You are on page 1of 173

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HYDROPOWER TRONDHEIM/NORWAY 130 JUNE - 2 JULY 1997

Hydropower '97

Edited by

E.BRdcH & D.K.LYSNE

The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

N.FLATAB0

Norwegian Electric Power Research Institute, Trondheim, Norway

E.HELLAND-HANSEN

Norconsult International AS, Sandvika, Norway

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HYDROPOWER TRONDHEIM/NORWAY 130 JUNE - 2 JULY 1997 Hydropower

A.A. BALKEMA/ROTTERDAMI BROOKFIELD I 1997

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HYDROPOWER TRONDHEIM/NORWAY 130 JUNE - 2 JULY 1997 Hydropower

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, FlatabfJ & Helland-Hansen (eds)© 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 54108886

Table of contents

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, FlatabfJ & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 54108886 Table of contents
 

Preface

Xli

Acknowledgements

XN

Organization

XV

 

1 Hydropower in the environmental context

Application and comparison of computermodelsfor quantifying impactsof river regulation on fish habitat

3

KAlfredsen, WMarchand, T.H.Bakken & A Harby

Dulyn/Eigiau water transfer project- Integration of environmental issues

11

I

V. Baxendale

Planning and designof desilting basins in Himalayas - A casestudy

17

1.Chandrashekhar & A Rengaswamy

Environmental aspectsof theLowerKihansi Hydropower Project, Tanzania

23

IH.Gerstle, S.L.Mhaville & I Lindemark .

:~

TheEIA process: A multi-dimensional perspective

33

 

E. Helland-Hansen

 

Economic aspectsof removalof sediment from reservoirs

39

 

T.Jacobsen

 

Hydropower and environment: Decision making in Norway

47

HiKaasa Weir construction as environmental mitigation in Norwegian hydropower schemes

51

1.H.L'Abee-Lund & IE.Brittain

A framework for a 3D numerical modelfor hydropower reservoir waterquality

55

. arameters, evaluation, discharge, costsof construction

,

.

';'it'\

61

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, FlatabfJ & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 54108886 Table of contents

~/;':-;:j'

N R B Olsen

..

Fish bypass charmels: Desi and operation

B.Pelikan

,'~'1!.'~/!; ~

v

Hydropower projects and environmental impact analysis

. 67

5. Rajani

The proposed controversial Upper Kotmale Hydro Power Project in Sri Lanka and its environmental and technical aspects

73

NRupasinghe

Environmental issues block hydroelectric project: A case study of Baspa-I Hydroelectric Project

79

R.CSharma, S.P.Bansal & Y.Attri

Austria's hydropower and its importance to the environment

85

W Steininger

Split & settle - A new concept for underground desanders

95

RStt/Jle

 

First world development in a third world environment: The challenges and solutions to environmental impact mitigation during construction phases of hydropower projects in Tanzania, East Africa

105

P.A.McCauley Terhell

. Hydropower development in harmony with environment

111

 

NVisvanathan & UBhat

Hydro power and environment problems in Lithuania

119

 

IVycius

.

Neelum-Jhelum hydroelectric project - Environmentally sound hydropower

125

D.AWright & MAMalhi

Resettlement methods at Lianhua Hydropower Station of China

133

 

YongZhao

 

The Shi Sanling pumped storage power plant and its environment

137

ZhaoZheng, Liang Hai-Bo & WuXiao-Feng

Environmental issues of Three Gorges Project

141

 

DexiangZhu

 

2

Hydropower in mixed systems

Coordinated operation of a hydrothermal power system: The case of Nepal

153

D.B.Basnyat & AD.Gupta

Game model for optimizing a river regulation plan

161

Qiguang Chen & Changming Wang

Temperature dependency of demand in mixed hydro-thermal systems

167

G.LDoorman & B.Mo

Norway: Europe's pumped-storage system -Necessary modifications of power plants

173

A Elstrom

VI

The value of hydropower importinto a thermal system

181

P.B.Eriksen & 1 Pedersen

Long to short term operationplanningand modelling of hydro thermal power systems

187

B.A Flechner & H Wolter

Portfolio management in a deregulated hydropower based electricitymarket

197

S.-E.Fleten, WT.Ziemba & S.WWaliace

Model experiment of steel lining and reinforced concrete back penstock in the Three-Gorge Hydropower Station

205

Xiong De-yan, Fu Yi-shu, Ma Shan-ding, Gong Guo-zhi, WuHan-ming, Yang Xue-tang &YangYao

A case of hydro scheduling with a stochastic price model 211

A Gjelsvik, MB.Belsnes & MHaland

Neural network based simulationtool for improving the control of hydro cascade system

219

R.Golob, D'Grgic & T.Stokelj

Stochasticoptimization of weeklygeneration schedules: Solutionof the hydraulic subproblemswith interior point methods

227

I-P.Goux, A Renaud, S.Brignol &l-CCulioli

Analysison selection of pumped storageplant in

North China

235

Liang Hai-bo, Gu Zhao-qi, Ma Ji-ming & Zhang

Ming

Benefitof capacity expansionin hydropower stations in view of power exchange contracts and transmissiongrid utilization

239

KS.Hornnes, O.S.Grande & T.G.Borg

The challenge of hydro-thermalschedulingin a deregulatedpower market regime 245

A Johannesen

Incorporationof thermal stochasticelements into a hydro-thermalmodel

251

CJfjJrgensen &HF.Ravn

An optimization model for regionalgeneration scheduling at Hydro-Quebec

259

Ll.afond

Tuningthe planning chain of hydroelectric systems

267

CL Correa de So, Jr & CLyra Filho

Evaluating hydro expansion or refurbishmentin a deregulatedelectricity market

271

A Haugstad, HMo & MBelsnes

Integratinglong- and short-termmodels for hydro scheduling

279

B.Mo, A Haugstad & Q.B.Fosso

Estimation of the economical and operational impacts of a HVDC-link between Norway and a continental power system

287

T.1Larsen, S.Niefien & HIHaubrich

Dailygeneration planning of a hydrodominated hydrothermalsystem

293

O'Nilsson & L.S6der

VII

Stochastic hydrothermal scheduling in a competitive environment

301

M

V. R Pereira & N.M Campod6nico

V.

Effects on thermal power systems in coordination with hydropower systems

309

 

SiSather

Advantages and disadvantagesin exchange of power between a hydro- and a wind-dominated electricity supply system

317

P.Meibom, T.Svendsen & B.S¢rensen

 

Maximizing the profit of hydro generation when taking into account the extra costs of co-generation with thermal power

323

LVinnogg

 

Experiences from the Norwegian deregulation experiment

327

LWangensteen & 0. Rismark

 

Integration of river water temperature constraints within real time operation of hydroplants

333

RWelt, S.Hachem & R.Kahawita

 

Dynamic models for real time management of hydroplants

341

S.Hachem, AG.Hammadia, RWelt & MBreton

 

3

Dam safety and risk analysis

Performance as an indicator of the safety of arch dams with special reference to the wide spanned arch dam Sta. Maria

349

P.Beyeler, WHauenstein, P.Lier & B.Otto

 

A role for risk assessment in dam safety management

359

D.S.Bowles, LR.Anderson & T.RGlover

 

Experience of failure mode, effect and criticality analysis on UK hydropower schemes

369

CBeak, lW.Findlay &D.LAikman

 

Some problems discussed in design of the Three Gorges Project

377

Gu Zhao-Qi, Peng Shou-Zhuo, Cai Jun-Mei, Ma Ji-Ming, Zhang Ming, Liang Hai-Bo & Guo Jian-Jun

Stability analysis of rock foundation of a plant dam section .

