unit efficiency
Powell, 2001 operations inputs based on established
efficiency curves; flow rate is
Hydrology, loads, prices, computed from differential
unit efficiency to optimize water level readings
unit loading
HydroSoft HydroSoft Energie, Historic, real-time, or Utilizes inflow forecasts and
(GESTEAU) 1992 forecasted flow routing routines; relies on
Determines optimal maximum and minimum
distribution of power water levels; unit flow input
among units and plants
ICC-Shop Powell Data, 1996 Short-term (7-11 days) Optimizes use of water given
optimization load obligations and options
for market trading in a
cascade river basin
OPT-EASE Kleinschmidt Current or future Maximizes either plant output
Associates, 1994 conditions or minimizes total plant water
usage based on performance
data and efficiency profiles
SIMHYDE and Technik-Eaucan Simulate both short- and Optimizes operation of
VALOPER Inc., 1988 long-term operation system and then optimizes
units within plants by using
efficiency curves
Vista Acres International, Short- and long-term Unit efficiency is computed
1996 analysis based on power polynomials
Seven module input; that are derived from sets of
plant equipment, water index test data corresponding
levels, flow, value of to unit discharge, efficiency,
generation, outages, and power magnitudes
peak periods, factors to provided by owner.
optimize generation
scheduling
WaterView Hydro Resource Efficiency module (for Sensors for data input are
Solutions, LLC, 1996 different unit types) to available through HRS for
(HRS) optimize plant operation real-time installation.
References: [41,42,43,44,45]
The following case studies describe the application of flow measurement techniques used in
optimizing hydro system operation.
5-3
5.1.1 Bureau of Reclamation—Riverware
The Bureau of Reclamation, operator of 58 power plants totaling over 14,600 MW, indicates
that, for normal operation, flow is determined using relationships developed during efficiency
testing of turbines or by using penstock acoustic flowmeters. Other bypass flows have been
instrumented only if they are critical or are required for water accounting purposes; however,
few outlets or spillways have flow measurement instrumentation. The Bureau has installed
acoustic flowmeters on penstocks at 39 plants with diameters ranging from 3 ft. (1m) to 32 ft.
(10 m) at Grand Coulee [46]. Most of these installations were made in the 1990s and most
systems are performing reliably and within manufacturer’s specifications. Operations and
maintenance on the acoustic flowmeters include periodic cleaning and replacement of the
acoustic transducers, along with hardware and software upgrades.
The Bureau uses the input from these flow measurement instruments, as well as temperature and
other water quality parameters (such as dissolved oxygen, turbidity, total dissolved gas, etc.),
USGS gages (for inflows and outflows), and reservoir level recorders (for change in storage) for
input to two optimization models. One system is used to optimize water releases over monthly
and, in some cases, daily, time frames. This optimization model is termed Riverware and has
been developed through joint research with the University of Colorado.
The second optimization model is a short-term model used primarily by power plant operators to
perform automatic generation control. The model uses calibrated turbine efficiency curves. Work
continues to expand these concepts to provide operators with unit commitment tools. In addition,
the amount that the calibrated turbine efficiency curves change with time and cavitation damage
on the turbine runner will be monitored and measured at Grand Coulee. If measured changes
over time are found to be significant, on-line updates of curves will be investigated as a tool to
measure these changes for the purpose of providing accurate flow discharges for optimizations
and determining the condition of the runners.
Both models require a combination of flow measurements such as reservoir inflows and
outflows, penstock flow, as measured with acoustic transducers, and the calculated power plant
release to meet compliance objectives. In some cases, the Bureau operators use daily releases
from the penstock flowmeters to meet a daily flow schedule. Adjustments are made (in most
cases by manual operation) to make the daily flow release meet the compliance schedule.
Installing and operating flow measurement instrumentation has not been without some
difficulties. The installation of acoustic transducers on short and odd- or irregularly-shaped
penstocks has resulted in some difficulties with the measurements. Another less obvious
difficulty, was to establish confidence in and acceptance of the instrumentation from project
operators and electronics technicians. However, with continued operation and technical support,
most of the operators now have more confidence in these devices.
5.1.2 FPL Energy Maine—Real-Time Hydro Operations Model
The need for a model that represents a complex system consisting of 31 plants, 92 units, eight
storage reservoirs, and three rivers, and operating in a competitive market, was the key driver
5-4
behind the development of a Real-Time Hydro Operations Model (RHOM) implementation of

the HYDROPS system [47]. The system uses modules to perform the data gathering, analysis,
scheduling, and optimization. Key inputs relative to flow measurement include:
• A satellite downlink from the USGS, GOES-8 system, which collects data (in the form of
stages) on USGS stream gages in the system. The data viewer converts river stage to
discharge.
• An inflow forecasting module utilizing the HFAM model developed by Hydrocomp, Inc. (as
a successor to the EPA HSPF and Stanford model), which generates streamflows for ungaged
portions of the watershed.
• Compliance operating objectives and set points, which are both input and optimized for the
available water.
Plant data, which are relayed to the Dispatch Decision Support System (DDSS) module from the
FPL SCADA system and include turbine rough zones, pond levels, and tailwater levels.
5.1.3 Orion Power New York
Orion Power New York, which operates 70 plants comprising 650 MW on 15 river basins in
New York state, ranging in size from 220 kW to 50 MW, has used various standard flow
measurement techniques over the years for efficiency testing, optimization, and compliance [48].
Orion has used acoustic multi-path flow measurement following turbine upgrades to test
efficiency on some of its units greater than 7 MW. At their School Street Plant (5 units, 39.6
MW) Orion’s predecessor company, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, installed Accusonic
4-path transducers in the penstocks and has had good experience monitoring real-time flow.
However, at this time, the system is not in use on a regular basis. Optimization of the multi-unit
plant’s operation with real-time flow measurement might be restored later in 2001, when Orion
completes installation of a new SCADA system.
Index testing using pressure transducers on small units as part of an upgrade is commonly used,
basing flow on model tests and manufacturers’ curves. The use of Winter-Kennedy taps with the
calibrated curves is the common basis for review of turbine efficiency.
Plant operation is conducted based on operator knowledge and the use of in-house river system
models. Traditional flow inputs to the models include data from USGS gaging stations, water
level transducers at plants, turbine efficiency curves, related meter readings, and operator
knowledge and experience. Orion believes that improved, cost-effective flow measurement
techniques at multiple unit plants could see gains in the range of 1 to 2% on an annual basis if
real-time flow were incorporated into new algorithms in river models.
5-5
5.1.4 Wisconsin Electric Power—Vista
Recently Wisconsin Electric (WE) acquired the Acres Vista DSS system to operate its 90-MW
portfolio of plants. In the past, WE used efficiency curves and attempted to operate at efficient
points to maximize generation when water was limited. WE intends to use the Acres system to
fully optimize the plants while meeting all operating constraints, which include compliance,
varying hydrologic conditions, and unit operation characteristics. The initial cost of the Vista
system was about $250,000, with an estimated $12,000 a year for maintenance. Using the Vista
system, WE inputs flows from the USGS gaging network that monitors natural inflows,
computes accretions between plants or ungaged areas, and then optimizes the settings for
operation. The system then monitors flow by unit and gate (for spillways), using the
flow/discharge relationships developed per unit, to ensure that the optimal settings were
achieved.
On a given day, knowing the flow constraints, the available inflow and the head, and the
generation (economic) conditions, unit operation (flow set points) can be determined for an
optimal condition. Simulating the operating environment is difficult because of the number of
system constraints and the vast network of data inputs (flow rates, water levels, unit availability,
etc.) that must be acquired from various operating systems. Integrating the various SCADA
systems, the individual plant controls, and external data sources, such as the USGS network, is
challenging. In the end, however, the overall goal is to achieve an optimal solution for maximum
generation.
5.1.5 Other Applications
Following the studies done by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) in the early 1990s
with clamp-on flow measurement transducers, it became apparent that utilizing real-time power
plant data from SCADA and EMS systems, in conjunction with flow measurement data, would
allow the optimization of available water resources to obtain greater power output and also to
meet compliance objectives [26].
PG&E’s system is a dynamic, multi-level LAN- accessible Hydro Unit Database (HUD)
designed to provide PG&E users with historical and current turbine-generator unit generation,
water discharge, and water duty (KWh/available flow). The HUD system correlates hourly load
data with available water data and optimizes multi-unit production, considering head-change
coefficients and headloss.
The Tennessee Valley Authority has implemented a system for monitoring and optimization at
25 of its hydro plants and at one Corps of Engineer plant in the southeastern U.S. The TVA
WaterView system records numerous environmental and operating parameters and computes
loss-adjusted performance curves and efficiencies. The data are then used by TVA area network
operators to operate for environmental compliance and to provide input for decisions regarding
support power dispatch tools [49].
5-6
5.2 Flow Measurement Applications for Compliance and Stewardship
Another aspect of flow measurement, and one that is seeing increasing scrutiny, is the need for
continuous substantiation and demonstration of compliance and stewardship with regard to
downstream flow maintenance. In the post 1990 compliance environment, the need for
monitoring downstream and instream compliance objectives and reporting/alarming of
deviations has become more commonplace. Finally, beyond the issue of compliance with
mandated limits, many hydro plant owners are increasing their focus on demonstrating the value
and responsiveness of hydro generation units as partners with the resource agencies.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensees utilize a variety of flow measurement
techniques and reporting to meet the various compliance requirements in licenses. These include
simple visual staff gages, water level transducers, or floats in pit gages linked with chart
recorders, and more sophisticated systems linking USGS telemetered gages to plant flow
transponders. Whatever the system, the goal is to be responsive to the license conditions in the
most cost-effective and credible way.
Overall, the vast majority of licensees have accomplished flow compliance in an exemplary
fashion. Indeed, there is not a significant body of compliance violations related to flow
conditions. There are, however, some noted self-reported licensee difficulties. These have been
in the areas of not meeting minimum flow conditions and minor violations of run-of-river (that
is, inflow equal to outflow) conditions. Improved flow measurement techniques often can
alleviate these situations.
Several examples of effective programs are illustrated by the case studies below.
5.2.1 Seattle City Light
Seattle City Light (SCL) reports that they have flow release requirements for the Skagit Project
(Gorge, Diablo, and Ross plants) that were established as part of FERC relicensing. These
compliance requirements include seasonal minimums, ramping rates, and pool targets and are
based on salmon migration timing and flood control requirements. The compliance gage is a
USGS station located just below the Gorge Powerhouse on the main-stem Skagit River.
There are also release requirements that were established as part of the original license for the
South Fork Tolt River Project. These include seasonal minimums and ramping rates. This project
includes the added complexity of being a water supply project as well as a generation project.
Minimum releases are provided in a combination of ways, depending on domestic water
demands and precipitation.
SCL recently negotiated an instream flow agreement (minimum instream flows and ramping
rates) in conjunction with a Habitat Conservation Plan for the Cedar Falls Project. For this, SCL
will be constructing a minimum flow mechanism for the dam, a synchronous bypass system at
the powerhouse, and two new compliance gages (USGS stations). In all cases, the local USGS
station serves as the compliance gage for SCL’s projects.
5-7
5.2.2 Orion Power New York
Orion Power New York’s operation of 70 plants in fifteen river basins, under numerous FERC
licenses, requires a number of different approaches to flow measurement for compliance.
Under the FERC licenses for the projects, Orion is required to support the funding of USGS
streamflow gages, which amounts to $115,000 annually for gages upstream and downstream of
affected plants. Where USGS data are not available, other manual estimates of flow are used in
river system models. Under operating agreements, the USGS re-calibrates and maintains real-
time streamflow data consistent with their nationwide system on an Internet-based system for use
in flow models and for operation and verification.
Parenthetically, it should be noted that the USGS states that, while streamflow water-level
(stage) gaging is generally accurate to within ± 2.0%, streamflow gaging, which includes
calculations for the cross-sectional area of a channel and streambed, is only accurate to within
± 5.0%. Because these readings form the basis for many inputs to plant and river system
optimizations, improvements in the technology to gage both inflow and compliance ratings could
result in improvements in hydro production. While the USGS estimates that normal maintenance
on a USGS gaging station is anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 per year, a cost that is often borne
by the hydro operator, improvements in technology are developing that reduce this annual cost
while increasing accuracy and reliability (see Section 6) [50].
Compliance flow measurement has been accomplished using a variety of methods, with the
general consensus that a low-tech protocol, if adequate for the resource, is acceptable. For
example, recent settlements have included provisions for headwater monitoring, formula
calculations for release structures, unit operation records for base flow, and visual confirmation
of flow in tailraces or bypass reaches. In one case, base flow compliance has been met by
installing a series of lights noting the unit operation status. Given that the unit is on, and an
agreed flow rate is known, minimum and/or base flow can be visually verified in the downstream
section.
Calibrating a fixed-dimension slot, notch, stop-log, or gate opening for a known flow at a given
water level has also provided visual verification of flow quantity, particularly in a bypass reach
or in the event of a unit outage. Daily observation by an operator, and annual certification that
the notch or orifice has not been blocked by debris, is sometimes required to substantiate base
flows. Simple water level staff gages, which have been calibrated to the known turbine unit flow
rates, have also been used to verify flow requirement compliance. These simple devices have
been effective in providing resource agencies and other stakeholders with confidence in flow
discharge compliance.
5-8
5.2.3 Other Compliance Applications
Wisconsin Electric has several requirements for minimum flows, which are measured by USGS
gaging stations located downstream of its projects. At these projects, FERC reviews the
compliance objective records during the annual inspections.
At four of their newly relicensed projects, the minimum flow is 50% of the peak daily flow, so it
changes every day. WE expects to be self-monitoring and report compliance to the FERC and
resource agencies involved. Currently, a review panel of the resource agencies meets periodically
to review WE’s compliance with meeting run-of-river requirements. These new requirements go
into effect November 2001. WE expects to rely on the Vista System to collect the data and
produce the compliance monitoring reports. Once the system is fully operational, WE expects an
ongoing manpower cost for a person to develop, print, and distribute the reports that could be
expected to be 1-2 days per month.
Following are several other examples of compliance flow measurement [51]. At their 112-MW
Jackson plant (FERC Project 2157), Snohomish County PUD utilizes a combination of USGS
gages to monitor upstream and downstream discharges and a regional on-line reporting system
for protection of fisheries.
As part of the FERC relicensing class of 1993, Consumers Energy developed a settlement
agreement with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) related to flow
measurement and monitoring at its eleven hydro projects. This included the upgrading and real-
time data logging of discharge measurements at several sites.
At the 60-MW Milner Hydroelectric Project on the Snake River, Idaho Power is required to
maintain the rate of change (that is, ramp-up rate) of the combined flow through two penstocks
(one 9 ft. (2.7 m) in diameter, the other 17 ft. (5.2 m) in diameter) at no more than 300 cfs
(8.5cms) in 20 minutes. To meet this requirement, Idaho Power installed an acoustic flowmeter
provided by Accusonic Technologies of Falmouth, Massachusetts to the two penstocks to supply
continuous real-time flow data. The data is transmitted to the river-wide SCADA system for
control of the unit flow, as well as the turbine bypass gate, when the plants are off-line [49].
5.3 Flow Measurement for Penstock Leak Detection
The use of flow measurement methods to determine penstock leak detection can be
accomplished using either internally mounted multi-path acoustic systems or, in some
applications, clamp-on transducers.
5-9
5.3.1 Pacific Gas and Electric
Pacific Gas and Electric has used the acoustic flow rate measurement method in penstock leak
detection and monitoring systems. Multiple path acoustic flow rate measurement systems are
ideally suited for repeated and accurate measurements that ensure operating stability. In a
reported case study, Pacific Gas and Electric instrumented the two unit, 170-MW J.B. Black
Powerhouse in California with such a system [52]. A 5,467-ft. long, (1,666 m) 138-120 inch
(3.5-3 m) steel penstock is part of a 20,000 ft. (6,100 m) water conveyance system, operating
under 1,115 ft. (340 m) of head. The system includes a surge tank, intake butterfly shut-off
valve, and spherical turbine shutoff valves. Prior to the installation of the acoustic system, the
measurement of differential pressures was used to detect either a catastrophic loss of the
penstock (where the pressure would go to zero) or a situation where the pressure rose by more
than 20 percent, thus causing automatic closure of the intake and turbine valves.
By installing a multi-path flowmeter at the remote upstream end of the intake butterfly valve and
a second four-path flowmeter downstream of each of the turbine shut-off valves, comparisons
between the differential flow rates, with appropriate dampening for normal penstock transients,
can be made. Because this system allows the detection of leakage rates that are lower than the
previous system, shutdown can be initiated not only for the catastrophic event, but also for
partial dislocation of the penstock. Incorporating this type of flow measurement into daily
operations also had to take into account unusually fast changes in load and high-speed cycling of
units but, with modification of set points for differential tripping, the integrity of penstock leak
detection and public safety could be continuously monitored, without undue alarming and
shutdown as a result of operational fluctuations.
5.3.2 Ataturk, Turkey
In a similar application, two single-path flowmeters were installed, one for measuring flow
upstream as near as possible to the intake, and the other for measuring flow at the downstream
entrance to the powerhouse at the 2,400-MW, 603.7 ft. (184 m) head, Ataturk Power Plant in
Turkey. Each of the eight penstocks, ranging from 21.6 to 23.8 ft. (6.6-7.25 m) in diameter, was
instrumented in this way, and then continuous flow monitoring and alarming were installed to
minimize risk resulting from penstock leakage or rupture [53].
5.3.3 Other Applications
Seattle City Light is in the process of designing a penstock leak-detection system for the Cedar
Falls Project that will employ acoustic technology on two aging penstocks. Details are too
preliminary for reporting, but the installation is expected to be completed by the fall of 2002.
In a different configuration, BC Hydro has installed a permanent leak detection system on four
units at the 200-MW Bridge River 1 Powerhouse. The project includes a tunnel that leads to four
6 ft.- (1.8-m) diameter penstocks, 2, 000 ft (610 m) long, of 1950 welded steel construction. Risk
5-10
assessment of the economic impact of downstream consequences of a penstock failure indicated

