See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301680107

THE BENEFITS OF CFD MODELLING IN DESALINATION PLANT DESIGN AND

OPERATION

Conference Paper · April 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 169

4 authors, including:

Ross Jeffrey Haywood Matt White

Hatch Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Australia Hatch
20 PUBLICATIONS   343 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ross Jeffrey Haywood on 28 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THE BENEFITS OF CFD MODELLING IN
DESALINATION PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION
Ross Haywood Ph.D.1, Lukas de Roo 1, Matthew White 1, Thomas Hamilton 2
1. Hatch Associates Pty Ltd, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
2. AdelaideAqua Pty Ltd, Lonsdale, SA, Australia
ABSTRACT
Computational Fluid Dynamic Modelling (CFD) has
been used in the design and commissioning of the
Adelaide Desalination Plant. CFD modelling
provided valuable insight into the fluid behaviour
within the Intake Pump Station (IPS) and helped to
provide a robust and efficient final design.
Subsequent measurements in the actual operating
facility have provided experimental data to validate
and improve the modelling.
During commissioning, CFD was also used to
retrofit quickly and cost effectively the Treated
Water Tanks (TWT’s) to ensure adequate
residence time and mixing. These examples
illustrate the benefits of CFD in both the design and
comissioning/early-operation of large desalination
facilities.
INTRODUCTION
In 2009 SA Water chose AdelaideAqua for the
design and construction of the A$1.8-billion
desalination plant to be built at Port Stanvac, South
Australia. The project was to provide a climate-
independent source of freshwater capable of
supplying 50 percent of the annual water needs of
the city of Adelaide, South Australia. The plant, with
a capacity of 300 million litres per day, is among the
largest desalination plants in the world.
The Hatch/SMEC Joint Venture team formed the
design group for the AdelaideAqua consortia with a
scope of work including all architectural, civil, and
structural design associated with the seawater
intake and outfall, the intake pumping station and
connecting pipelines. CFD modelling was
recognized as a valuable tool for design guidance
and was integrated into the design process for the
IPS.
CFD IN DESIGN: INTAKE PUMP STATION
Description
The basic IPS system, shown in Figure 1, consists
of the inlet tunnel, inlet wet well, screening
chamber, suction header wet-well, and suction
headers. Ocean water enters the inlet tunnel
(2820mm x 2820mm) with a flow rate of up to
755ML/day. Sea water proceeds though the inlet
wet well and is divided into three chambers
containing band screens (conveyor screens) which
remove unwanted solid material. The salt water
then enters the suction header wet well. Finally,
twelve pumps, two small variable speed pumps,
(1267 m3/h each) and ten large pumps, (2534 m3/h
each, of which six are variable speed), draw the
fluid from the suction header wet well, through the
suction headers, and discharge to the downstream
desalination system. The average velocity in the
large 1830mm diameter suction headers is
1.75m/s, corresponding to a Reynolds number of
3.75x106.
CFD Model development
CFD modeling was used to simulate the fluid
behaviour inside the suction header wet well and
suction headers for different flow configurations
including a range of tide heights, and operating
screen/pump configurations. From a design
perspective the most “challenging” operational case
corresponds to the lowest tide height, only the
outside screens in operation, and all pumps
operating at maximum flow.
Figure 1: Inlet Pump Station Geometry
Free-surface and sub-surface vortices entering the
pumps and entraining air were a major
consideration throughout the design cycle.
Construction costs were strongly affected by the
size of the IPS cabin meaning that the suction
header wet well had to be compact. This made the
design complex with many different CFD
geometries being investigated. The design cycle
was iterative and the hydraulic system layout
evolved until a feasible design with acceptable
performance was achieved.
The acceptance criterion for the IPS was adopted
from the American National Standard Institute
publication ANSI/HI 9.8 – 1998. The criterion
outlines recommendations for free-surface and sub-
surface vortices and swirl-angle/velocity-profiles at
pump entry.
Standard CFD modelling techniques were used
including the development of geometric solid
models in CAD, generation of a computational
mesh, solution of the governing equations and post-
processing of computed results. The technical basis
was the well established finite-volume based
method for modelling of high Reynolds number
flows solving the Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes
(RANS) equations with a two equation (k-epsilon)
turbulence model. The ANSYS CFX software
package was used for all simulations.
CFD Model validation
Actual physical modelling at 1/7th scale performed
by Hydrotec Ltd at their facilities in Leeds, UK was
also part of the design effort and included
essentially the same domain as the CFD model (a
portion of the suction header was omitted in the
Pitot tube measurements were taken directly
upstream of the inlets of Pump 1 and Pump 2, as
well as inside Inlet Header 1 and 2. To validate the
CFD model, the experimental measurements at
these locations were compared to predictions from
the CFD under similar flow conditions.
Comparison of the experiment measurements and
CFD model predictions at the Pump 1 inlet along
the main vertical and horizontal axes are shown in
Figure 4. The agreement between computational
predictions and experimental measurements was
generally very good at the pump inlets. Both the
CFD and physical modelling suggested that the
flow presentation at pump inlets was satisfactory
with no significant velocity defects or pre-swirl.
Both the CFD and physical modelling suggested
some benefit could be realized by modifying the 90-
degree T junction (using a mitered or finite radius
bend) where each pump intake branches off from
the main suction header. Unfortunately, the
significant constraints on available space made this
impossible in the final design.
Pump 1 (A and E)
Fine Mesh Physical Model

experiments). Detailed measurements of the mean 2.50

flow velocity were taken just downstream of each

2.00
bandscreen and at the pump inlets. Figures 2 and
3 show the extent of the physical model and the
Velocity (m/s)