383

Zhang Ming, Peng Shou-Zhuo & GuZhao-Qi

 

Credibility and defensibilityof dam safety risk analyses

387

D.N.D.Hartford & G.MSalmon

 

Evaluating the probability of failure of an earth dam by seismically induced liquefaction

395

D.N.D.Hartford, K Y.Lum, M K Lee & R.A Stewart

Rehabilitation of the intake structures at the VerseDam, Germany

405

CHeitefuss &H-J.Kny

 

Incorporating risk analysis in dam emergency planning

413

LJenssen

VII'

Mohale CFRD, design considerations

 

419

P.Johannesson, CGratwick & S.Nthalw

 

Risk analyses of three Norwegianrockfill dams

 

431

P.MJohansen, s.GVick & CRikartsen

 

Dam safety legislation and guidelines - A UK. perspective

443

lP.Millmore & T.AJohnston

Seismic risk analysis of concretegravity dams - Problems and solutions

451

D. S. Kisliakov

Numerical modelling of2-dimensionaldam-break flow

 

459

1 P. Laasonen

Ice in spillways in connection with dam safety

 

467

LLia

Hydrodynamic forces from steep waves in rivers

 

473

A Levoll

Large scale model test on the hydraulic properties of differenttypes of inlets to the penstock

481

Ma Jiming & Liu Dechao

Hydraulic prototype observationof Geheyan Hydropower Station

487

Ning Tingjun, Cheng Yuanqing & Wang Shipeng

 

Dam safety and risk analysis- Experience of E.S.B. Ireland'

493

lD.O'Keeffe

A 3-dimensional numerical modelfor determination of spillwaycapacity

501

N.R.B.Olsen & HMKjellesvig

 

Visco-plastic analysis for the lock slope of the Three-Gorge Project

507

Peng Shou-Zhuo & Guo Jian-Jun

 

Meadowbank Dam spillway review- A case study in the use of risk analysis and non-structural solutions

. 513

LPolglase

A new approach to probable maximumflood studies

 

521

lD.Cattanach,

& GMSalmon

Estimating the magnitude and probability of extreme floods

531

GM.Salmon, lv.Q.Chin & V.Plesa

.

The dam safety business

539

N.P.Robins & GA Weller

The hydraulicproblems existing in Xiaolangdihydraulic project

545

T.Xiang, B.Wu, lMCai, lMFen & lv.HYarig

 

Parameteruncertaintyin modellingdam breach and its flood

551

lX.'LYang

IX

4

Tunnelling and underground works

Developmentof tunnellingtechnology in Nepal by use of local resources

563

P. P.Adhikari

A new method for in situ determinationof the roughnesscoefficient of the hydropowerplant tunnels

575

P.Boeriu & V.Doandes

Hydraulic jacking tests for unlined high pressure tunnels

581

E.Broch, T.S.Dahl¢ & S.E.Hansen

Ertan hydroelectric project:Experiences during construction

589

Qian Yang, P.K.Edvardsen &K.ICarstens

Rehabilitationin the unlinedrock tunnels of NedreRessaga after 40 years of operation

597

T.Carstens, S. E. Hansen & B.Undrum

Shotcrete-linedhydropowertunnels

605

S.Elfman

Optimaldesign of hydropower plants

611

  • 1 Eliasson, P.Jensson & G. Ludvigsson

Monitoringsurvey and feedback analysisof underground powerhouse ofMing Tombs pumped storage plant

619

Liang Hai-Bo, Gu Zhao-Qi, Zhang Ming & MaJi-Ming

TBM-tunnellingat Sauda PowerProject

623

RMoe, RHolen,

E.D.Johansen & B.Aspen

Rebuildingof the 70 years old Nore 1 PowerPlant

631

  • 1 Hope, APalmstr¢m &KFinnerud

Rock mechanicalengineeringto the design of the underground tunnelling works of Bakun River diversionproject in Sarawak, Malaysia

639

W.R.Jee & llChoi

Stabilitystudy of an underground power cavern in sandstone

647

WeichengJin, MLu & E.Broch

Modeling and back analysisfor a large scale undergroundpowerhouse complex

653

Zhong-Kui Li, Ai-Min Wang & Xing-HuaMuo

Head losses due to air pockets in hydropower tunnels

659

E. Tesaker & S. Lunde

Prediction of rock supportin Melamchi Tunnel,Nepal

667

P.Pradhan

New method for estimation of head loss in unlined water tunnels

675

P.-E.R¢nn & MSlwg

Economic design of hydropower tunnels

683

P.-E.R¢nn & MSkog

x

Floor paving in unlined hydropower tunnels

691

(Z).Solvik & E.Tesaker

Unlined invert impact on the free-flow tunnels drainage capacity

697

V.D.Tashev & K.T.Daskalov

Method of calculating pressure transferred by soft layer surrounding penstock

703

Yao Shuang-Xi, Gu Zhao-Qi & Liang Hai-Bo

Author index

707

XI

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, Flatabe & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 54108886

Preface

These Proceedings contain the papers presented at the International Conference on Hydropower Development in Trondheim, Norway, June 30 to July 2, 1997. The first conference in this series, Hydropower'87 in Oslo, concentrated mainly on underground hydropower plants, the second conference in Lillehammer in 1992 had a wider scope, covering technical, enviromnental and economic issues. Hydropower'97 broadens the scope even further to also cover safety and training.

In a world where the demand for electric energy is steadily increasing, hydropower holds a unique position as the renewable energy source with the highest potential in a medium-range perspective. The regions of the world where the need for energy is most pressing, all possess huge hydropower resources. With a century of experience to draw on, the hydropower community has an extensive basis of knowledge and skills in support of every aspect of hydropower development. This includes how to deal with potentially negative effects of inadequate planning and design. Hydropower'97 does focus on issues that are vital in this respect, such as hydropower in an environmental context, dam safety and risk analysis. Planning of hydropower developments is still a great challenge covering a wide range of technical, economic and enviromnental issues. The objective of the conference has been to address these issues and highlight the ways in which hydropower can be developed in a flexible manner to meet varying demands and changing conditions. These are important issues both for professionals and for the general public. The papers were selected on the basis.of a general invitation, except for a few specially invited lectures. The editors thank all contributors, who have made it possible to collect documentations on many recent scientific and technicaladvancesinhydropower engineering. We hope that the proceedings

will form a valuable basis for further progress of hydropower

development.

.

The proceedings have been produced by the offset printing method. All papers are typed by the

authors in accordance with given instructions. The Editors are therefore not responsiblefor misprints

or errors in the text. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the '

Editors.

Trondheim, 2nd April 1997

E.Broch

E. Helland-Hansen

N.Flatab0

D.K.Lysne

Editors

XIII

  • Planning and design of desilting basins in Himalayas - A case study

Hydropower'91, Brach, Lysne, Hetsbe & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1991 Belkeme, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 54108886

1. Chandrashekhar & A. Rengaswamy

Central Water Commission, New Delhi, India

ABSTRACT: The paper highlights the planning and design aspects of desilting basins in Himalayan rivers with specific reference to Nathpa Jhakri underground hydroelectric project under execution. The project is a run-of-the-river project on river Satluj which experiences severe sediment transport. The project comprises of an underground desilting basin complex with four parallel basins, with hoppers and flushing conduits at the bottom to control undesirable sediments from entering the turbines. The design is aimed at eliminating sediments of particle size O.2mm and above in the basins. The hydraulic performance of the proposed basin as studied on a physical model as well as simulated in a numerical model is highlighted in this paper.

1. INTRODUCTION

Himalayan rivers carry huge quantum of sediments both during snowmelt season as well as during monsoon. The planning of run-of-the-river hydropower projects in Himalayan rivers call for careful handling of the sediments. Undesirable sediments in the water diverted for power generation will cause significant wear and tear of the electromechanical parts of the power station. Diverting absolutely sediment free water for power generation from such rivers is practically impossible keeping in view the economic viability. However the sediment content in the diverted water can be controlled to permissible limits at the headworks using settlingidesiltingjbasins.T'roper planning and design is of utmost importance. Physical model studies and numerical modelling of large settling basins help in better understanding of the water and sediment flow behaviour. This paper discusses in brief the planning and design studies carried out for the desilting basins of Nathpa Jhakri Hydroelectric project:

  • 2. THE PROJECT

  • The Nathpa Jhakri Hydroelectric project is an ongoing run-of-the-river project on river Satluj . The

proposed installed capacity of the project is 1500MW, through six Francis units of250MW each, utilising a discharge of 405cum/s. under a design head of 425m. The project is an underground power project and comprises of mainly:

  • - concrete gravity diversion dam 65.5m high.

  • - four desilting basins, each 525m long, 16.31m wide at centre,27.5m high

  • - lO.15m dia. 27300m long headrace tunnel

  • - 21.6m dia. 301m deep open surge shaft

  • - 4.9m dia., three steel lined pressure shafts

  • - powerhouse cavern 20m wide, 49m high, 216m long

  • - transformer cavern 18m wide, 27.5m high, 196m long.

  • - 10.l5m dia., l012m long tail race tunnel.

The layout plan of the project is shown in Fig.l.

3. SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS

The river carries significant amount of bed load as well as suspended sediment load. The particle size distribution of the measured suspended sediments indicates the presence of very high percentage of fines. The average distribution of coarse (0.2 to 2mm), medium (0.075 to O.2mm)and fine (less than

Planning and design of desilting basins in Himalayas - A case study Hydropower'91, Brach, Lysne,

17

TAIL RACE TUNNEL 10.15 M.rp, 1012 M. LONG JHAKRI POWER HOUSE COMPLEX NAT HPA DAM,INTAKE &DESILTING
TAIL RACE TUNNEL
10.15
M.rp, 1012 M. LONG
JHAKRI POWER HOUSE
COMPLEX
NAT HPA DAM,INTAKE
&DESILTING COMPLEX
HEAD RACE TUNNEL
10.15Mct>,27.3 KM. LONG
Fig. 1. Nathpa Jhakri H.E. Project - Layout Plan

0.075mm) sediments observed in this river and averaged over 15 years is 17%, 25% and 58% respectively. The bed material gradation measured indicates that the bed load ranges from O.lmm to

200mm.

The analysis of suspended sediments for mineral composition indicates a very high percentage of angular quartz i.e. about 40%. Besides these, other minerals with Mho's hardness more than 7 viz. Zircon, Garnet etc. constitute about 8%. These sediments could be very much damaging for the turbines if not controlled.

4. DESILTING ARRANGEMENT

The desilting basins for this project has been planned fully underground as topography doesn't permit a surface one. Four independent intakes and inlet tunnels feed four parallel desilting basins flowing full under pressure. Various alternatives constituting three to six basins were considered and four basins were finally found to be technically and economically sound. The layout plan of the desilting basins is shown in Fig.2. The desilting basins are Dufour type( hopper type). The design criteria laid down by the turbine manufacturer calls for excluding sediments above

0.2mm in size in the desilting basins with the stipulation that the units will trip when the sediment concentration exceeds 5000ppm. Accordingly the basins have been designed and dimensioned keeping the flow velocity around 0.3m/s. The proposed basins are each 525m long, l6.31m wide at the centre and 27.5m high. The inlet discharge into each basin is 121.5cumls which includes 20.25cumls for

continuous flushing which

is 20% of the outlet

discharge. The incoming flow into the basin expands uniformly in all directions through a 50m long transition (diffusor). The outlet tunnel at the end of the basin is provided with a controlling gate to isolate and empty any of the basins for maintenance. The sediment controlled water is thereby led into the 27300m long headrace tunnel. The efficient performance of settling basin calls for ejection of the sediments as it settles down. The continuous hopper 5m deep at the bottom of the

basin has a 3m wide settling trench with inlet holes of varying sizes for the settling particles to gradually travel into the flushing conduits. The basin is

divided into three sections of 175m each

..

Three

flushing conduits are provided to sectionalise coarse, medium and fine fractions of the sediments. One conduit runs in full length of the basin from the upstream end carrying coarse sediments while the second and third conduit starts at 175m and 350m

18

from the upstream end carrying medium and fine sediments respectively. Six gates for each basin i.e. two for each flushing conduit at the end shall control the flushing operation and lead the sediment laden water into a free flowing flushing tunnel and finally back into the river downstream of diversion dam. The velocity in the flushing conduit gradually increases along its length from 3m/s to 3.75m/s

which is of the same order of

magnitude as in the

inlet tunnel. Thus all sediments entering the flushing conduit shall be flushed out. The longitudinal section and cross-sections of the desilting basins is shown at Fig. 3 .

5. MODEL STUDIES

5.1 Physical modelling

Physical model studies of the desilting basin were carried out (CWPRS, 1990) on a 1:30 scale model covering the entire basin from inlet to outlet. The particle size distribution of the suspended sediment

inflow had do = O.OOlmm, d ss = 0.075mm, d S3 = 0.2mm and d lOo = 1.Omm . The physical model study

indicated

that the 525m length of the basin is

adequate for 90% settlement of the sediments coarser than O.2mm for an overall inflow concentration of 5000ppm by volume. The overall settling efficiency of the basin worked out to be about 36% for the gradation of the particles considered. The size of the flushing tunnel is adequate for continuous flushing of the settled sediments with 20% of the design discharge for flushing. The length and slopes of bed and roof of the diffusor were finalised based on the results of the model studies so as to permit full expansion within the transition

without flow separation.

5.2 Numerical modelling

Numerical modelling simulating the entire desilting basin from inlet tunnel to the outlet tunnel was carried out for studying the hydraulics and functional efficacy (Chandrashekhar, 1994). A three dimensional model called "Sediment Simulation in Intakes with Multiblock option" (SSIIM) (Olsen, 1994) was used to study the water and sediment flow in the ehtire domain of the basin.

The velocity field in the basin was found to be predominantly favourable except for the inlet zone where recirculation was observed. All particles above OAmm were seen to settle within the first half of the basin. The concentration of sediments of 0.2mm size is very near to zero at the end of the basin, but nevertheless some particles find their way into the tunnel . All particles of size 0.05mm and below enter the power tunnel . The particles that are under suspension in the upper half of the basin towards the outlet are getting carried away into the tunnel by the high velocities and turbulence . As a result, significant percentage of fines in the range 0.05mm to 0.2mm enter the headrace tunnel. The study indicates that the desilting basin is found to be adequate for 90-95% removal of particles upto 0.2mm size for an overall inflow concentration of 5000ppm. The overall settling efficiency of the basin is predicted as 37%.

6. ROCK SUPPORT SYSTEM AND LINING

The basic rock support system designed after characterising the rock mass comprises of pattern rock bolting with steel fibre reinforced shotcrete . The internal lining for the basins was originally conceived as 30cm thick concrete lining with welded mesh reinforcement on the inner side. The welded mesh was proposed to be anchored to the rock by 25 dia. anchors . Various other alternatives have been studied for lining the basin . The lining should be able to withstand the internal water pressure during operation and the external pressure head when one of the basins is emptied for maintenance purposes. It is now proposed to provide concrete lining for hopper portion and the inlet transition reach where the velocities are higher. The side walls and roof of the basin is to be finished with 150mm thick steel fibre reinforced shotcrete lining. The final surface shall be smoothened to the extent possible . Though the rugosity coefficient of shotcrete lining is .higher than that of concrete, due to very low velocity in the basin the increase in head loss is negligible.

7. SUMMARY

Desilting basins

form

a major

cost

item

in the

headworks of any hydroelectric project. Hence the planning and design should aim at optimizing the

19

I • 175 M I 17 5 M , 175 M I 150M ", 525M .,
I
175 M
I
17 5
M
,
175 M
I
150M
",
525M
.,
'I
"
"GATES
~-
CHAMBER- 4
-"
\
'I.
I
-,
­
\
\
,
\
......,
"\
CHAMBER- 3
SETTLING
TRENCH
' ............,
.....
r-­ -
+ ;:_~_
\
,
'"
:!:
..
CHAMBER-2
:I:
'"
­
ui
,.;
'"
...
\
j
r
-
~'
CHAMBER-l
.
FLUSHING TUN NEL
I i
....
~UJ. \'"3
\
'd.
,
'7
\
~
Vl
\
.
. \
I

~

'\ I

Fig.2

NathpaJhakri headworks - Layout Plan

'A c ~' FLOW - SETTLING BASIN < .. 600 I' 1600 400 =---0 c (FI
'A
c
~'
FLOW -
SETTLING BASIN
<
..
600
I'
1600
400
=---0
c
(FI u5hing tunnel not shown)

I\J

......

I- t- .525 H I:"LI LONGITUDINAL SECTION z: ,x 16.31 H Imax.J U'l II) N N
I-
t-
.525 H
I:"LI
LONGITUDINAL
SECTION
z:
,x
16.31 H Imax.J
U'l
II)
N
N
N
It:
N
,'1
z:
E C!
U'l
TRENCH
_L
'"
~., •
-U-
CEMENT CONCRETE
FLUSHING CONDUITS
iJ~l'
A-A
B-B
{AT60M)
(AT 425M
I
SET TLI NG
BAS IN
-
CR0 SS- SEC T ION S

.,

LINING

(-( (AT 480M )
(-(
(AT 480M
)
  • !~:r

CEMENT CONCRETE

'" ~. -~ ~1
'"
~.
-~ ~1

1- I

0-0

INLET

TUNNEL

OUTLET TUNNEL

Fig.3

number and dimensions of the basin , at the same time achieving the desired performance. For large projects, the basic design should necessarily be

supplemented

with

physical/numerical model

studies.