that a penstock leak detection system that monitored a slowly developing failure was warranted.
A new real-time system was installed several years ago to replace a Venturi piezometric system
that was used to detect a catastrophic event.
The system uses an externally mounted strap-on Caldon ultrasonic flowmeter with two paths per
unit: one mounted at the upstream inlet to the penstock and the second mounted upstream of the
turbine inlet spherical valve at the powerhouse. The installation of the 16 transducers is
estimated at $100,000. The project is still being commissioned, and BC Hydro’s expectation is to
be able to measure both catastrophic and slowing developing penstock leaks in real-time, and
then institute an alarm and warning system that completes an emergency action plan at the
facility.
5-11
6
THE FUTURE OF FLOW MEASUREMENT FOR HYDRO
APPLICATIONS
Where is the industry headed with flow measurement? The following discussion is intended as
an overview of possible innovations, improvements, and research and development projects in
flow measurement techniques that would continue to improve the overall accuracy and operation
of hydro production.
6.1 Improving Flow Measurement Techniques and Codes
At TVA, the 2001 Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment (RD3) Program
includes funding for technology solutions and projects such as absolute and relative flow
measurement technology methods that would cost-effectively reduce performance uncertainties.
A synopsis of a project was outlined in the report, A Summary of Current Research and
Development Projects, which was prepared for the 2001 Hydro R&D Forum [54]. The project
was scoped as follows.
SID 071 Absolute and Relative Flow Measurement Technologies for Performance
Optimization
“Efficient, productive, and environmentally responsible operation of hydroelectric power

systems requires cost-effective flow measurements, including both absolute and relative
flow measurements. Emerging technologies for absolute flow measurements, such as
Acoustic Scintillation Flowmeters (ASFM), offer promise but are not ASME PTC-18
Code accepted. Also, previous comparisons of ASFM with Code-accepted methods have
provided mixed results under the sub optimal conditions typically encountered in short,
semi-scroll intakes for hydroelectric power plants. Relative flow measurements provide a
cost-effective alternative to absolute flow measurements under some circumstances, but
the traditional Winter-Kennedy method suffers from a variety of problems, including
approach flow effects (from accumulated trash, support piers, adjacent unit operation,
fish diversion structures), sensing line deterioration, sensing line fouling, pressure
transducer stability, etc.
This project involves establishing collaborative efforts (including industry, federal

agencies, and ASME PTC-18) to compare, improve, develop, and demonstrate both
relative and absolute flow measurement technologies.
The relative flow task will demonstrate and deploy HRS proprietary relative flow
measurement technologies in short, semi-scroll intakes that have been adequately
6-1
The Future of Flow Measurement for Hydro Applications
characterized using numerical models, physical models, and prototype measurements.

Emphasis will be placed on conducting the field comparisons at two installations (e.g.,
TVA's Wheeler Project, Chelan County PUD's Rocky Reach Project, Grant County
PUD’s Wanapum Project, USACE/BPA's Bonneville Project) where significant physical
model data, numerical model data, and field test data already exist and where difficulties
with Winter-Kennedy relative flow measurements have been encountered due to
approach flow conditions.
The absolute flow task will compare ASFM, conventional time-of-flight multi-path
acoustic flowmeters, and current meters in short, semi-scroll intakes that have been
adequately characterized using numerical models, physical models, and prototype
measurements. Emphasis will be placed on conducting the field comparisons at several
installations (e.g., TVA's Wheeler Project, CCPUD's Rocky Reach Project, GCPUD’s
Wanapum Project, USACE/BPA's Bonneville Project) where significant physical model
data, numerical model data, and field test data already exist.
The primary benefit to TVA will be from improvements in production and profitability.
For the TVA hydro system, a 1% improvement in average operating efficiency is worth
approximately $3,600,000 per year in increased production, assuming an average price of
$25/MWh, and a 1% improvement in that part of the total production associated with
generation at maximum load is worth approximately $4,000,000 per year, assuming an
average on-peak price of $50/MWh. Also, collaboration with other utilities,
organizations, and agencies provides additional funding, scope, insight, and experience.
TVA’s activities in FY02 will be limited to project conceptualization, planning, and

coordination (Phase 0) in order to define the tasks and secure funding commitments from
the various other agencies and organizations. Possible partners include Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation (USBR), Chelan County Public Utility District (CCPUD), and Grant County
Public Utility District (GCPUD).”
According to David Lemon, President of ASL AQFlow (see Appendix B), continual
improvements in the deployment of ASFM technology are being made, including new, lower-
cost transducers. Other products under development for application at hydro facilities include:
• ASFM Monitor – This low cost, stand-alone system could be permanently installed in the
intake and provide continuous, repeatable, real-time monitoring of turbine discharge
• ASFM Spillway – Designed to provide an innovative field discharge measurement tool for
spillways
• ASFM Circular – Designed for discharge measurements in short or irregular penstocks
ASL AQFlow’s vision for the ASFM technology is to become the industry standard for turbine
discharge measurement in short intakes of low-head plants.
Opportunities for Research and Development with ASFM include those offered at the 2001
Hydro R&D Forum (Salt Lake City, Utah, July 2001), which could be a program of comparative
testing, similar in scope to the EPRI 1980 testing at Kootenay Canal, with a reduced complexity,
duration, and scope that would include ASFM [55]. It is noted that Grant County PUD would
6-2
like to get support from EPRI, perhaps in a tailored collaboration, to complete an inter-
comparison flow measurement test at the Wanapum Hydroelectric Plant involving the ASFM
and other flowmeters. While the details of the inter-comparison tests remain to be confirmed,
they should help pave the way for some R&D on the viable flow measurements for plant
optimization at Grant County PUD. Additionally, some R&D could be specifically focused on
small (5-10-MW) units and medium-sized units (10-30 MW) to identify cost reduction
potentials. Further details are summarized below.
RDID 1.13 Improved, Accurate, Affordable Flow Measurements (particularly in close-

coupled intakes, for performance optimization, and investigation of applications to
spillways and tailraces)
“Keywords: Flow Measurement, Close-Coupled Intakes, Absolute Flow, Relative Flow,