1.50
measurement locations respectively.
1.00

0.50 Vertical axis

0.00
A1 A2 A3 A4 E4 E3 E2 E1
Location

Pump 1 (C and G)
Fine Mesh Physical Model
2.50

2.00
Velocity (m/s)

1.50

1.00

0.50
Horizontal axis
0.00
C1 C2 C3 C4 G4 G3 G2 G1
Location

Figure 4: Comparison of CFD predictions and

measurements from the physical model at Pump 1
inlet (vertical and horizontal axes).

Figure 3: Measurement locations on 1/7th scale

physical model at band screen outlets (top) and
pump inlets (bottom)
 Figure 2: Extent of the IPS Physical model at 1/7th scale
IPS model predictions and design guidance
Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the manner in which
the CFD investigation influenced the design
cycle for the IPS.
Figure 5: Streamlines in vertical plane just
upstream of the suction header 1 inlet for
original and modified designs.
In Figure 5 it can be seen that the original
design concept, using a raised floor section
between the suction header pipes, was
contributing to swirling flow in the inlet headers.
By modifying the design to utilise a flat bottom
(lower half of the figure) this swirling was nearly
eliminated.
Figure 6: Streamlines at fluid surface in the
vicinity of Bandscreen A.
Similarly, consideration of the streamlines at the
fluid surface through Bandscreen A showed a
significant recirculation forming just above the
main wet well suction header 1 inlet (Figure 6).
This posed a significant risk of generating a
surface vortex and ultimately of drawing air into
the suction header. Because spatial constraints
made it impossible to develop a design to
eliminate this vortex, the final design provided
benching above the inlet to the suction headers
to mitigate this potential problem.
Influence of Bandscreens
While it was generally true that for most of the
IPS the CFD predictions and 1/7th scale physical
model measurements showed good agreement,
significant disparity was noted in the region just
downstream of the bandscreens as shown in
Figure 7.
The CFD model developed for the original
analysis used a simplified treatment of the
bandscreens based on a porous sub-domain
within the entire bandscreen chamber and this
was judged to be a possible contributor to the
observed differences. Similarly, the physical
model was constrained to represent the
bandscreens using a porous plate with scaled
apertures and it was unclear whether this
faithfully represented the hydraulic resistance of
the full-scale bandscreen. Further investigations
were required.
Velocity Profile (Screen A, Column 1)
Fine Mesh Physical Model
A The ADV was positioned vertically at the end of
B Bandscreen B outlet. An underwater camera
Location
C relative position of the ADV in relation to the
D
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Pitot Velocity (m/s)
Figure 7. Comparison of CFD predictions and
measurements from the physical model at
Screen A, Column 1)
Full Scale tests
To verify the CFD and physical model
predictions of the final design and to improve the
understanding of the fluid behaviour and the
predictive capabilities of the CFD model around
the bandscreens a plant trial to collect
measurements at full scale was undertaken.
Full scale hydraulic testing was completed over
a five day period within the Intake Pump Station
(IPS) suction header wet well.
The goal of the testing was to understand
precisely the fluid flow behaviour at the
bandscreen outlets and to determine whether
the physical model or the CFD model better
predicted the full scale behaviour and (assuming
the physical model was superior) whether the
treatment of Bandscreens could be improved in
the CFD model. Access for test equipment was
limited to Bandscreen B due to the presence of
vortex suppression benching installed above
Bandscreens A and C. The test equipment was
comprised of three components:
 Fixed support tower running 16 meters
from bottom of the wet well up through
an access port
 A mobile carriage with deployment arm
for positioning of the measurement
equipment vertically and radially
 An Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter (ADV)
instrument (Nortek Vector)
The ADV is used to measure 3D velocity
components in water flows where a distinct and
small sampling volume is required. The sensor
utilizes a pair of acoustic pulses with a known
time lag to determine a Doppler induced phase
shift. This measured phase shift allows for an
accurate determination of the fluid velocity by
scaling with the speed of sound in (salt) water.
the deployment carriage arm and lowered into
the wet well to a specific elevation in front of the
and two lasers were used to determine the
bandscreen outlet. Figure 8 shows the test set-
up.
2
Figure 8: Test apparatus
The ADV was cycled through a series of 30
array points; 5 angular positions at each of 6
elevations. The carriage geometry and
measurement array were determined such that
the measurement points would be as close as
possible to the measurement plane used in the outlet located at the bottom periphery. A large
physical testwork (as previously shown in Figure concrete deflector block was place in the tank
3.) above the bottom inlet ostensibly to deflect the
incoming flow away from the outlet.
Data was collected for 30 seconds at each point
and post-processed to transform the X and Y Deflector
velocity components of the ADV to the global Block
coordinate system. Measurements were taken
Outlet Inlet
under several different flow scenarios by varying
the suction header flow rates and the number of
operating bandscreens.