The desilting basins of Nathpa Jhakri H.E. project which is taken as a case study in this paper is under excavation in the Himalayas. The proposed arrangement is expected to function well with over 90% trapping efficiency in eliminating sediments of size O.2mm and above _Central Water Commission (CWC), a premier technical organisation of Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India is the principal consultant for civil works of this project. CWC has a vast experience in planning, designing and monitoring of hydroelectric projects and has contributed in developing over 60% of the country's installed capacity of hydropower. Several desilting basins have been planned and designed in the Himalayas which are operating satisfactorily.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors express their sincere gratitude to Chairman, Central Water Commission for granting permission to submit this paper. The authors also thank Nathpa Jhakri Power Corporation Ltd., Geological Survey of India and Central Water and Power Research Station, Pune whose basic data have been used in this paper.

REFERENCES

  • 1. Chandrashekhar 1.,(1994) "Numerical Simulation

of sediment movement in desilting basins using

SSIIM" M.S.Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim .

  • 2. CWPRS(1990),"Specific note on model studies

for desilting basins for Nathpa Jhakri Project"

  • 3. Olsen, N.R.B.(1994) "SSIIM-A three dimensional

numerical model for simulation of water and

sediment flow" Hydraulic Engineering Software V,

Volume 2, Computational Mechanics Publications.

22

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, Flatabo & Helland-Hansen (eds)© 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 5410 888 6

Environmental aspects of the Lower Kihansi Hydropower Project, Tanzania

John H.Gerstle

Hydrosphere Resource Consultants, lnc., Boulder, Colo., USA

Simon L. Mhaville

Formerly: Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited (TANESCO), Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania

Jan Lindemark

Norplan Al S, Ski, Norway

ABSTRACT: The Lower Kihansi Hydropower Project, a 180 MW (ultimately 300 MW) installed capacity high-head underground facility with hourly storage, is presently under construction by the Tanzania Electric Supply Company (TANESCO) in central Tanzania. The project is financed by TANESCO, World Bank, European Investment Bank, NORAD (Norway), SIDA (Sweden) and KfW (Germany), many of which, in

addition to the Government of Tanzania, have requirements for environmental review and mitigation

In the

.. course of its project cycle (identification, planning, design and construction phases) a variety of environmental studies were undertaken. This paper discusses environmental studies process and the most significant fmdings and considerations in the recommendations for mitigation. Interim observations of project impacts observed at this point in the construction period are described. Lessons learned to date in the process are discussed.

I. INTRODUCTION

This paper describes the process of environmental

studies carried out to date as part of the Lower Kihansi Hydropower Project (LKHP), the impacts predicted, mitigation selection process and impacts noted to date. Although the project is at present under construction, with commissioning still three ­

years in the

future, it is of interest to review the

anticipated impacts of construction activities described in the inipact assessments and to compare them with actual developments which have been observed to date. The LKHP is located in central Tanzania on the Kihansi River, a tributary of the Kilombero and Rufiji Rivers, as shown in Figure 1. The project, with an initial capacity of 180 MW and a planned ultimate capacity of 300 MW, has- a small amount of storage (sufficient for hourly flow regulation; with mostly underground waterways and an underground powerhouse. The water diverted through the turbines will be returned to the Kihansi River about 5 km in channel distance below the diversion point, with a gross head of 855 meters. The LKHP is being constructed with financial participation from TANESCO, World Bank, European Investment Bank, NORAD (Norway), SIDA (Sweden) and KfW (Germany).

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, Flatabo & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 5410 888 6 Environmental

Figure 1: Project Location Map

The main project components (shown in-Figure 2) in the initial project formulation are:

A small darn (25 m high) and reservoir (1,600,000 m- gross volume), which serve as the diversion and storage facility; the maximum area, inundated will be 26.1 hectares at highest water level; approximately 8.5 km of access and waterway shafts and tunnels, and

anunderground powerhouse;.

.

A tailrace canal approximately 650 m long;

A surface switchyard and transmission lines from the project site to Iringa and the Kidatu Hydropower Station;

23

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, Flatabe & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN905410 888 6

Economic aspects of removal of sediment from reservoirs

TomJacobsen

Department of Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway

ABSTRACT: Deposition of sediment in reservoirs is a major obstacle to the development and operation of reservoirs. Sites for construction of new reservoirs are a limited and decreasing resource. Removal of

sediment from existing reservoirs may therefore be the

best, if not the only, way to preserve reservoir

capacity in a region. Economic aspects of removal of sediment from a hypothetical reservoir are studied. The removal of sediment is based on two recently developed techniques, the Saxophone Sediment Sluicer and the Slotted Pipe Sediment Sluicer. The techniques enable a stable suction of sediment and feeding of the sediment water mixture into a pipe or a flume leading out of the reservoir. Present value of costs and benefits is calculated for a hypothetical case. A number of factors affecting the economy of the system are identified

and discussed.

1. INTRODUCTION

facility may be assessed differently for each one.

. Deposition of sediment in reservoirs is a major obstacle to the development and operation of reservoirs, and causes one per cent of the world's total water storage capacity to be lost each year (Mahmood, 1987). Sites for construction of new reservoirs are a limited and decreasing recourse. Removal of sediment from old as well as existing reservoirs may therefore be the best, if not the only way to preserve or increase reservoir storage capacity within a region. There can be several advantages to operating a reservoir so that storage capacity is preserved, apart from the value of the storage volume. Increased bed level in the upstream reaches of the reservoir as well as in the river can cause increased flood levels (NIWA 1996). Downstream of a reservoir that traps incoming sediment scouring of the riverbed is likely, perhaps causing failure of riverbanks and lowered waterlevels. Altered conditions in the river are likely to affect ecology (ICOLD 1985). Beaches and deltas will also be affected by reduced feeding of sediment. Intake works can be affected long before the reservoir is completely filled.

Water supplied from

reservoirs can have

many

uses such as domestic and industrial supply, irrigation, flood control navigation, and recreation,

Therefore,

this study is simplified as follows:

1. Only the economic impacts caused

by loss

of

water storage capacity are considered. 2. The value of water is assumed to be related only to generation of hydropower. 3. It is assumed that all sediment is removed from the live storage part of the reservoir.

2. METHODS FOR REMOVAL OF SEDIMENT

There are several ways to remove sediment from reservoirs. Reservoirs that are relatively small compared to the annual inflow (Ratio of capacity to annual discharge, typically less than 3 %) (Lysne 1995) may be flushed. However, flushing requires drawdown of the reservoir and subsequent interruption of water supply. Large amounts of sediment may be released over a short period. Other methods for sediment removal include excavation, dredging and sluicing through pipelines. Sedimentation may also be controlled with bypassing techniques (Ando 1994). Two new techniques which enable controlled

suction

of sediment into a pipeline have been

developed by the author since 1993. (Jacobsen, 1995,96,97) The purpose is to sluice sediment out

of the reservoir through a pipeline. This work is part and the value of the water and the water storage of a Ph.D. study undertaken at the Department of

39

Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering at NTNU. (The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). The Saxophone Sediment Sluicer is a saxophone shaped suction head mounted to a pipeline. It is operated from e.g. a raft and sluices sediments from the surface of the deposits. The Slotted Pipe Sediment Sluicer is pennanentIy fixed near the reservoir bed, and sediments are allowed to deposit over it. During sluicing all sediments covering the Slotted Pipe Sediment Sluicer will be removed. Both techniques are characterised by their simplicity, except for the valves they have no

movable parts.

The

head

of

water

between

the

reservoir surface and the outlet level is the driving

force. Due to their special design

clogging of the

pipeline is avoided,

and

a

high

efficiency

with

respect to water consumption is obtained.

Laboratory and

field experiments have been

performed, and both techniques have proved their

ability

to

function

under

realistic

conditions

(Jacobsen 1995, 1996 and 1997).

Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering at NTNU. (The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). The Saxophone Sediment

Figure 1. Sluicing of sedimentwiththe Saxophone SedimentSluicer. Figure of suctionhead is inserted.

Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering at NTNU. (The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). The Saxophone Sediment

Figure 2. Sluicing of sediments from a reservoir with the SlottedPipe Sediment Sluicer.

3. J The two layer method

A complete review of this method is provided by Shook & Roco (1993), only a brief discussion is

given here. The slurry flowing in a pipe is visualised as forming two layers separated by a hypothetical

interface. Within each layer,

variations

of solids

concentration and velocity are neglected when

computing boundary stresses and stresses

at

the

interface. The mixture in the upper layer behaves

essentially as a liquid as far as the wall shear

stress

is concerned.

The lower layer is assumed to have a

high total solids concentration, (C

lim

)

which

is

a

specified quantity. The increment C (see figure 3) is

2

assumed to consist of particles whose irrunersed

weight is transmitted to the pipe wall by interparticle contact.

A:

Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering at NTNU. (The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). The Saxophone Sediment

Figure 3.

Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering at NTNU. (The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). The Saxophone Sediment

A: Pipe Crosssection.as idealisedin the model. B: Concentration variation with elevation.

The volumetric flowrate of the mixture is:

A . V = Al . V; +A

2

,V

2

(1)

V:

Velocity in pipeline

 

VI: Velocity in the upper layer

 

V 2 : Velocity

in the lower layer

The local

slip velocity for particles relati ve to the

fluid

is

neglected

so

the

volumetric

flowrate

of

solids is:

 
Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering at NTNU. (The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). The Saxophone Sediment

(2)

  • 3. CALCULATION OF SEDIMENT

TRANSPORT CAPAClTY IN A PIPELINE

Two

methods

for

computing headloss for solid­

water mixtures in pipelines and two methods for

computing the minimum deposit velocity in a pipeline are considered. The methods are compared with results obtained from laboratory and field experiments.

Volumetric concentration of particles contributing to Coulombic friction:

(4)

40

The two-layer method provides an equation for C, and equations for interfacial stresses written in terms of momentum equations.

3.2

The Durand - Condiolis equation

 

One of the most frequently used equation for headloss of water-sediment mixtures in pipelines is the Durand Condiolis equation:

(5)
 

(5)

 

.

.

V 2 rc-

Where <1> ==

z

..

-

Z

and

'P ==

"I/'-'D

C V

i

g. D . (S, - 1)

1: Energy gradient of water (m/m)

 

1 m : Energy

gradient of slurry (m/m)

C y : Sediment concentration by volume g: Acceleration due to gravity

D:

Pipeline diameter

 

V:

Velocity in pipeline

Co: Drag coefficient of sediment particles.

 

S5:

P'/Pw

For normal sediment with a density of 2650 kg/m' the equation can be written as:

3.2 The Durand - Condiolis equation One of the most frequently used equation for headloss of

3.3

Minimum deposit velocity

 

A number of equations for (and definitions ot) minimum deposit velocity have been proposed. The deposit, velocity may be expressed in terms of the factor F, first used by Durand and Condiolis:

The two-layer method provides an equation for C, and equations for interfacial stresses written in terms

(7)

The factor F may be obtained from a chart (Vanoni, 1975) or by Gillies' correlation (Shook, 1993). Gillies correlation gives a conservative estimate of deposit velocity compared to Durands and Condiolis chart for non-uniform sediment. It is worth notice that Gillies' correlation does not account for the variation of minimum deposit velocity as a function of concentration in the way that as the Durand and Condiolis chart, nor does it account for broadness of grain size distribution. (The effect of fines < 74 uis however included) Gillies correlation gives a conservative estimate compared to Durands Chart for sediments with broad. grain size distribution.

3.4 Comparing theory with resultsfrom and field experiments

laboratory

The results from some experiments are summarised below in Table 1. The observed minimum deposit velocity is compared with values predicted from Durands' chart and Gillies' correlation. The measured headloss is compared with values predicted from the Two layer method and the Durand and Condiolis equation.

Table I. Comparing measured and predicted values for deposition velocity and headloss.

 

LAB I

LAB2

FIELD

D(mm)

44

60

125

d., (mm)

0.6

1.,2

0.12

C y (%)

4.0

2.8

10

CRITICAL VELOCITY (mls)

 

Observed

1.2 - 1.4

1.6

<1.8

Predicted, Durand

1,07

1.25

1.20

Predicted, Gillies

1.32

1.43

1.54

ENERGY GRADIENT, t (%)

 

Measured

10.0

7.5

2,7 - 2.9

Predicted, Durand

7.1

5.9

2.2

Predicted,Two-layer

7.3

5.6

3.1

  • 3.5 Selection of method

The Two-layer method is developed from experiments with fairly narrow size distributions, which do not always reflect the real situation. The model is however preferable to empirical correlations (Shook 1993) and therefore selected for this study. The deposition velocity is calculated from Gillies' Correlation. A maximum concentration of 20 % by volume is selected. The extra head obtained because of the increased unit weight of the slurry (because of the sediment) is not included in the calculations, as pipeline is modelled as horizontal. The calculations performed in this study are therefore believed to be conservative in that the transporting capacity in the real pipeline is likely to be higher than predicted. On the other hand sluicing can not be expected to be fully effective at all times.

  • 3.6 Chart showing sediment transport capacity

computed with Two-layer method

A chart has Been produced to show transport capacity (as tonnes per hour) in a 500 mrn pipeline .. The transport capacity depends on energy gradient and average grain size for sediment. Minimum deposit velocity IS computed by Gillies correlation.

41

Table

2

show

common

properties

for

the

computations:

 

Table 2. Data for computationof headloss in pipeline.

Water temp, T

200C

Pipe roughness

20 I.l

Grain friction factor

0.5

Sediment density

2650 kg/m'

Pipe inclination Concentration in bottom layer, C"m

0 % 0.6 mJ/m 1

Maximum concentration, C,

0.2

rn'zm'

A hypothetical reservoir has been studied. The reservoir is given properties typical of reservoirs subject to a monsoon climate in the foothills of the Himalayas such as for example in Nepal. It has thus a wet and a dry season with most of the rain falling in the three months of July, August and September. The reservoir is operated so that the whole live storage is used for electricity production once every dry season. Essential for these calculations is that

the electricity price is assumed higher

in

the

dry

season, due to scarcity of water. Table data that are constant for all cases.

3 provides

0.100 '/ 0.090 /' .. #' 0.080 C /' 0.070 Q) , ": -I'" " .
0.100
'/
0.090
/'
..
#'
0.080
C
/'
0.070
Q)
,
":
-I'"
"
.
'5
0.060
~
./
..
..
~
.'
.....
!
OJ
0.050
...
V
....
...
,
• "1'"
~
0.040
.........
.........
~
~
0.030
0"
.........
••••••• 500 lIh
w
A~'
0.020
--
_-
;:4
1000 lIh
0.010
-- - -2000 tJh
--3000tJh
0.000
o
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Average grain size, in mm

Figure 4.

Sediment transport capacity in a 500 nun

pipeline, computed with the Two-layer method.

  • 4.2 Calculation costs and benefits for a basic case:

The economics of sediment removal is computed

step by step for a basic case. The calculations are

based on values given in tables 3. and 4.

An overall efficiency of the powerplant of 0,85 is

assumed, thus the amount of electricity produced

from each m' is:

1m 3 432m· 0.85· 3600s/h· 9.8I m/s == 1.0kWh/m 3

0.001m 3 /kg·lOOO W/kW

Annual deposition of sediment is:

0.93 . 2,365,000to~nes == 1,640,000m 3

1.33 tonnes]m

  • 4. STUDY OF A HYPOTHETICAL RESERVOIR

'4.1 Features of the hypothetical reservoir studied

Table 3. Reservoir propertiescommon for all cases CATCHMENT:

Catchment area:

473 km 2

Erosion (pr. km'zyear):

5000 tonnes

Runoff:

1000 mm/year

Average discharge, Qm:

15 ml/s

Annual discharge, Q.:

473*10" m'

Annual sediment load, Q,,:

2.365.000 ton

SEDIMENTS:

Dry density of sediment deposits:

1333 kg/m'

Density of sediment:

2650 kg/m'

STORAGE RESERVOIR:

 

Reservoir volume:

100*10 6

m

Head for

sediment. transport:

150m

Capacity

inflow ratio (CIR):

0.21

Trap efficiency:

93 %

 

OTHER VALUES:

 

Lifetime of

removal system:

20

yr.

Lifetime of cleared reservoir volume:

45 yr.