Optimization, Spillways, Tailraces
Problem/Need: Efficient, productive, and environmentally responsible operation of

hydropower systems requires cost-effective flow measurement. Accurate flow values are
needed for turbine performance assessment, and for spillway capacity ratings. Close-
coupled intakes present difficult conditions in which to obtain accurate flow values.
Application of any particular method requires understanding those conditions in order to
carry out the measurement effectively.
This problem is best approached with a combination of numerical modeling and field
measurements (to define turbulence and boundary layer characteristics) with test
comparisons of candidate flow measurement methods.
Research Objective: Evaluate the flow environment in close-coupled intakes (mean

field, turbulence, time availability of the mean) to evaluate their effects on the accuracy
of the various methods available (ASFM, current meters, calibrated W-K taps,
conventional time of flight acoustic meters). Perform field comparisons at adequately
characterized field sites (e.g. Kootenay Canal, Rocky Reach, Wanapum, Bonneville, etc.)
Potential Benefits: The ability to provide accurate, absolute flow in measurements in

close-coupled intakes will improve efficiency and profitability for the operations of these
plants. The data will enable use of real-time optimization systems at both the plant and
system-wide level. Accurate calibration of spillway capacity will ensure safety standards
are met, as well as ensuring accuracy in meeting environmental flow constraints.
Time Frame: Estimated at two years, divided as follows:
Analysis of existing knowledge - 6 months
Design, operation, and execution of field program - 12 months
Evaluation of results - 6 months
6-3
Funding Estimate: $2,000,000
Possible Cooperating Organizations/Experts: EPRI, USACE, BPA, TVA, CEA,

Chelan, and Grant Co. PUD’s equipment manufacturers” [55].
A similar recommendation was generated in the December 2000 report of the National
Hydropower Association R&D Committee to the Department of Energy, which stated:
“Real-Time Flow Measurement and Analysis for improved flow measurement for real-time flow
determination. Efficient, productive, and environmentally responsible operation of hydroelectric
power systems requires cost-effective flow measurements, including both absolute and relative
flow measurements. Emerging technologies for absolute flow measurement, such as Acoustic
Scintillation Flow Measurement (ASFM), offer promise but are not yet accepted under the
ASME or the ISO Test Codes. Also, previous comparisons of ASFM with Code-accepted
methods have provided mixed results under the sub-optimal conditions typically encountered in
intakes for hydroelectric power plants. DOE should provide leadership for a collaborative, cost-
sharing effort (including industry, federal agencies, EPRI, and ASME PTC-18) to compare
ASFM, conventional time-of-flight multi-path acoustic flowmeters, and current meters.
Collaborative opportunities are available, using intakes that have been adequately characterized
with numerical models, physical models, and prototype measurements” [56].
6.2 Improving Methods and Applications at Small Hydro Plants
Improving the methods for application and the affordability of applications of flow measurement
techniques at small (5-30-MW) units remains a critical item. As described in Section 4, while
some owners have had success with modifications of the methods and techniques, further
extensions and tailored collaborations in this area might be useful if interest continues. As part of
a larger ASFM project (see above), a specific research task could be directed toward small unit
application, which would provide a smaller, less expensive equipment setup with an easier
technique, to make the method practical for small units.
6.3 Enhancing Water Optimization Model Input
A clear area for improvement, as echoed among several model developers, includes the need for
continued advancements in cost-effective flow measurement techniques that can perform real-
time flow measurement to spot check and adjust turbine efficiency curves for input to
optimization programs. It is generally believed that it would greatly enhance the applicability and
usability of these tools if flow measurement were integrated on a more real-time basis.
Another area for further development that several experts noted was improvements to flow
measurement techniques to respond to the integration of other water quality parameters. With
enhancements in modeling capabilities to predict temperature, dissolved oxygen, and other water
quality parameters, the need to adjust flow to meet varying compliance objectives over both
short- and long-term periods will inevitably increase. In these instances, the accuracy and
6-4
applicability of various flow measurement techniques in open channels, both upstream and
downstream of hydroelectric facilities, will be key factors in meeting water quality compliance
objectives.
6.4 Improving Streamflow Information
Under a plan developed by a Committee of the Office of Surface Water (OSW) of the U.S.
Geological Survey, “Streamflow Gaging for the Next Century,” [50] several key objectives were
identified to:
• Increase the level of streamflow information for national needs
• Improve the way streamflow gaging stations are funded and located
• Develop new ways to collect, store, and distribute streamflow information
While the overall mission of the USGS streamflow program is more global in nature—to meet
the needs of all water data users—many of the relevant observations and plans relate to the need
of the hydro industry.
The USGS Committee that developed this report recommended the initiation of a National
Streamflow Information Program (NSIP) to maintain the basic streamflow gaging network for
federal streamflow needs. In this program, the fixed costs of the USGS stream gaging program
would be funded by Federal appropriation but the marginal costs for non-federal base-need
streamgaging stations would be funded by partners.
The report also addresses enhanced streamflow information delivery and products, pointing to
the recent dissemination of near real-time (but not verified) streamflow information on Internet-
based systems. Further development to provide nearer to real-time information and information
at more discrete time resolution intervals than the current daily reports will become necessary as
the streamflow customer base requires 15-, 30-, or 60-minute data for water quality analysis,
habitat studies, and planning for flood control and water regulation, and hydro production.
Finally, the report also addresses the reliance and development of new and original tools and
techniques for streamgaging. The report states, “The most commonly used technique for
streamflow estimation (continuous stage measurement, correlated to periodic cross-sectional
surveys of velocity using velocity meters) has remained virtually unchanged for a century. For
the most part, this is a tribute to its robustness, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Concerns for
personal safety, accuracy, reliability, and efficiency, however, provide justification for ongoing
efforts to identify and develop new and emerging technologies for streamflow measurement.”
Using the newest array of computational tools and equipment, the gaging station of the future
might operate where stage, cross-section, and water velocity are all determined by remote
sensing from the side of the river without contact with the stream.
6-5
According to the report, pursing this technology and other tools such as those listed below will
form the vision for the National Streamflow Information Program. These include:
• Development of acoustic Doppler current profilers for use in shallow and low-velocity
streams and on remotely operated vehicles
• Improved quality assurance techniques to screen data for faulty instruments and to quantify
the uncertainty in streamflow data
• Experimental and theoretical research to develop new and more cost-effective indirect
methods of estimating flood flows
• Reexamination of theoretical hydrological extrapolation of streamgage data to 100- and 500-
year events, based on changing climatic patterns
This vision of streamflow gaging will no doubt lead to improved information for hydro owners
because of the significant reliance on USGS data for hydro operations.
6-6
7
REFERENCES AND RESOURCES
7.1 References
1. Acoustic Flow-Measurement Evaluation Project: Summary Report. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
August 1987. AP-5341.
2. Comparative Flow Measurements: Grand Coulee Pumping-Generating Plant Unit P/G 9.

EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: October 1986. AP-4712.
3. Comparison of Acoustic and Conventional Flow-Measurement Techniques at the Raccoon

Mountain Pumped Storage Plant. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: August 1987. AP-4713.
4. Comparison of Acoustic and Other Flow-Measurement Systems: Kootenay Canal Tests.

EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: February 1986. EM-4367.
5. Innovators with EPRI Technology. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: August 1994. RP2038-2.
6. March, P.A. and Fisher, R.K. “It’s Not Easy Being Green: Environmental Technologies
Enhance Conventional Hydropower’s Role in Sustainable Development,” Annual Review of
Energy and the Environment, Volume 24 (November 1999).
7. Spitzer, D.W., Flow Measurement: Practical Guides for Measurement and Control,
Instrument Society of America, Research Triangle Park, NC (1991, 1996).
8. American Society of Civil Engineers. Recommendations for Standards in Hydraulics (1994).
9. Gulliver, J.S., and Arndt, R.E., eds. Hydropower Engineering Handbook. McGraw-Hill, Inc.
New York, NY 1991.
10. Hecker, G.E. and Nystrom, J.B., “Which Flow Measurement Technique is Best?” Hydro
Review. Kansas City, MO (June 1987).
11. Hydro Life Extension Modernization Guides: Volume 2: Hydromechanical

Equipment. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: August 2000. TR-112350-V2.
12. Karlicek, R.F., “Estimating Uncertainties in Thermodynamic Measurement of Turbine

Efficiency,” HRW. Kansas City, MO (March 1999).
13. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). Performance Test Code 18: Hydraulic
Turbines. ASME PTC 18-1992, New York, NY, 1993.
7-1
References and Resources
14. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Field Acceptance Test to Determine the
Hydraulic Performance of Hydraulic Turbines, Storage Pumps and Pump-Turbines.
Publication No. 41 (Third Edition), Geneva, Switzerland, November 1991.
15. Voigt, R.L. and Gulliver, J.S. “Field Efficiency Testing: A Tool for Maximizing
Performance,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (August 1993).
16. Wolff, P.J., Hansen, D.B., Almquist, C.W., and March, P.A., “An Improved System for
Hydroturbine Index Testing,” presented at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 1, page
783-792, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
17. Rineerm, T.C., Nystrom, J.B.,Ward, P.W., and Harty, F.R., “Safe Harbor Hydroelectric
Station Index Tests, Flow Measurements, and Hydro Operating Curve Revision,” presented
at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 1, page 756-765, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
18. Mikhail, A.F. and Knowlton, R.J., “Performance Testing of the St. Lawrence Plant,”
presented at the Waterpower XII Conference, (CD-ROM) HCI Publications, Kansas City,
MO (July 2001).
19. Mikhail, A.F., Knowlton, R.J. and Metcalfe, R., “Intake Current-Meter Calibration Program
And Results,” presented at the Waterpower XII Conference, (CD-ROM) HCI Publications,
Kansas City, MO (July 2001).
20. Almquist, C.W., March, P.A., and Kirkpatrick, J.F., “Modernizing the Gibson Method of
Flow Measurement,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (June 1990).
21. Westermann, G. and Morgenroth, M., “Performance Testing of Hydroelectric Turbines,”