On the basis of the full-scale test measurements

the CFD model was improved through a more
rigorous treatment of the band-screen geometry
using a thin porous domain to simulate the
actual screen itself. In addition, details of the
screen outlet and penstock were more precisely Overflow
modelled geometrically. As seen in Figure 9,
the improved model showed good agreement
with the measurements taken at full scale.
Figure 10. Treated Water Tank, as-built
Both the original CFD and the 1/7th scale geometry
physical models of the IPS simulated the intake
with the penstock in a fully retracted position
which, as it turns out, is not consistent with the CFD Model development
actual operation. At normal tide levels the As with the intake system, standard CFD
penstock is partially submerged, forcing the flow modeling methodologies were used to simulate
through the bottom portion of the bandscreen. the fluid behaviour inside the treated water
As shown in Figure 9, under normal operation tanks. In all cases the steady-state flow field
the flow demonstrates a significant wake was initially computed and “frozen”.
downstream of the submerged penstock; a Subsequently the transient solution of the tracer
feature that is not apparent in Figure 7. concentration was computed, based on the
steady-state (“frozen”) flow field.

CFD Model Validation

No data were available to validate the CFD
model prior to the investigation and due to the
very short time available there was no
opportunity to gather actual field data to validate
the model. Fortunately, past experience has
provided confidence in the predictive capabilities
of the ANSYS CFX software for this class of
problem provided careful attention is paid in
developing the computational mesh.

Analysis and suggested modifications

Figure 11 shows the fluid streamlines in the “as-
built” treated water tank. Significant short
circuiting from inlet to outlet was found to occur,
Figure 9. Comparison of CFD predictions leading to an inadequate residence-time
(improved model) and measurements from the distribution for the tank system. Because the
actual IPS Screen B, Column 2) inlet flow is not accurately directed tangentially,
the full tank volume is not used effectively and a
dead-zone develops along the outer wall
CFD IN OPERATION: TREATED WATER opposite the tank outlet.
TANKS

Description of the Treated Water Tanks

Each of the treated water tanks as originally
designed, shown schematically in Figure 10,
consisted of large cylindrical tanks with inlet and
 Dead Zone
The changes were effective in providing an
improved flow field and residence time
distribution as demonstrated by the computed
tracer concentration curve shown in Figure 13.

Figure 11. Treated Water Tank, flow Figure 13. Treated Water Tank, computed tracer
streamlines, as-built geometry. concentration at tank outlet, modified geometry.

On the basis of the CFD model investigation,

several key modifications to the tank were
developed. The first was to relocate the tank The predicted performance of the as-built and
exit to the centre of the tank. Assuming a large modified tank for operation under low and high-
scale swirling motion as the fundamental flow flow scenarios are given in Table 1. Since the
configuration, this allows the best use of the implementation of the proposed modifications
tank volume and should produce the greatest the TWT’s have been able to achieve
mean residence time. To make this modification performance targets consistently.
cost-effectively a system of concrete culverts
(square section) were lowered in to the tank and
Table 1: Computed results for as-built and
arranged to bring the effective inlet to the tank
modified Treated Water Tank
bottom centre. The second key modification
involved the deflector block, which clearly was Config. Case ~First Mean T10/T
not effective in directing the inlet flow. To Tracer Residence
promote tangential flow, deflector plates were
Time
added to the block along the inner face
extending upwards and outwards. The
modifications and their effect on the fluid As-Built Low 53 mins -
streamlines can be seen in Figure 12. Flow
Outlet
Modified Low 4.5 hrs
Flow

As-Built High 9 mins 3.0 hrs 0.16

Flow

Modified High 24 mins 3.3 hrs 0.28

Flow

T10 = time at which 10% of the tracer into the system has exited the outlet
T = Theoretical mean residence time (Tank Volume/Volume Flow Rate)

Deflector plates added

Figure 12. Treated Water Tank, flow

streamlines, modified geometry.
 CONCLUSIONS

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has been

shown to be a valuable tool in the design and
comissioning of large desalination facilities.

In the design phase, CFD was used to develop

a robust and efficient intake system with minimal
flow recirculation and very low levels of pre-swirl
at pump inlets. A detailed program of full scale
testwork measuring the flow field around the
intake band screens has been effective in
improving CFD modelling capabilities for large
intake structures.

During commissioning, CFD was used to

engineer a retrofit of the treated water tanks in
order to meet strict residence time requirements.
An understanding of the basic flow field led to
the rapid development of cost effective retrofits
to improve the residence time in the tanks.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to express their gratitude to

Hydrotec Consultants (UK) Ltd for permission to
reference their experimental results and to
AdelaideAqua for their assistance with trials
performed at the Adelaide Desalination Plant
during June 2013 and for their permission to
publish this paper.

View publication stats