 

Electricity price, wet season:

2 cents/kWh

It is further assumed that 91.5 % of the incoming

sediment, which equals 1.5 mill.

m'

(or

2

mill

tonnes) is removed from the live storage of the reservoir annually. (It is assumed that all sediment is removed from live storage) The extra production obtained in each dry season because of the increased reservoir volume is:

1,500,OOOm J .1.0kWh/m 3 = 1.5.10 6 kWh == 1.5GW}z

It is assumed

that 50

% of the

water stored for the

dry season could have been used for electricity production in the wet season. it is further assumed an electricity price of 4 cents/kWh in the dry season. The value of the extra production the dry season is therefore:

1.5.10 6 kWh· (4 - (2· 0.5)) cents/kWh = $45,000

The net present value of the removal of the sediment can be calculated by multiplying the annual reoccurring benefit with the inverse annuity discount factor, dh, which is given as:

42

df

A

=

n

l-(l+rr
-'---'--

r

(8)

If the volume is used for 45 years and the discount rate is 7 % the inverse annuity discount factor df, = 13.6 and the obtained reservoir volume has a present value equal to:

$45,000 ·13.6 = $612,000

  • 4.3 The net present value of the sediment removal

system

The amount of sediment removed annually is 2.0 million tonnes and d., = 0,12 nun. The length of the pipeline through which the sediment is transported is assumed 5000 meter. The available head is 150 meter, and thus the available energy gradient in the pipeline is 3.0 %. Computations with the Two-layer method show that a 460 mm pipeline can transport 1314 tonnes/hour at this gradient. Thus 1522 hours is required to remove the sediment at a discharge of

water in the pipeline of 0,55 ml/s. The amount

of

water used annually to transport sediment out of the reservoir is:

0.551 m 3 [s- 3600s/h ·1522 h/year = 3.019.10 6 m

3

(Which is 0,6% of total annual discharge.) It is assumed that 50 % of the water used for transport of sediment would otherwise have been discharged past the reservoir during floods. The value of the water used for sediment transport is therefore calculated as:

3.019·10 6 m 3 -Zcentsjm' ·0.5=$30,190

(World Bank, 1997) The cost of the other equipment

is set to system is:

$500,000 and thus the cost of the removal

(5,000m * $370/m) + $500,000 := $2.350,000

 

The

net

present

value

of the

sediment

removal

system is:

 

$(2,988,000 - 2,350,000) = $638,000

  • 5. SENSITIVITY TO VARIATION OF INPUT

DATA the sensitivity of the net present

value

of

the

sediment removal system to variation of different factors is considered. For each case only one set of data is changed while the others are kept constant at the values given in table 3 and table 4. The range of variation is also given in table 4.

Table 4. Values that can be varied. Values used for the basic case are given. Values in brackets are ranges of data in the sensitivity analysis. VARIABLE VALUES

Lengthof pipeline

5000m (1500 - 10000)

d,", sediments:

0,12 mm (0,04 - 0,5)

Head forpower generation:

432 m

(300 - 1000)

Electricityprice,dry season:

4 c./kWh(3 - 7)

Discountrate:

7 %

(3 - 10)

PRICES FOR REMOVAL SYSTEM:

 

Pipeline:

(D/460mm)2*$370/m

Other equipment:

(D/460mm)*$500,000

Operation and maintenance:

(D/460mm)*$300,000/yr.

It is further estimated that the sediment removal 10000 ., ... ------------ .... , system has
It
is further
estimated that the
sediment removal
10000 .,
...
------------
....
,
system has annual operation and maintenance costs
of $300,000. The gross present value of the
ID
8000
::J
"iij~
6000
>~
...
(J)
4000
Basic case
sediment removal
system
as
described
above
is
C:::)
ID
2000
O
calculated by
using
the inverse annuity discount
810
0+----
...... ....
;
-
.....00::::------4
'-0
a.
.....
factor, di. A lifetime of 20 years and a discount rate
-2000
Qj~
di.
of 7
%
gives
= 10.6. Thus the gross present
Z
-4000
-6000 +---t---\---t----.I---+---'
value is:
1500
3000
4500
6000
7500
9000
Length of pipeline (m)
(612,000 - 300,000 - 30,190) ·10.6 = $2,988,000

The cost of a removal

system is difficult to asses

correctly.

A

simple way of assessing the

cost

is

therefore used. Steel pipe with wall thickness = 2.5

%

of pipe

diameter is assumed, and the price

is

taken

as

5.5

times

a

steel price of $500/tonnes.

43

Figure 4. The net present value of a sediment removal system is calculated assuming different length of the pipeline. A shorter pipeline will give higher energy gradient. and a smallerpipeline is needed, The amount of water used is also reduced.

_________

---'---

~

...

0.

··_,··_" __

10000 8000 6000 4000 Basic case 2000 a ~~~- ..... :-------J -2000 -4000 -6000 +---+---+----1----1-----' 0.04
10000
8000
6000
4000
Basic case
2000
a ~~~-
.....
:-------J
-2000
-4000
-6000 +---+---+----1----1-----'
0.04
0.14
0.24
0.34
0.44
Grain size, d50 (mm)
Figure 5. The net present value of a sediment removal
system is calculated assuming different grain size, d
The grain size will influence both flow resistance and
size of pipeline as well as water used for sluicing.
'
so
10000 y-------- -----, lD 8000 ::J ~ @ 6000 C ~ Basic case 4000 CD 0
10000 y--------
-----,
lD
8000
::J
~
@
6000
C
~
Basic case
4000
CD
0
2000
lllo
o
~
0t--------'-=-t<::::------j
a; ~
-2000
Z
-4000
-6000 +--+--+--+--+--;---+---I
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Discount rate (%)

Figure 8. The net present value of a sediment removal system is calculated assuming varying discount rate. A low discount rate increases the value of costs and benefits obtained in the future.

-4000 Z a; ~ 8l s C ~ @ a.~ ~o ~ ~ -----­ -2000 2000
-4000
Z
a; ~
8l s
C ~
@
a.~
~o
~
~
-----­
-2000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
O-j-"':?'_I------------""""!
Basic case

-6000 +----!------1I----+----I

300

475

650

825

1000

Head available for energy production (m)

Figure 6. The net present value of a sediment removal system is calculated assuming different heads available for power generation.

10000 , i 8000 CD ::J 6000 (ij~ .:: ~ 4000 Basic case c::::l 2000 810
10000
,
i
8000
CD
::J
6000
(ij~
.::
~
4000
Basic case
c::::l
2000
810 Olo O+----::I::o"""'=-----------i
....
0
a. -
-2000
a;~
Z
-4000
-6000 +----+-----,f-----1----;
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
Electricity price in dry season ($/kWh)

Figure 7. The net present value of a sediment removal system is calculated assuming varying electricity price in the dry season.

6. DISCUSSlON

it is important to note that several simplifications were made to make this study feasible. In particular the costs associated with a sediment removal system were assessed on a very crude basis. The study is therefore intended to provide a survey of factors influencing the economy of sediment removal, rather than predicting exact values for specific cases.

  • 6.1 Conditions for sediment transport in a pipeline

The length of the pipeline (i.e, the energy gradient) and the grain size determine both how much water is needed for transport of sediment and the investments in pipeline and other equipment. For long pipelines andlor for large sediment sizes a larger diameter pipeline and thus a much more costly sediment removal system is necessary.

  • 6.2 The value of water stored in the reservoir

The value of the storage volume varies linearly with the head available for energy production and the

price for electricity in the dry season, and therefore has a major influence on the economics. The value of the water used in this study is bases on use of the stored water once a year. In a real case the water can

be used several times a year but

it is also possible

that there are years where the storage volume is not

fully exploited.

  • 6.3 The discount rate

The discount rate is seen to have a mitior influence on the economics. The standard discount rate used in this study is equal to the Norwegian discount rate of 7 % set by the Norwegian Government in 1978. This is well above the real rate of interest in Norway

44

from

1946 -

1992 which was

1.4 %.

It

is therefore

argued that a discount rate of 7 % is too high

(Myhre

1995).

Discounting may also be criticised

for

environmental reasons, the

most

important of

them being (Myhre 1995):

  • I. Depletion of natural resources.

  • 2. Obstacle for environmental investments.

  • 3. Welfare of future generations.

  • 4. Environmental risk.

  • 5. Irreversibility.

One example of where normal discounting is not used is planting of trees in Norway. In an ordinary

economic assessment this

is

not

profitable

at

all

since the discounted value of the trees 60 - 80 years from now is practically zero. Hence,· "normal"

economic considerations are not sufficient for these applications.

  • 6.4 Non-economical costs and benefits

The non economical costs or benefits from removing sediment from a reservoir have not been considered in this study. These costs and benefits are likely to add weight to the argument for removal of sediment from reservoirs, provided the sediment released does not alter conditions in the river too much.

  • 6.5 Further improvement

of calculations

Factors which could have affected the outcome of the calculations but have been ignored in this study (Apart from the non-economical costs and benefits) are:

  • 1. Operation costs are likely to depend on time

needed for removal of sediment.

  • 2. The size of the reservoir and the amount of

sediment removed annually is likely to affect the economics.

3.

It is

assumed in the

study that all sediment in

the live storage. In a new reservoir the percentage of

sediment which deposits in the live storage will increase with time and reach 100 %.

  • 4. The benefits from avoiding rebuilding of intake

works and other structures are not taken into

account.