presented at the CSME Forum 1998, Canadian Society of Mechanical Engineers (May 1998).
22. Kurz, A., “New Generation Flowmeter for Sultartangi in Iceland,” Hydropower and Dams.
Issue Five (2000).
23. Taylor, J.W., “Acoustic Flowmeter Experience at BC Hydro,” Hydro Review. Kansas City,
MO (February 1988).
24. NIST’s Ultrasonic Technology Assessment Program to Improve Flow Measurement. EPRI,
Palo Alto, CA: 1998. TR-111311.
25. Small Power Uprates by Improved Feedwater Flow Measurement. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
August 2000. Draft Report, TR-112XXX.
26. Lynch, F. and Horciza, E., “Flow Measurement Using Low Cost Portable Clamp-on
Ultrasonic Flowmeters,” presented at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 1, page 766-
773, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
7-2
27. Lemon, D.D., Almquist, C.W., Cartier, W.W., March, P.A., and Brice, T.A., “Comparison of
Turbine Discharge Measured by Current Meters and Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter at
Fort Patrick Henry Power Plant,” presented at the HydroVision ’98 Conference, (CD-ROM)
HCI Publications, Kansas City, MO (July 1998).
28. Lemon, D.D., Caron, N., Cartier, W.W., and Proulx, G., “Comparison of Turbine Discharge
Measured by Current Meters and Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter at Laforge-2 Power
Plant,” National Research Council of Canada, IRAP program (1997).
29. Lemon, D.D., Wittinger, R.J., Cartier, W.W., and Emmert, R., “Effect of a Prototype Surface
Collector and Juvenile Fish Diversion Screens on Turbine Efficiency Measured at Unit 5,
Bonneville Dam,” presented at the HydroVision 2000 Conference, (CD-ROM) HCI
Publications, Kansas City, MO (August 2000).
30. Lemon, D. D., Cartier, W., and Bickford, B., “Measuring Flow Through a Bulb Turbine at
Rock Island Dam Using An Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter,” presented at the Waterpower
XII, (CD-ROM) HCI Publications, Kansas City MO (July 2001).
31. ASL AQFlow, Sidney, BC, personal communications (July-August 2001).
32. Lemon, D.D., “Measuring Intake Flows in Hydroelectric Plants with an Acoustic
Scintillation Flowmeter,” presented at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 3, pages
2039-2048, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
33. Lemon, D.D., Almquist, C.W., Cartier, W.W., March, P.A., and Brice, T.A., “Measuring
Turbine Flows with an Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO
(April 1999).
34. Levesque, J-M, “Caption of Dynamic Temperature Method for the Thermodynamic
Method,” International Group for Hydraulic Efficiency Testing (IGHEM), Proceedings,
Reno, NV (July 1998).
35. Millan, L., Rodriques, D., and Levesque, J-M, “Thermodynamic Testing at Toro 1 Plant,”
International Group for Hydraulic Efficiency Measurement (IGHEM), Proceedings, Reno,
NV (July 1998).
36. Siame, L.C. and Siamachoka, E.M., “Turbine Flow Measurement at Kariba Dam,” presented
at the Waterpower ’97 Conference, Volume 3, pages 2189-2196, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Vienna, VA (August 1997).
37. Gordon, J.L., Bennet, K., and Chen, C.T., “Testing Turbine Efficiency: Practical,
Economical Approaches,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (March 2001).
38. “Hydro Rehabilitation Practice: What’s Working in Rehabilitation.” HCI Publications,

Kansas City, MO (August 1998).
39. Acres International, Niagara Falls, NY, personal communications (July-August 2001).
7-3
40. March, P.A. and Almquist, C.W., “Flow Measurement Techniques for the Efficient
Operation of Hydroelectric Power Plants,” Metrology for the Americas Conference, National
Institute of Standards and Technology, Miami, FL (November 1995).
41. Sheldon, L., “Reviewing the Approaches to Hydro Optimization,” Hydro Review. Kansas
City, MO (June 1998).
42. Needs and Opportunities for a Hydro Asset Management Tool. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
December 1998.
43. Chuck Howard, Vancouver BC, personal communications (April-June 2001).
44. Robitaille, A., Sylvain, R., and Welt, F., “Making Money by Improving Plant Efficiency,”
Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (August 1996).
45. Sheldon, L., “Optimization Index Test Box,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (June 1998).
46. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, CO, personal communications (April 2001).
47. Livingstone, A.B., Smith, D.I., Do, T.V., and Howard, C.D.D., “Optimizing the Hydro
System,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (August 1999).
48. Orion Power New York, Syracuse, NY, personal communications (December 2000).
49. Faulkner, E., “Tools for Environmental Monitoring and Response at Hydro Projects,” Hydro
Review. Kansas City, MO (April 2000).
50. U.S. Department of Interior, “Streamflow Information for the Next Century—A Plan for the
National Streamflow Information Program of the U.S. Geological Survey.” U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 99-456, Reston VA (1999).
51. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Washington D.C., personal

communications (November-December 2000).
52. Walsh, J.T., Prien, D.M., and Lemon, D.D., “Penstock Leak Detection Using Accurate Flow
Monitoring Systems,” presented at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 3, pages 2352-
2360, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
53. Vaterhaus, H., “A New Intelligent Ultrasonic Flowmeter for Closed Conduits and Open-
Channels,” presented at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 2, pages 999-1008,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
54. 2001 Hydro R&D Forum: A Summary of Current Research and Development Projects. HCI
Publications, Kansas City, MO (July 2001).
55. 2001 Hydro R&D Forum: Paths to the Future for Research and Development. Draft, HCI
Publications, Kansas City, MO (September 2001).
7-4
56. National Hydropower Association, R&D Committee, “Hydropower Research and

Development Recommendations of the National Hydropower Association for the U.S.
Department of Energy” (December 2000).
7.2 Additional Resources

• “A Comparison of Flow Measurements Using Acoustic and Volumetric
Techniques,” Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Hydro
Power Fluid Machinery, FED-Vol. 43, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
York (December 1986).
• Alden Research Laboratory, Inc., Holden, MA, Personal Communications (April-August
2001).
• Almquist, C.W., Hansen, D.B., Schohl, G.A., March, P.A., “Pressure-Time Flow Rate in
Low Head Hydro Plants,” Proceedings ASCE National Hydraulic Engineering Conference
(August 1994).
• American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME): www.asme.org
• Birch, R. and Lemon, D.D., “Non-Intrusive Flow Measurement Techniques for Hydroelectric
Applications,” presented at the Waterpower ’95 Conference, Volume 3, pages 2049-2058,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA (July 1995).
• Brice, T.A. and Kirkland, J.E., “Checking Turbine Performance by Index Testing,” Hydro
Review. Kansas City, MO (Winter 1986).
• “Comparison of Volumetric, Ultrasonic, and Winter-Kennedy Flow Measurement Methods,”
Water Power. October 1982.
• Evaluation of the Ultrasonic Time-of-Travel and Pressure-Time Methods for Measuring
Flow in Main River Hydroplants. TVA Engineering Laboratory: February 1996. Report No.
WR28-1-900-276.
• Hydro Resource Solutions, LLC, Norris, TN, Personal Communications
(April-August 2001).
• Increased Efficiency of Hydroelectric Power. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: June 1982. EM-2407.
• International Group for Hydraulic Efficiency Testing (IGHEM): www.ighem.org.
• Miller, D. and Stover, C., “Computer Forecasting: The Future of Hydro Management,”
Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (June 1994).
• Sullivan, C.W., “Acoustic Flow Measurement Systems: Economical. Accurate, But Not Code
Accepted…Yet,” Hydro Review. Kansas City, MO (1987).
• Theoretical and Numerical Analysis of the Pressure-Time Flow Measurement Method. TVA
Engineering Laboratory (June 1990). Report No. WR28-1-900-244.
7-5
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS): www.water.usgs.gov/osw/

• Wolff, P.J., March, P.A., and Almquist, C.W., “Old Problems, New Techniques: Using
Computational Fluid Dynamics to Find the Missing Flow,” presented at the Waterpower ’97
Conference, Volume 2, page 1192, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vienna, VA
(August 1997).
7-6
A
APPENDIX A—FLOW MEASUREMENT ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION
A.1 Flow Measurement and Hydroelectric Facilities
Designing and operating a hydro facility requires knowledge of the hydrologic conditions
(streamflows) at the project site. Given an expected flow regime based on flows that have been
measured by stream gaging techniques over a long period of time and the available head, one can
estimate the power production that is expected and the ranges that a plant must be prepared to
accommodate during operation. Because this is a substantial variable, any improvement to
measurement can translate into production.
Flow in a natural open channel is measured primarily by the area-discharge method. In a natural
stream, the cross-sectional area is irregular but can be approximated by bottom profiling. Given a
known cross-sectional area, A, and the speed of the current (Velocity) measured by instruments
over time, the flow, Q, or discharge can be calculated (Q= VA). Relating the flow to a water
level by a correlation curve is the most simplistic method to directly transform levels into flows.
Flow discharge downstream, or in a tailrace, can be measured in the same manner, to
demonstrate flow rates that meet compliance objectives.
Once the plant is built, the units are run and measured for efficiency. Given the measured head
and gate opening, what is the power output and where are the optimal set points? The flow rate is
then back calculated or fitted to the known inflow, as determined by other relative flow
measurement methods (pressure gages, current meters, salt, dye, or tracer methods), to provide
discharge relationship curves. The unit operation is then calibrated to these flow set points. So,
for a given flow and head available, the unit can be operated at a given flow set point (or
combination) that produces the best operating characteristics for each unit. However, the
efficiency of the unit changes over time as the plant experiences wear or is rehabilitated, so
efficiency testing should be done repeatedly over the life.
Alternatively, in a plant that contains regular cross-sections, such as a long open channel
forebay, or a plant with exposed penstocks, acoustical methods can be used that measure sound
travel time over a known distance to calculate velocity and convert it to flow rate.
To optimize the operation of a plant, all of these inputs involving flow measurement are taken
into account—streamflows, unit characteristics, compliance objectives—to balance the
utilization of the water (the fuel) and maximize economic generation, while minimizing wear on
the units.
A-1
Appendix A—Flow Measurement Additional Information
A.2 Groups Active in the Science of Flow Measurement
The research, development, and ongoing application of flow measurement technology continues
by various scientific, commercial, governmental, and academic forums and is represented by
several key players.
In 1994, a Task Committee of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Hydraulics
Division, produced a report entitled, Recommendations for Standards in Hydraulics [8]. This
document contains an excellent overview of existence, development, and use of hydraulic testing
standards and guidelines throughout the world. The reference includes both U.S. standards and
internal agency technical guides and monographs, as well as a description of international
agencies’ work in the development and use of standards for hydraulic structures, hydraulic
machinery, and both open- and closed-channel flow measurement. It should be noted that
continuing work of the ASCE Hydraulics Division is now coordinated from the recently formed
Environmental and Water Resource Institute (EWRI) located at www.EWRI.org. Table A-1 lists
some of the relevant organizations and standards:
Table A-1
Groups Active in the Science of Flow Measurement
Organization/Agency/Association Hydraulic/Flow Measurement

Reference Guidelines/ Standards
American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) ASTM D Open Channel Flow
4409-91 Current Meters
ASTM D 5089-90 Electromagnetic Current Meters Open Channel Flow
ASTM D 4408-84 Acoustic Methods Open Channel Flow
International Standards Organization (ISO) Measurement of Fluid Flow in
Handbook 15 Closed Conduits
International Standards Organization (ISO) Measurement of Liquid Flow in Open
Handbook 16 Channels
Reference: [8]
A.2.1 The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
The USGS is the principal Federal agency responsible for the collection, analysis, interpretation,
and dissemination of hydrologic data needed to plan, develop, and manage the water resources of
the United States, its territories and possessions (see www.water.usgs.gov).
A-2
The USGS Water Resources Division (WRD) investigates the occurrence, quantity, quality,
distribution, uses, and movement of surface and ground waters to develop and disseminate
scientific knowledge and understanding of the Nation's water resources. The WRD activities
include collection of data on water quality, quantity and use, resources assessment, research, and
coordination of the activities of numerous other entities involved in water resources data
acquisition or information transfer, in cooperation with state and local governments or other
Federal agencies. Resource assessment activities include:
• Collecting data on the quantity, quality, and use of surface water (streams, lakes, reservoirs,
estuaries, and glaciers), ground water, and on the quality of precipitation
• Storing, disseminating, and interpreting these data and publishing the results of the
interpretations
• Developing and applying new methods of hydrologic data collection, analysis, and
interpretation
• Conducting focused interpretive hydrologic investigations and appraisals at the national,
regional, State, or local scale
• Reporting to the Nation on a regular basis, regarding the overall status of water resources,
hydrologic events, and water resources issues
The Hydrologic Instrumentation Facility (HIF) supports USGS hydrologic data collection
activities through the identification of needs, development of technical specifications, design or
development of specialized interfaces, contracts and procurements, testing and evaluation,
specialized field applications, repair and calibration, quality control and assurance, and storage
and distribution of hydrologic instrumentation.
A.2.1.1 Streamflow Gaging
Since 1887, the USGS has operated a streamflow gaging program to collect information about
the Nation's water resources. Under this program, the USGS collects the streamflow data needed
by Federal, State, and local agencies for planning and operating water resources projects and
regulatory programs. Streamflow gaging is the common term for measuring the amount of water
flowing in an open channel and provides the basis for quantification of available water (inflow)
and downstream discharge calculations for many hydroelectric developments. This streamflow
gaging network has been the primary source of data for hydroelectric development and ongoing
operation nationwide. Advances in streamflow gaging and the interface with hydroelectric
operations are discussed further in Section 6.
A.2.1.2 Stage Measurements
The stage of a stream or lake is the height of the water surface above an established datum plane.
The water-surface elevation referred to some arbitrary or predetermined gage datum is called the
gage height. Gage height is often used interchangeably with the more general term stage,
A-3
although gage height is more appropriate when used with a reading on a gage. Stage or gage
height is usually expressed in decimal feet or meters.
In open channel applications, current meter measurements are taken by wading or off a bridge,
boat, or cableway across the flow way to determine the velocity profile at a given time. The
cross-sectional area of the open channel at this point is determined using equipment such as tag
lines, wading rods, and sounding reels to take measurements of the physical streambed
configuration. The computation of total flow or discharge in this open channel is determined by
Q=V x A where Q is total flow in cfs, V is the velocity in ft/sec and A is the area in square feet
or meters. This allows the correlation of water level (stage) to flow (discharge). This stage-
discharge relationship provides the direct readout of the flow or discharge measurement.
Reliability of the stage-discharge relationship is dependent upon the consistency of the cross-
sectional area in an open channel and must be re-calibrated as conditions change, such as
streambed movement after a flood or drought.
Several different types of stage measuring devices are available. These include non-recording
gages that are in general use such as staff gages, wire-weight, float-tape, and electric tape. These
gages are used primarily as auxiliary gages at water-stage recorder installations to serve as a
reference gage indicating the water-surface elevation in the stream or stilling well. Other water
level (stage) measuring and recording devices are floats in stilling wells and gas purge (bubble
gage) systems that transmit the pressure head of the water to a manometer or pressure transducer.
Both of these systems can be adapted to graphic and/or digital recording and a variety of
transmitting methods. (USGS website: www.usgs.gov)
A.2.1.3 Current Meters
Another important function of the USGS is the activities of the Office of Surface Water (OSW)
in Mississippi. OSW conducts studies on the performance of current meters used in the United
States and throughout the world. Testing has included measurement of repeatability and response
to angular flow and pulsating flow.
A current meter is an instrument used to measure the velocity of flowing water. The principle of
operation is based on the proportionality between the velocity of the water and the resulting
angular velocity of the meter rotor. By placing a current meter at a point in a stream (or a water
passage for hydroelectric applications) and counting the number of revolutions of the rotor
during a measured interval of time, the velocity of water at that point is determined.
Current meters generally can be classified into two main types, those meters having vertical-axis
rotors and those having horizontal-axis rotors. The comparative characteristics of these two types
are summarized in Table A-2. (www.water.usgs.gov)
A-4
Table A-2
Characteristics of Current Meters
Vertical-Axis Rotor With Cups Horizontal-Axis Rotor With Vanes

(Propeller-Type)
Operates in lower velocities Rotor disturbs flow less than vertical-axis
rotors because of axial symmetry with flow
direction
Bearings are well protected from silty water Rotor is less likely to be entangled by debris
Rotor is repairable in the field without adversely Rotor is repairable in the field without
affecting the rating adversely affecting the rating
Single rotor serves the entire range of velocities Ability to measure oblique current velocities
with different pitch rotors available
Commonly available models: Commonly available models:
Price Type AA Ott C-31, Ott C-2
Pygmy Type Valeport BFM001, BFM002
Swoffer 2100
Reference: [50] (www.water.usgs.gov)
For open channel flow velocity measurements in the field, the USGS has selected vertical axis
current meters through extensive testing and research. This style meter has proven itself a highly
accurate, durable, low-maintenance, and economical choice for stream velocity measurements.
The horizontal axis style meter is used primarily in current meter testing in the closed conduit
conditions experienced at hydro facilities. Several case studies and applications are presented in
Section 3.
Ultrasonic Doppler or acoustic type-velocity meters are available for field use for portable and
permanent field installation. These systems are used in extremely low reversing flow conditions
or in extreme flood conditions where a current meter cannot be put in the water.
A.2.2 The International Group for Hydraulic Efficiency Measurement (IGHEM)
The IGHEM is an independent group of scientists and engineers involved in hydraulic power
plant efficiency measurements. The association is open to qualified individuals interested in
measuring those hydraulic parameters used to determine the efficiency of hydraulic machinery.
Members are expected to contribute actively to the biennial conferences of IGHEM with
discussions, presentations, or posters.
A-5
The group was formed by a merger of the former International Current Meter Group (ICMG) and
le Groupe des Practiciens de la Méthode Thermodynamique (GPMT). IGHEM was founded by
members of the ICMG group and the GPMT group in Zürich, January 31, 1995. Three meetings
have been held, in 1996, 1998, and 2000.
IGHEM brings together experts from various fields and backgrounds to discuss the latest results,
new trends, and methods in hydraulic efficiency measurement. This includes discussions of the
purpose and necessities of test standards, flow studies, instrumentation and calibration, and the
scientific study of the various methods, acoustic, acoustic scintillation, current meters, pressure-
time, and thermodynamic.
IGHEM provides exchange of experience, improvement of measuring accuracy (especially for

refurbishment projects), and technical support for groups such as those that develop and maintain
the Codes that cover hydraulic efficiency testing. These working groups, such as the Technical
Committee No. 4 of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the ASME PTC 18
committee of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), are active in reviewing
and updating the Codes.
A.3 Flow Measurement Techniques—Additional Background Material
Ultrasonic flowmetering systems provide for continuous acquisition of the flow velocity V in
open flowing waters. Two metering principles can be employed:
• The flow velocity is determined in standard mode by the differential transit-time method
• If there is a high suspended-matter load or a large proportion of oxygen in solution, the flow
velocity can be measured by the Doppler method
The combination of these two metering processes provides a high degree of reliability and,
hence, decisively improved flowmetering.
Linking the transducers to signal processors, transmitters, and appropriate software, ultrasonic
metering systems can attain a high degree of metering precision. Coupling the flow velocity with
a sensor for water level metering, it is also possible to solve for the variable flow, Q, given a
known cross-sectional area.
The measurement of discharge by ultrasonic/acoustic flowmeters in both open channels—rivers,

forebays, and tailrace, and closed conduit water passages, such as penstocks, has to be adapted to
different flow conditions and can be applied in either single or multi-path configurations.
In its most basic form, the acoustic/ultrasonic flowmeter can operate with a single pair of
transducers, measuring only one component of the velocity. Provided that a relation can be
established in another way between this measured value and the mean cross-sectional velocity,
the discharge can be appropriately computed by this simple means.
A-6
Multi-path configurations, however, provide a greater opportunity to refine the accuracy and
have, thus, been applied in situations where non-ideal plant configurations (inadequate straight
runs of penstock) are present. The multi-path system relies on averaging of flow components to
reduce errors.
Experience has shown that the following configurations for open channels and closed conduits
(see Table A-3) are applicable for acoustic (ultrasonic) flow measurement.
Table A-3
General Acoustic Flowmetering Parameters
Parameters Parameters for Best Parameters for Best Performance in

Performance in Open Channels Closed Conduits
Length Channel length straight for at least Measurement section should be a
10 times the width straight run, 0.7 times the penstock
diameter.
Cross-Section Regular cross-section over length Regular diameter, impacted by
above, flat at bottom disturbances.
Measurement section should be
anywhere from 10 X diameter to 50 X
diameter downstream of bends,
reductions, and valves.
Water Quality Low suspended solids Importance varies.
Low gas content
Depth Water level to allow for several Not applicable, but steady state is
ultrasonic paths preferable to turbulent flow regimes.
Reference: [53]
A-7
B
APPENDIX B—FLOW MEASUREMENT SERVICE AND
PRODUCT SUPPLIERS
The following Table B-1 of flow measurement service and product suppliers was compiled from
a survey of service and product suppliers that was generated from listings in:
• HRW, 2000-2001 Worldwide Hydro Directory, HCI Publications Kansas City, MO. Vol.8
Number 2. May 2000.
• Hydro Review, 2001 Industry Sourcebook, HCI Publications, Kansas City, MO. January
2001.
These company profiles were developed as part of the Technology Roundup report and were
compiled from the information available on Internet sites and from personal contacts. The list
provides a good reference for companies active in flow measurement, however, it is not intended
to be comprehensive or necessarily endorsed by EPRI.
B-1
Appendix B—Flow Measurement Service and Product Suppliers
Table B-1
Flow Measurement Service and Product Suppliers
Company Location Web Site Services and Products

Accusonic Technologies East Falmouth, MA Accusonic.com Acoustic single- and multi-path flowmeter systems for turbine
Inc. efficiency, penstock leak detection, and flow measurement.
Advanced Energy Devon, UK Yatesmeter.co.uk Pump and turbine flow measurement systems using
Monitoring Systems, Ltd. thermodynamic methods.
Alden Research Holden, MA Aldenlab.com Fluid flow engineering lab offering both field and lab services for
Laboratory, Inc. measurements of flows and efficiency testing.
ASL AQFlow Inc. Sidney, BC AQFlow.com Services and applications of the Acoustic Scintillation Flow
Measurement system for field performance testing and efficiency
monitoring.
Controlotron Hauppauge, NY Twinick@controlotron.com Clamp-on ultrasonic flowmeters.
Fluid Components San Marcos, CA Info@fluidcomponents.com Flow, level, and temperature instrumentation.
International
JBS Energy, Inc. West Sacramento, Stan@jbsenergy.com Hydrologic and hydraulic measurement, recording, and calculation
CA devices and services.
Mountain Energy Inc. Grants Pass, OR Mountain@hydropwr.com Log-it Telemetry devices and hydro consulting services.
Ott Messtechnik GmbH Kempton, Germany Ott-hydrometry.de Hydrometric measurement instruments including OTT current
& Co. KG meters and ultrasonic metering.
Polaris Group, Inc. Bloomington, MN Polarisgroupinc.com Flow measurement and engineering services for dams and rivers.
Quantum Hydrometrie Berlin, Germany Quantum-hydrometrie.de Hydrometric measurement instruments using ultrasonic flowmeters
for measurement and penstock leak detection.
Rickly Hydrological Columbus, OH Rickly.com USGS designed products for streamgaging (Price Pigmy and Type
Company AA current meters) and stage measurement equipment.
Rittmeyer Ltd. Rome, GA Rittmeyer.com Instrumentation and applications for ultrasonic flow measurement
using single- and multi-path technology in open and closed
conduits, as well as pressure and level measuring instrumentation.
Stevens Water Beaverton, OR Stevenswater.com Water level measurement devices and flowmeters that convert
Monitoring Systems, Inc. gage heights to flow rates.
Unidata America Lake Oswego, OR Unidataamerica.com Instruments related to water information data measurement and
ultrasonic Doppler instruments for computing flow rates.
B-2
Accusonic Technologies, Inc.
Contact Information:
25 Bernard E. St. Jean Drive