  • 5. Annual sedimentation rates will always vary

and rates varying from 100,000 to over 4,000,00? tonnes/year have been reported for a reservoir

(Ando, 1994). The uncertainty

with

regard.

to

sedimentation rates is likely to affect the economics.

7. CONCLUSION

It is concluded that the benefits from increased dry season power production can justify removal of sediment from a medium sized reservoir. However of more importance is that the economics of such an undertaking relies strongly on several technical and economical conditions some of which have been identified and discussed. Several additional benefits apart from the pure economics are likely to occur, adding to arguments for the implementation of a sediment removal system.

REFERENCES

Ando, N., Terazono K. and Kitazume R.: Sediment removal project at Miwa dam. 18th Congress on Large Dams, Durban (1994) Jacobsen, Tom 1995. Slotted pipe sediment sluicing. ICOLD symposium: Reservoirs in river

basin development. Oslo.

Jacobsen, Tom 1996. Removal of sediments from

reservoirs. Proc. Int. Conference on reservoir

sedimentation, Fort Collins, 9. - 13. Sept. 1996 Jacobsen, Tom 1997. Removal of sediments from a reservoir with the Saxophone Sediment Sluicer.

19. ICaLD congress, Florence 1997.

Lysne, D. K. L. Olsen, N. R. B. Stale, H.

Jacobsen, T. 1995. Sediment control: recent developmentfor headworks. Hydropower and

Dams, March 1995.

Mahmood, K 1987. Reservoir sedimentation:

Impact,

Extent

and

Mitigation.

World

Bank

Technical Paper no. 71. Washington DC.

Myhre, Lars 1995. Some environmental and economic aspects of energy saving measures in

houses. Ph.D. Thesis The Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway ­

National Institute for water and Atmospheric research (NIWA) and WORKS Consultancy 1996.

Lake Roxburgh: Sediment redistribution. Effects of 1995 floods.

Shook, C. A. & Roco M. C. 1991. Slurry flow ­

Principles and Practice. Buttenworth-Heineman,

Boston

Vanomi, Vito A. (ed.) 1975. Sedimentation engineering. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering practice No. 54, New York. World Bank 1997. The Pink sheet. http://www.worldbank.org/htmIJieccp/psjan.html.

.",

..

,

45

Hydropower'97, Brach, Lysne, Flatabo & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5410 888 6

Hydropower and environment: Decision making in Norway

Halvard Kaasa

Statkraft Engineering, Hevik,Norway

ABSTRACT: A major change in the Norwegian planning process was carried out in 1990. A model for plan­ ning involving good multidisciplinary contact and co-operation between the involved parties in early phases of the decision making process is compared to a conflict model where much energy was spent on visual­ izing the parties' different interests and demands instead of focusing on end results.

1 INTRODUCTION

Norway does have more than 100 years of experi­ ence in producing electricity from hydropower, and environmental issues have been on the public agenda in Norway for quite a number of years. A major change in the Norwegian legal system inter alia introducing public and open processes from the ini­ tial phase of the planning process was carried out in 1990. This has recently given us experience in dif­ . ferent ways of handling hydropower development and to a certain stage we feel that we are able to draw some vital conclusions about the best courses of action to foresee and solve potential environ­ mental conflicts in relation to hydropower schemes. In the early sixties, environmental issues were of relatively minor importance for hydropower deve­ lopers and for the society in general, and the de­ veloper's arguments usually carried most weight. We were still in the process of building up the Scandi­ navian model for the welfare state and economic growth had priority over environmental issues. From that time and up to the eighties, the normal procedure for development of a hydropower site was, for the hydropower company, to carry out the planning and feasibility studies without specific contact with other organisations. Only slight atten­ tion was paid to environmental issues. The hydro­ power company was in practise responsible for the technical and economic plan, while the central ad­ ministration commented on the effects of the project as a whole, its social impact and the environmental and cultural aspects.

It was normally when the application was sent to the appropriate governmental institution that the envi­ ronmental conflicts would start hotting up. This led to reactions from various interest groups, and not least from the environmental concern groups, which in that period were becoming increasingly important.

  • 2 VISmLE CONFLlcrS

In disputes over hydropower developments in Nor­ way, as in many other countries, the environmental issues ate most focused on and appear as. '-risible public conflicts. Pecuniar discussions atwutprofit­ ability, tax, duties, economic compensation to the local authorities and land owners are more con­ cealed. The same goes for non-economic compensa­ tion to the local community such as building of wa­ ter supply systems, sewage treatment, setting up investment funds et cetera. These discussions make relatively little noise because they involve individual legal subjects who accept forms of negotiation and ways of reaching agreement, for example the judicial system. The parties involved seldom feel that they have much to gain by publicity. The greatest problems therefore arise concerning public access and utilization of the environment. Being a scarcely populated. country, these rights are fundamental legal privileges in Norway. Increasing interest in the environmental impact of hydropower developments seems to go hand in hand with the increase in prosperity. Today many coun­ tries potentially face this development but I should

47

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, FlatabfiJ & Helland-Hansen (eds)© 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 54108886

Split & settle - A new concept for underground desanders

H.St01e

Sediment Systems, Dr.ing. H Stele AS, Trondheim, Norway

ABSTRACT: It is often difficult to locate surface settling basins at the intake of high head run of the river hydropower projects. Conventional underground settling basins requires large caverns. It is not required to reduce the transit velocity of the entire flow in order to facilitate settling in an underground split & settle sediment excluder. The split & settle concept takes advantage of the difference in'sediment concentration over the depth in a water flow. The basic principles of the split & settle concept is presented in this paper. The present status of the development programme for the split & settle technology is given together with the results from preliminary case studies which indicates that the cost of underground sediment excluders can be reduced to 60-80% if the split & settle concept is applied instead off conventional underground basins.

according to the design criteria for the project, which normally are given as trap efficiency criteria for one or more particle sizes. Depending on the design criteria, the transit velocity in the settling basins is normally in the range of 0.1 to 0.4 rn/s. Settling basins are therefore a major cost item at the headworks of run of the river hydropower projects. The required surface area for settling basins are often not available at the desired location for the headworks structures at high head run of the river projects if the water is drawn from a steep river running in a narrow valley. The area required for surface settling basins is an important site location parameter for the intake structures. The cost of underground caverns are largely dependent on the rock quality and the span of the rock caverns required for conventional settling basin design. Several caverns are therefore often built in parallel in order to Obtained the required transit velocity and maintain acceptable spans of the rock caverns from an engineering geological point of view.

New technology has been developed over the last ten years which facilitates removal of deposits from free surface as well as pressurized settling basins while these basins remains in operation (Aspen and Stele, 1992), (Stele, 1993), (Jacobsen, Lysne, Olsen and Stele, 1995). Fuelled by the

95

  • 1 INTRODUCTION

The split & settle concept is a new approach to exclusion of suspended sediments in water withdrawn from rivers with high sediment loads. Exclusion of suspended sediments is required at many hydro projects in order to obtain an acceptable quality of the withdrawn water. The main objective with the sediment handling facilities at run of the river hydropower projects is to reduce the sediment induced wear and abrasion of the turbines as well as uncontrolled accumulation of sediments in the waterways which may reduce their transport capacities.

Settling .basins

are

normally

applied

for

exclusion of suspended sediments at hydro projects.

The velocity of the flow is reduced in order to

the

The

facilitate settling of the coarser fractions of

load

due

to

gravity.

suspended sediment

• exclusion of suspended sediments is guided by the

the

suspended particles

and. the .

fall velocity of

. turbulence level of the water flow which keeps the

particles in suspension despite the gravity forces. The cross section area of the flow must therefore be expanded in order to reduce the turbulence level and thus facilitate settling.

The

settling

facilities

shall

reduce

the

. concentration of suspended sediments in the water

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, FlatabfiJ & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN90 54108886 Split & settle
SEDIMENT SYSTEMS - Dr.lng. H. Stale AS o :i! ~ m :t i m :D ~
SEDIMENT SYSTEMS - Dr.lng. H. Stale AS
o
:i!
~
m
:t
i
m
:D
~
i
'>
(,
1.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·."'·.·
..
·.·.·.::;·.·1
;::;:;:::;;:=:;:;;::;:;:;:;;;:;::;:::;::.-,
FLUSHING OUTlET (CONSTRUCllON ADn)
UPPER FLOW
----- ...
LOWER FLOW
SPLIT & SETTLE - BASIC ARRANGEMENT
_---~
FLUSHING FLOW

~

Figur 1

Basic Split & Settle Arrangement

~.~~.~,,~~=.=~ ,. "".

.c

..

.

.c..

", .........

,_

.