E. Falmouth, MA 02536
Phone: 508-495-6600
Fax: 508-495-6699
E-mail: sales@accusonic.com
Contact: Jim Walsh
Business Profile:
Accusonic multi-path flowmeter systems have been installed in over 700 penstocks and low head
intakes throughout the world. The systems are used to determine individual unit and plant
performance with an end result in improving plant efficiency. Systems have been installed in
penstocks ranging from 3.3 to 42.6 ft. (1 to 13 m) in diameter. System accuracy in most
applications is +0.5%.
Products:
Accusonic provides multiple-path acoustic (ultrasonic) flowmeters that are accepted in ASME
Power Test Code 18 and IEC Pub 41. The Accusonic 7500 Series flowmeters provide high
accuracy flow measurement in both buried and exposed penstocks. Accusonic flow measurement
systems are also used for turbine efficiency monitoring and penstock leak detection systems.
Services:
Accusonic also provides flow measurement services at facilities.
Business Activity over the past 5 years:
In addition to providing penstock and intake flow measurement systems, Accusonic has provided
flow measurement systems in over 200 river systems, with rivers up to 1,150 ft. (350 m) wide.
By using acoustic paths, the velocity at several depths is continuously measured. The river’s
velocity profile is therefore measured automatically. Simultaneous stage measurement (including
computation of the cross-sectional area) allows continuous discharge calculation by the system
electronics.
B-3
Advanced Energy Monitoring Systems Ltd. (AEMS)
The Energy Centre

Finnimore Industrial Estate
Ottery St. Mary
Devon, UK EX11 1NR
Phone: (44) (0) 1404 812294
Fax: (44) (0) 1404 812603
E-mail: info@yatesmeter.co.uk
Website: www.yatesmeter.co.uk
Contact: Maurice A. Yates
Business Profile:
AEMS’ role is to provide plant owners with independent advice on how to improve the
performance of their plant. This is achieved by monitoring the plant and identifying any shortfall
in performance. AEMS staff is experienced in dealing with large plants and are familiar with the
requirements of utilities.
Products:
Hydraulic Performance Monitor: Monitors fluid flow and hydraulic efficiency of both hydro
turbine and pumping systems. The system is based on the thermodynamic technique.
Services:
• Measurement of hydraulic performance of hydro turbine and pumping plant
• Open channel flow measurement
• On-site calibration of flowmeters
• Optimization of hydraulic systems

• Hydro turbine testing has been carried out for Mission Energy and Alstom.
• Water pumps have been tested for a large number of water undertakings in the USA, Europe,
and Southeast Asia.
• Flowmeter calibrations have been carried out for a large number of different water
undertakings.
B-4
Alden Research Laboratory, Inc.
30 Shrewsbury Street
Holden, MA 01520-1843
Phone: 508-829-6000
Fax: 508-829-5939
E-mail: nystrom@aldenlab.com
Web: www.aldenlab.com
Contact: James B. Nystrom, Ph.D., Vice President, Flow Measurement Dept.
Business Profile:
Alden’s services include field efficiency tests, index performance testing, site surveys, physical
model studies, analytic evaluations, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analyses, and
consulting to verify regulatory, contractual, or equipment performance requirements. Alden has
the expertise and facilities to calibrate, test, and develop hardware and software to minimize the
uncertainties vital to precise measurements.
Services:
Alden conducts field performance tests of turbines and pumps using several flow measurement
techniques:
• The area-velocity integration method with both pitot tubes and current meters.
• The tracer (dye) dilution method.
• The pressure-time (Gibson) method.
• The salt velocity (Allen) method.
• Calibration of index flow (Winter-Kennedy or Peck) taps is usually included during
efficiency measurements for future on-line monitoring of flow. Additional areas of field
performance testing include index and vibration tests. Alden’s expertise with turbine tests
includes acceptance tests of new units, pre-upgrade tests of old units, and tests to determine
operational conditions for maximum efficiency. Performance testing is also conducted for
pumps located throughout the U.S., as well as overseas, with sizes ranging from 5 to 200,000
hp.
Alden also conducts plant, hydrographic, and site surveys to determine equipment performance,
define existing site conditions for design purposes or model calibration, establish parameters for
CFD and physical modeling, calibrate in-place flowmeters or gauging equipment, and confirm
model test results.
B-5
Over the past five years, Alden has been involved in many activities relating to hydroelectric
plants. In fact, field measurements have been an integral part of Alden's services since its
founding in 1894, with tests originally conducted on water turbines to determine efficiencies.
This tradition has expanded over the years and now includes mapping of bottom contours and
water temperatures in lakes or rivers, measurement of currents in rivers or channels, accurate
field flow measurement, and fisheries-related monitoring/surveys.
Recent field performance tests include tracer flow measurements of two 25-MW Francis units
(McKay), and area velocity flow measurement with current meters of two 40-MW units (Hudson
Falls). Pressure-time flow measurements were conducted in support of performance tests at the
180-MW Robert Moses Niagara Plant and to calibrate the Winter-Kennedy pieziometer of
several existing units in preparation for a runner upgrade. After the runner and generator were
upgraded, flow measurements were again performed to determine turbine and overall efficiencies
and to compare the test results to the pre-upgrade conditions.
B-6
ASL AQFlow Inc.
1986 Mills Rd.

Sidney, British Columbia V8L 5Y3
Canada
Toll-free: 1-877-656-0177
Phone: 250-656-5529
Fax: 250-656-2162
Web site: www.aqflow.com
E-mail: dfissel@aqflow.com
Contact: David Fissel, President, and CEO
Business Profile:
AQFlow’s ASFM technology offers the industry a state-of-the-art accurate and cost-effective
flow measurement technology for short, rapidly converging intakes typically found at low-head
plants. For the non-uniform hydraulic conditions associated with this type of intakes, only
current meters could be used until now, and those are notoriously labor intensive and
inconvenient. Primary business activities are flow measurement for hydroelectric unit efficiency
testing, primarily in short, converging intakes of low-head plants. A secondary product/service is
open-channel flow measurement and stream flow gauging.
Products:
AQFlow’s proprietary Acoustic Scintillation Flow Meter (ASFM) is eminently suited to provide
accurate flow measurement in low-head hydroelectric plants with short, rapidly converging
intakes and accompanying difficult, non-uniform hydraulic conditions.
The ASFM uses a technique called acoustic scintillation drift, which has been used to measure
the winds in the atmosphere for over 50 years, and the currents in the oceans for 18 years. Its
first hydroelectric application occurred on the Columbia River in 1992.
In this technique, flow velocity is measured by analyzing the variations (scintillations) of sound
signals, which have passed through (and been altered by the turbulence in) the flowing water.
The total flow rate is calculated by measuring the average velocity at several pre-selected
levels and then by integrating its average horizontal component over the total cross-sectional
area of the intake.
ASFM employs pairs of arrays of acoustic transducers mounted on opposite sides of fixed or
movable support frames lowered into the intake stoplog or gate slots. This permits its use in very
short intakes, with virtually no space between the intake and the turbine. It also minimizes
the required plant downtime during installation and removal, does not require dewatering, and, in
multiple unit plants, permits repeated use without removal/reinstallation of the equipment
B-7
from/to the frame. No instruments are required in the measurement zone, which minimizes
interference with the flow, and there are no moving parts requiring maintenance and frequent
calibration.
The ASFM is, thus, well suited for measuring absolute turbine discharge, particularly for the
Kaplan, bulb, propeller, or pit units typically used in low-head plants. By obtaining accurate flow
measurement, AQFlow’s clients were able to verify efficiencies of their aging or refurbished
units, to tweak their operation to achieve optimum efficiency, and to confirm compliance with
prescribed water releases. The ASFM has also been successfully used to calibrate Winter-
Kennedy index readings, to measure the effects of fish screens and deflectors on turbine
efficiency, and to check the accuracy of the current meter measurements.
Services:
In support of sales, AQFlow provides on-site personnel training in the use of ASFM, assistance
with the first installation and measurement, and troubleshooting. The ASFM can also be leased,
in which case AQFlow will provide the equipment and personnel to assist with the installation, to
run the ASFM flow measurement and to produce a report on the results of the measurement. In
both cases, ASL AQFlow will also provide help with the frame design and construction, ranging
from a one-page design considerations document to complete design and even fabrication,
depending on customer choice.
ASL AQFlow and its parent company, ASL Environmental Sciences Inc., have provided turbine
flow measurement at the following hydroelectric plants:
2001 - The Dalles, USACE, USA, Deep Brook, Nova Scotia Power, Canada
2000 - The Dalles, USACE, Bonneville, USACE, Rocky Reach and Rock Island, Chelan County
PUD, USA
1999 - Seven Sisters, Manitoba Hydro, Canada; Wheeler, Tennessee Valley Authority, USA
Bonneville, USACE, McNary, USACE
1998 - Bonneville, USACE, McNary, USACE
1997 - Laforge-2, Hydro Quebec, Canada, Fort Patrick Henry, Tennessee Valley Authority
In addition, Hydro Quebec has used its ASFM at several of its plants from 1999 to the present.
B-8
Controlotron
155 Plant Avenue

Hauppauge, NY 11788-3899
Phone: 508-495-6600
Fax: 508-495-6699
E-mail: twinick@controlotron.com
Web: www.controlotron.com
Contact: Ted Winick
Business Profile:
Controlotron produces a line of very accurate clamp-on ultrasonic flowmeters, which can be
installed without penetration of steel penstocks, with the aid of clamp-on transducers.
Controlotron has already installed meters on pipes as large as 20 ft. (6.1 m) in diameter and
having wall thicknesses as heavy as 1 1/2 inch, with great success. Controlotron has recently
worked on an EPRI project, which utilized the same technology on pipes as small as 3/4 of an
inch in diameter.
Products:
Controlotron equipment performance is attributable to a patented wide-beam technology, which

permits accurate flow measurement, even under very extreme conditions.
For hydroelectric plants, where the flow can be in both directions, our technology performs with
the same excellent accuracy bi-directionally.
Services: No information provided.
See above.
B-9
Fluid Components International
1755 La Costa Meadows Drive

San Marcos, California 92069
Toll-free: 800-854-1993
Phone: 760-736-6169
Fax: 760-736-6250
E-mail: jaredd@fluidcomponents.com
Web: www.fluidcomponents.com
Contact: Jared DeSpain, Inside Sales Applications
Business Profile:
Fluid Components Intl (FCI) is an international company providing precision high performance
flow, level and temperature instrumentation. FCI has over 200,000 units in the field, covering the
full range of liquid, gas, and slurry process requirements since introducing its first flow
switch/monitor in 1964. FCI products support demanding processes and industries including
chemical, waste and water, oil and gas, aerospace, military, nuclear power and more. Customers
find FCI offers a broad range of instrumentation solutions, from off-the-shelf devices to custom
engineered systems.
Products: Flowmeters and flow level instrumentation
Business Activity over the past 5 years: No information provided.
B-10
JBS Energy, Inc.
311 D Street
West Sacramento, CA 95605
Phone: 916-372-0534
Fax: 916-372-1624
E-mail: stan@jbsenergy.com
Contact: Stan E. Malinky
Business Profile:
JBS Energy, Inc. is a consulting firm specializing in economics and engineering for energy
producers and consumers. JBS helps energy producers develop markets and determine the most
practical, cost-effective means of producing energy. JBS works with energy consumers to reduce
energy use and costs both at their individual facilities and for utility systems.
Founded in 1984, JBS provides expert testimony, economic, and regulatory analysis of utility
operations and rates, feasibility analysis for generation, utility systems simulation and modeling,
water resource engineering, and regulatory permitting.
JBS Instruments, a subsidiary of JBS Energy, provides hydrologic equipment and software to the
water industry throughout the world.
Products:
JBS provides both hardware and software for the Hydrologic and Hydroelectric communities.
JBS Instruments developed the AquaCalc family of computerized velocity and current meters
used to measure velocity and discharge. This equipment can be used in penstocks and in open
channels to quantify the discharge of conveyance facilities and turbines. WISKI is a hydrological
time-series software suite for storage of hydrological, mechanical, and electrical SCADA point
data in an industry standard relational database management system. The WISKI interface is
capable of both graphical and tabular analysis with export to other platforms. Data can be stored
in time steps from one minute to one day.
Services:
Primarily related to water resources:

• Hydrology
• Velocity Profiling
• Flood Measurements
• Discharge Measurements
B-11
• Stream Monitoring Programs

• Electronic Discharge Measurement Training
• Ultrasonic and Acoustical Velocity Meter Calibrations
• Hydroelectric Project Siting, Feasibility Studies, Water Rights, and Regulatory Permitting
The benefits that JBS offers include providing data quickly at month- or year-end, or upon
request. Experienced engineers, rather than technicians, oversee water projects.
JBS’ gaging services provide a complete and thorough service and, in most cases, JBS can save
the client approximately half of the cost of government services fees.
The staff at JBS has installed river gaging stations, both permanent and temporary, for the
collection of continuous discharge records for a number of proposed hydroelectric projects in
California. JBS has also assisted in the training of personnel in the use of the AquaCalc and
WISKI package to manage hydrologic records for hydroelectric project operators. JBS has
assisted operators of hydroelectric projects with clogging fish screens by collecting velocity
profile data on the face of the fish screens to assist in redesigning the intakes, brush systems, and
screens.
JBS just recently completed the installation of WISKI for Idaho Power Company located in
Boise. The hydrologic software suite will be used to collect, manage, and report their water
records to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the United States Geological Survey.
B-12
Mountain Energy, Inc.
530 N.E. “E” Street

Grants Pass, OR 97526
Phone: 541-472-8095
Fax: 541-472-8143
Web site: www.hydropwr.com
Contact: Jack Goldwasser, President
Business Profile:
Mountain Energy is a hydro consulting firm that has been providing study services and
consulting to hydro projects for about twenty years. Over the past several years, their work has
included three new projects and rehab at two larger projects. MEI currently operates and
maintains two projects in northern California (5 MW and 0.75 MW) under an O&M agreement.
Products:
Mountain Energy Inc. manufactures data logging equipment specifically designed for flow
applications. The AG100 data logger has a pulse counter as well as event and analog sensor
inputs. Pulse is the normal data type for flow sensors; however, because small hydro projects
require a state-of-the-art logger that provides data and at the same time is easy to use, MEI
developed the AG100. The logger is ideal for measuring flow in pipes, flumes, and ditches, as
well as of surface water. Log-It Telemetry also has loggers with embedded radios for remote data
collection and control.

MEI’s current business includes work in the following areas: hydroelectric development,
hydroelectric O&M, data collection services (environmental, engineering, etc.), custom telemetry
system manufacture, manufacture of Log-It Telemetry equipment (Mountain Energy's products),
and contract manufacture of printed circuit board assemblies.
B-13
OTT-Hydrometrie
Postfach 2140
87411 Kempten Germany
Phone: (49) 831 56170
Fax: (49) 831 5617209
E-mail: info@ott-hydrometry.de
Contact: Anton Felder
Business Profile:
OTT-Hydrometrie was founded in 1873, and OTT has become Germany's largest independent
producer of complete hydrometric systems. Today, ISO 9001 certifies the quality standard for
products and services and OTT, through subsidiaries and representatives, supply effective and
efficient solutions in hydrometry and meteorology to more than 100 countries around the world.
Products related to flow measurement include flow sensors, bubble gages, probes,
communication, data loggers, and radar sensors.
Products:
• Nautilus: A portable electromagnetic velocity sensor for the measurement of velocities from
0.000 to 2.5 m/s.
• OTT Current Meters C2, C20, C31: Current meters for the determination of flow velocities
(from 0.025 to 10 m/s) that are a standard for velocity measurement.
• DELPHIN/BIBER: Intelligent current meter stabilizer for use with all cable-suspended meter
devices; includes the BIBER software that calculates the flow rate on PC-based systems.
• Sonicflow: An ultrasonic metering system newly designed by OTT for continuous
acquisition of the flow velocity, v, in open flowing waters. In contrast to conventional
systems, Sonicflow offers the advantage of combining two metering principles: the flow
velocity is determined in standard mode by the differential transit time method. If there is a
high suspended-matter load, or a large proportion of oxygen in solution, Sonicflow
automatically changes over to the Doppler method, thereby ensuring reliable metering of the
flow velocity even under adverse conditions (for example, flooding). The combination of
these two metering processes provides a high degree of reliability and, hence, decisively
improved flow metering. By using an intelligent, digital signal processor (DSP), the
ultrasonic metering system, Sonicflow, attains a high degree of metering precision. The
minimum covering (water level) that is normally required over the ultrasonic transducers
when using the conventional differential transit time metering method is reduced to just a few
centimeters. Using the OTT-LOG data logger, a Sonicflow input card, and a sensor for level
metering, it is possible to determine the flow, Q, in addition to the flow velocity, v.
B-14
B-15
Polaris Group, Inc.
8200 Humboldt Ave. S., Suite 302

Bloomington, MN 55431-1433
Phone: 952-881-3156
Fax: 952-881-0023
E-mail:rvoigt@polarisgroupinc.com
Contact: Richard L. Voigt, Jr.
Business Profile:
Polaris Group performs flow measurement and related engineering analyses at dams and in the
riverine environment. Our staff has nearly 20 years of experience solving complex flow
measurement problems, using a wide variety of techniques including current meters, magnetic
velocity probes, weirs, flumes, and a variety of closed conduit meters. More recently, we have
used Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers to measure discharges where traditional methods were
impractical.
Services:
Polaris Group performs flow measurement services for open channel and closed conduit flow
applications including, but not limited to, the following:
• River and stream gaging
• Permanent and temporary stream gaging site selection
• Gate and sluiceway discharge verification
• Turbine discharge measurement
Polaris Group is a small consulting engineering firm focused in the area of water resources. Most
of our recent flow measurement activity has been performed for Minnesota Power of Duluth,
Minnesota and other clients in Minnesota. Recently, the Polaris group completed a one and a half
year long project performed to establish a regulatory required flow monitoring system for well
below the estimated cost by developing a detailed flow measurement and calibration plan and
submitting it for approval by regulatory agencies prior to beginning field measurements.
Through discussions, Polaris was able to obtain flow measurements and establish gaging stations
that not only met regulatory requirements but that also provide information needed for optimal
operation of the multi-river and reservoir system.
B-16
Quantum Hydrometrie GmbH
Zossener Straße 55,

10961 Berlin
Phone: (49) 3069 8110 0
Fax: (49) 3069 8110 99
Web site: Quantum-hydrometrie.de
Contact: Stephan Siedschlag
Business Profile:
Quantum Hydrometrie GmbH, Berlin, develops and sells hydrometric measurement solutions,
applying the ultrasonic flowmeter to the following applications:
• Liquid flow measurement in open channels
• River flow monitoring
• Flood warning
• Low-water regulation
• Irrigation channel
• Hydropower penstock measurement and leakage detection
Products:
The ultrasonic flowmeters from Quantum Hydrometrie determine the flow velocity with the
travel-time-method. Quantum Hydrometrie also has a series of ultrasonic flowmeters for open
channels and closed conduits. Modern instrumentation technology allows the adoption of
exceedingly complex path configurations, ranging from a single path or a cross-path system to an
advanced multi-path system (path length range 1 to 1000 m).
The Quantum ultrasonic flowmeters are installed as a solution to a wide range of industrial and
water resources applications. A maximum of eight transducers can be connected, forming four
single-path or two crossed-path systems. All systems operate to the same measuring principle
and are field-programmable. The systems offer a variety of display and output options to meet
customer-specific requirements.
B-17
Rickly Hydrological Company
1700 Joyce Ave.

Columbus OH 43219
Phone: 614-297-9877
Fax: 614-297-9878
E-mail: sales@rickly.com
Business Profile:
The Rickly Hydrological Company manufactures and distributes hydrological instrumentation

equipment as designed by the U.S. Geological Survey in accordance with its precise standards.
The intent is to enable hydrologists and engineers who endeavor to measure water with the best
available technology that is accurate and economically feasible. Rickly has manufactured USGS
hydrological instrumentation equipment for over 75 years.
Products:
The company offers products for:
Streamgaging
• Current meters: Type AA and USGS pygmy meters
• Meter sensing instruments
• Sounding reels and suspension equipment
• Bank-operated cableways
Stage Measurement
• Stage reference gages
• Float-type and bubbler-type instruments
• Submersible pressure transducers
• Data loggers and gaging stations
B-18
Rittmeyer, Inc., USA
100 Anderson Road

P.O. Box 5591
Rome, Georgia 30162-5591
Phone: 706-235-6190
Fax: 706-235-6763
E-mail: rittmeyersales@aol.com
Contact: Glen A. Hill, PE, Vice President
Business Profile:
Since 1904, Rittmeyer Instrumentation has developed, produced, and installed high-precision
and high-quality equipment and systems for the instrumentation of water and energy
management.
Products:
Rittmeyer Instrumentation provides instrumentation for the hydroelectric industry such as:
• Flow Measurement: by ultrasonic transit time, by single- and multi-path technology, in
closed conduits up to 40 ft. (12.2 m) in diameter and open channels up to 150 ft. (45.7 m)
wide
• Position indication by angle transmitters for position of gates, valves, and so on
• Pressure level and level measurement, by hydrostatic measurement for a wide range of
applications, with accuracies up to 0.01%FS
Recent hydro applications have been at the Salto Caxias, Brazil plant (8-path ultrasonic
flowmeter) along with many others.
B-19
Stevens Water Monitoring Systems, Inc.
5465 SW Western Avenue, Suite F

Beaverton, OR 97005
Toll-free: 1-800-452-5272
Phone: 503-469-8000
Fax: 503-469-8100
E-mail: info@stevenswater.com
Contact: Fred Holloway
Business Profile:
Stevens Water Monitoring Systems, Inc. is a recognized expert in providing quality, rugged, and
reliable environmental monitoring systems and accessories worldwide since 1911. Stevens has
introduced numerous successful products over the years for use in irrigation control, flood
forecasting, watershed management, water quality, water supply, wastewater, and related
applications. Stevens Products include data loggers, telemetry, water level instruments
(described below) including floats and staff gages, and water flowmeters. Water quality
monitoring instruments are also a specialty.
Products:
Stevens provides various options for water level measurement. Each is designed to provide
accuracy and reliability for a wide range of demanding measuring applications.
• Submersible Depth Transmitter II – a pressure transmitter with 4 to 20 mA output. Depth
ranges are available from 2.5 to 100 ft. (0.8 to 30.5 m).
• SDI-12 – a submersible water depth and temperature sensor utilizing the SDI-12 interface.
Depth ranges from 0 to 350 ft. (0 to 100 m).
• Stevens/Greenspan Pressure Sensor (PS210/310) – provides a combination of state-of-the-art
technical features.
• Ultrasonic Level Transmitter – a non-contact sensor of water level in channels, lakes, or
streams. Available in ranges of 0.33–5 ft. and 1–10 ft. (0.1–1.5 m and 0.3–3.0 m).
For measuring water flow, Stevens offers:

• The AxSys CCR Flowmeter, a microprocessor-based instrument used for monitoring,
recording, and totalizing open channel flows in water and wastewater. The unit is designed to
accept a variety of environmental sensor inputs. In flowmeter applications, the instrument is
capable of converting the water gage height reading from a water level sensor into an
instantaneous flow rate value, and then accumulating the discharged flow totals over a user-
specified interval. An integral 6-inch diameter circular chart provides continuous on site
recording of flow rates or any optional parameter. The AxSys CCR offers a large internal
B-20
memory capacity (60,000 readings) and an even larger memory capacity in a removable
Stevens Data Card (120,000 readings), which can be brought in from the field and read into a
computer at the office. The AxSys CCR can also be an easy functional replacement to the
Stevens 61R or 61M flowmeters by simply configuring the AxSys CCR with a float pulley
shaft assembly and mounting bracket.
• The AxSys MPU is frequently programmed as a flowmeter that will generate and record
reports on a periodic basis. Data includes a header, non-resetable totalizer reading, elapsed
flow, minimum and maximum flow rates and the times at which they occurred, and the
average flow rate over the specified period. Other optional features include chemical pacing
and sampler triggering.
No information provided.
B-21
Unidata America
17414 Boones Ferry Road

Lake Oswego, OR 97035
Tel: 503-697-3570
Fax: 503-697-3571
E-mail: Mick@UnidataAmerica.com
Contact: Mick Merrick
Business Profile:
Unidata is a global environmental products and services company with 25 years of research and
development into sensor technology and data storage systems. Unidata specializes in the design,
manufacture, supply, and support of environmental measurement, monitoring, and recording
systems. Unidata America has provided hydroelectric plants with a variety of flow measurement
equipment.
Products:
Unidata provides a wide range of instruments for applications that require water information data
measurement and logging for resource managers, researchers, and the industry. Any physical
parameter that can be detected electronically, such as those related to hydropower applications
(dissolved oxygen, evaporation, pressure, rainfall, temperature, water flow, and water depth), can
be measured.
Primary related products are:

• STARFLOW Ultrasonic Doppler Flow System
The Ultrasonic Doppler Instrument is a compact, easy to use system for measuring the velocity
and depth of water in rivers and streams, open drainage channels, and large pipes. It is suitable
for use in a wide range of water qualities ranging from sewerage and wastewater to clean
streams, potable water, and even seawater. The instrument measures forward and reverse flow
conditions and can be programmed to compute flow rate and total flow in pipes and open
channels.
The STARFLOW unit consists of a combination of an ultrasonic transducer assembly (profiled

to reduce flow disturbance) and signal processing electronics. It is designed to be placed at (or
near) the bottom of the water channel for upward looking measurement. A single cable connects
the instrument to a 12V dc power source.
Water velocity is measured by the ultrasonic Doppler principle, which relies on suspended
particles or small air bubbles in the water to reflect the ultrasonic detector signal. Water depth is
gauged by a hydrostatic pressure sensor, referenced to atmospheric pressure through the vented
B-22
power and signal cable. Water temperature can also be measured. Temperature is used to adjust
for the change in velocity due to speed of sound and is also available for logging. Depth range is
0 to 16.4 ft. (0 to 5 m), with velocities to 16.4 fps (5 mps).
• Precision Water Level Instruments: used to precisely measure water levels in and around
hydroelectric plants. They can achieve an accuracy of 0.01 ft. (0.3 mm).
• STARLOG Data Loggers and Systems: sensors are connected to data loggers to provide
monitoring, recording, and measuring of a variety of parameters such as temperature,
dissolved oxygen, and ph.
No information provided.
B-23
Target: SINGLE USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS IS A LEGALLY BINDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH
Hydropower Operations INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY BEFORE REMOVING THE WRAPPING MATERIAL.
and Asset Management
BY OPENING THIS SEALED PACKAGE YOU ARE AGREEING TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO
THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT,PROMPTLY RETURN THE UNOPENED PACKAGE TO EPRI AND THE PURCHASE PRICE WILL
BE REFUNDED.
1. GRANT OF LICENSE
EPRI grants you the nonexclusive and nontransferable right during the term of this agreement to use this package only for your own
benefit and the benefit of your organization.This means that the following may use this package: (I) your company (at any site owned
or operated by your company); (II) its subsidiaries or other related entities; and (III) a consultant to your company or related entities,
if the consultant has entered into a contract agreeing not to disclose the package outside of its organization or to use the package for
its own benefit or the benefit of any party other than your company.
This shrink-wrap license agreement is subordinate to the terms of the Master Utility License Agreement between most U.S. EPRI
member utilities and EPRI.Any EPRI member utility that does not have a Master Utility License Agreement may get one on request.
2. COPYRIGHT
About EPRI This package, including the information contained in it, is either licensed to EPRI or owned by EPRI and is protected by United States
and international copyright laws. You may not, without the prior written permission of EPRI, reproduce, translate or modify this
EPRI creates science and technology solutions for package, in any form, in whole or in part, or prepare any derivative work based on this package.
the global energy and energy services industry. U.S. 3. RESTRICTIONS
electric utilities established the Electric Power You may not rent, lease, license, disclose or give this package to any person or organization, or use the information contained in this
package, for the benefit of any third party or for any purpose other than as specified above unless such use is with the prior written
Research Institute in 1973 as a nonprofit research permission of EPRI.You agree to take all reasonable steps to prevent unauthorized disclosure or use of this package.Except as specified
consortium for the benefit of utility members, their above, this agreement does not grant you any right to patents, copyrights, trade secrets, trade names, trademarks or any other
intellectual property, rights or licenses in respect of this package.
customers, and society. Now known simply as EPRI,
4.TERM AND TERMINATION
the company provides a wide range of innovative This license and this agreement are effective until terminated.You may terminate them at any time by destroying this package. EPRI has
products and services to more than 1000 energy- the right to terminate the license and this agreement immediately if you fail to comply with any term or condition of this agreement.
Upon any termination you may destroy this package, but all obligations of nondisclosure will remain in effect.
related organizations in 40 countries. EPRI’s
5. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
multidisciplinary team of scientists and engineers
NEITHER EPRI,ANY MEMBER OF EPRI,ANY COSPONSOR, NOR ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ACTING ON BEHALF
draws on a worldwide network of technical and OF ANY OF THEM:
business expertise to help solve today’s toughest (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE
OF ANY INFORMATION,APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS PACKAGE, INCLUDING
energy and environmental problems.
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR
EPRI. Electrify the World INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY’S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS
PACKAGE IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER’S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS PACKAGE OR ANY INFORMATION,APPARATUS,
METHOD, PROCESS OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS PACKAGE.
6. EXPORT
The laws and regulations of the United States restrict the export and re-export of any portion of this package, and you agree not to
export or re-export this package or any related technical data in any form without the appropriate United States and foreign
government approvals.
7. CHOICE OF LAW
This agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California as applied to transactions taking place entirely in California
between California residents.
8. INTEGRATION
You have read and understand this agreement, and acknowledge that it is the final, complete and exclusive agreement between you
and EPRI concerning its subject matter, superseding any prior related understanding or agreement. No waiver, variation or different
terms of this agreement will be enforceable against EPRI unless EPRI gives its prior written consent, signed by an officer of EPRI.
© 2002 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights

reserved. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered
service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric
Power Research Institute, Inc.
Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America
1004429
EPRI • 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 • USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • askepri@epri.com • www.epri.com

Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities:

Achieving Efficiency, Compliance,

Please read the License Agreement

M AT E the Wrapping Material.

Final Report, January 2002

EPRI Project Manager

(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)

(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER

ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT

This report was prepared by

This report describes research sponsored by EPRI.

Flow Measurement at Hydro Facilities: Achieving Efficiency, Compliance, and Optimal

1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW..................................................................................... 1-1

2 UNDERSTANDING FLOW MEASUREMENT...................................................................... 2-1

3 ACHIEVING EFFICIENT OPERATION................................................................................ 3-1

3.2.1 Current Meters...................................................................................................... 3-4

4 FLOW MEASUREMENT: COSTS, BENEFITS, AND LESSONS LEARNED ...................... 4-1

5 FURTHER APPLICATIONS OF FLOW MEASUREMENT................................................... 5-1

5.1.2 FPL Energy Maine—Real-Time Hydro Operations Model..................................... 5-4

6 THE FUTURE OF FLOW MEASUREMENT FOR HYDRO APPLICATIONS ....................... 6-1

7 REFERENCES AND RESOURCES..................................................................................... 7-1

A APPENDIX A—FLOW MEASUREMENT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ...........................A-1

B APPENDIX B—FLOW MEASUREMENT SERVICE AND PRODUCT SUPPLIERS ...........B-1

Alden Research Laboratory, Inc. ........................................................................................ B-5

Figure 4-1 Benefits of Efficient Operation—Cherokee Plant, TVA ........................................... 4-7

Table 2-1 Flow Measurement Methods ................................................................................... 2-2

1.1 What Is the Value of Flow Measurement at a Hydro Plant?

Introduction and Overview

1.2 Why Innovate?

Introduction and Overview

1.3 Flow Measurement as a Basis for Improved Performance

Introduction and Overview

1.3.1 Flow Measurement for Improving Efficiency

1.3.2 Flow Measurement for Optimization Models

1.3.3 Flow Measurement for Compliance and Stewardship

1.4 Strategies for Assessing Flow Measurement Improvements

Introduction and Overview

1.5 Report Organization

Section 7, “References and Resources,” provides background information.

Appendix A, “Flow Measurement Additional Information,” provides supporting information on

Appendix B, “Flow Measurement Service and Product Suppliers,” provides additional

2.1 Flow Measurement Techniques

Understanding Flow Measurement

Method Description Applicability Advantages Expected Accuracy

Understanding Flow Measurement

Table 2-1 cont.

Method Description Applicability Advantages Expected Accuracy

Understanding Flow Measurement

2.1.1 Measurements by Current Meters

2.1.2 Measurements by Pressure-Time

2.1.3 Measurements by Tracer Dilution

Understanding Flow Measurement

2.1.4 Measurements by Transit Time

2.1.5 Measurements by Acoustic Signals

2.1.6 Relative Measurements of Flow

Understanding Flow Measurement

2.1.7 Measurements by Other Methods

2.2 Developing Protocols for Efficiency Testing at Hydro Plants

2.2.1 The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

2.2.2 IEC Publication 41 (1991)

Understanding Flow Measurement

2.3 Flow Measurement Options

3.1 Testing Efficiency of Hydroelectric Units

Achieving Efficient Operation