.......

.

._••"

..

'

...".......

..

'=" -."'cd'

.

.....

~","_~

opportunities provided by the new sediment removal technology and the theories and knowledge developed by our "fathers" and "grandfathers" on the behaviour of sediments suspended in a water flow, Dr. Haakon Stele has invented a new concept for sediment exclusion, labelled split & settle.

  • 2 THE SPLIT & SETTLE CONCEPT

    • 2.1 Basic Principles

The concentration of suspended sediment is not uniform over the cross-section of a water conduit. The concentration is higher close to the bottom than higher up in the water column in the flow in an open channel or a pressurized tunnel flow. The split & settle concept takes advantage of this difference in sediment concentration over the depth. In the following text, it will be assumed that we have a pressurized tunnel flow situation, but the concept may also be applied in water conduits with free surface flow. The basic elements of an underground split & settle arrangement are shown in Figure 1. The flow in the tunnel upstream of the settling facilities (the approach flow) is split horizontally at the first tunnel cross. The bottom water contains relatively more sediments than the water higher up. The bottom water (say 20% to 40% of the. total flow) is therefore diverted to the upstream settling tunnels running parallel to the main tunnel. The settling tunnels are processing the "dirtiest" part of the water flow. The transit velocity is reduced in order to facilitate settling of a major part of the suspended load in relatively small caverns. The "cleanest" water flows in the main tunnel where the transit velocity has been reduced somewhat (60% to 80% of the velocity in the approach tunnel). Suspended sediments will therefore continue to accumulate in the lower segments of the flow. The "dirtiest" water in the main tunnel may therefore be diverted once more in the second tunnel cross just upstream of the section where the "cleaned" water from the upstream settling tunnels are returned to the main tunnel. This water is then processed in the downstream settling tunnels before the water in these basins are returned to the main tunnel in the third tunnel cross. The split & settle concept facilitates exclusion of the suspended sediments without reducing the transit velocity of the entire flow to a settling level. The settling basins are located in a serial pattern rather than the conventional parallel pattern in a split & settle sediment excluder system. The settling

basins (tunnels) are always processing only the "dirtiest" part of the water flow. The split & settle basins are therefore able to exclude more suspended sediments per m' excavated rock than conventional settling basins. The split & settle process can be repeated several times if necessary until the total concentration of suspended sediments in the water

satisfy the design criteria with respect to exclusion of suspended sediments. Settling tunnels may then be

constructed along the main tunnel at any adit along the headrace tunnel if required. The same tunnelling and rock support technology can therefore be applied in the settling tunnels and the headrace tunnel. Exclusion of suspended sediments underground by use of the split & settle technology does not require large caverns, it only requires some additional meters of tunnels of the same type (span and support works) as applied in the headrace tunnel. The split & settle concept requires a flushing arrangement which can remove the deposited sediments from the settling tunnels (and the downstream main tunnel if required) while the basins are in operation. It is assumed that all four settling tunnels will be furnished with "Serpent Sediment Sluicing System" (S4) for this purpose. The upstream settling tunnels are flushed from their downstream end, while the downstream settling tunnels are flushed from their upstream end. The flushing outlets are located next to the second tunnel cross. The flushing tunnel will serve as an adit tunnel during construction of the headrace tunnel.

  • 2.2 Theoretical Basis

The distribution of suspended sediment concentration over the depth in turbulent and steady flow is described by the Rouse equitation given in (1). The diagram in Figure 2 shows the suspended concentration distribution for several values of z which is labelled the Rouse number (2).

w (2) ~ . k . U. where: d: y: C: Total depth Level above bed
w
(2)
~
. k
. U.
where:
d:
y:
C:
Total depth
Level above bed
Concentration of sediments with fall velocity

97

opportunities provided by the new sediment removal technology and the theories and knowledge developed by our

a:

w at level y Fixed level equal to 0.05 d

{3:

The turbulent Schmidt number w particles

1.0 for fine

Ca:

Concentration of sediments with fall velocity

k:

Von Karman's constant = 0.4 for clear fluids

w at level y=a

D.:

The shear velocity

w:

The fall velocity of the suspended particles

~ce

--=-_ 1.0

0.9

"I"

0.8

07

1\

\

\

\

--

1'--1

<,

I

f\

~

1\

\

1\

"v~

<,

~'\

1\

r

.........

~~~ t-­

"\

i\

\

i

\

~'b

~\~

\

\,

,

I

"'"

'0

0.6

0.5

~

~

;;;

:>

0.4

\

~~

0

v

. \

\

1\

0.3

0.2

O.

l~

\

1\

\ \

\

\

\

"':'

\ 1\

\'-L..............

-,

r- ..

I\.

\

\ \

r-,

"-

1\ \

r--

-- r-­

r---

r--­

<,

'""­

'

~~

a

0.1

7.:::t;~

.

>

..

Bottom

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

('

Relallve concentrancn, c:

08

09

LO

Figur 2

The Rouse diagram

For low values of z, the concentration tends towards becoming uniform over the depth, and for large z values, the concentration is small near the surface

and relatively higher near the bottom. The z value is

proportional to the fall velocity, wand proportional to the inverse of the shear velocity D., which again

is mainly dependent

on the mean velocity,

D

mean

in

the flow. The Prandtl-von Karman's universal velocity

distribution law applied on a rough and wide channel with steady flow and the Nikuradse sand roughness parameter, k representing the flow resistance, is given in (3). The Strickler formula, given in (4), is

applied to compute k, assumed equal to d 90 by use of

the Manning number, M (or lin).

U

= 5.75

. U

. loge 30

. Y)

k

M

1

n

:::

26

d

1 / 6

90

(3)

(4)

VERTICAL

FLOW AND SEDIMENT

DISTRIBUTIONS

Flaw em3/s)' 60.0 - Appr-oec h velocity em/s): 0.80 - Tunnel W-H (m): 7.07' 1061 REL
Flaw em3/s)'
60.0
-
Appr-oec h
velocity
em/s):
0.80
-
Tunnel
W-H (m):
7.07'
1061
REL
CONCENTRATION (CICa)
AND VELOCITY
(rnIS)
o
0.2
04
0.6
ctr
1
-------r------,------
.. ...
,
------,--
-
1
__
.....~-_:::::::4j1I
I
a.
W
o
w
>
<(
-l
W
IT
20
40
60
80
100
REL
TOTAL
FLUX
BELOW LEVEL (%)
cepo\ nt)
____
V( po I nt)
---6- V(ca I I)
-II-
-e-
TOT.
WATER-FLUX BELOW
~
TOT.
SED· FLUX BELOW
~
SED-FLUX(ce\ I)
SPL IT
&
SETTLE
SEDIMENT 515TEMS

Figur 3

Q = 60 m 3/s and d= 0.2 mm. Vertical distribution of concentration, flow and fluxes

98

a: w at level y Fixed level equal to 0.05 d {3: The turbulent Schmidt number
 

where:

U:

The mean velocity at level y above the bed

k:

Nikuradse sand roughness parameter

M:

The Manning number (M = lin)

d 90 :

Particle

d 90 l

d 90

size with 90% by weight smaller than

"'"

k

By use of these formulas it is possible to compute the distribution of sediment concentration and velocity over the depth in a wide open channel with steady flow. The product of these gives the sediment flux over the depth. The flow and sediment concentration distribution in a pressurized tunnel will be different from the distribution in an open wide channel. These one-uimensional distributions may l however, be applied to produce the first estimate of the distribution of the sediment flux over the depth in a rectangular shaped tunnel. The estimated sediment flux over the depth in a concrete lined tunnel (Manning number M = lin = 60) with a flow of 60 m 3/s and a rectangular shape where W = 7.07 meter and H = 10.61 meter, will be as shown in Figure 3 for particles with fall diameter of 0.2 nun in water of 10 deg C.

  • 2.3 Areas of Applications

The

split

&

settle

concept

is

expected

to

be

favourable at projects where the settling facilities must be located underground or at projects where a headrace canal is running along a narrow valley where there are very limited space available. The two main areas of application of the split & settle technology are expected to be: a) Sediment exclusion at new projects, and b) Add sediment exclusion

capacity to existing hydropower plants with severe sediment induced wear.

  • 3 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

A series of studies have been initiated in order to develop the split & settle technology and provide a

basis for

optimum design of sediment excluders

based on

the

split

&

settle

concept.

The main

questions which are approached are:

a) Means required to facilitate hydraulic control of the flow so optimum flow diversion ratios can be maintained. b) The actual flow and sediment distribution in the approach tunnel, and the variation in these based

on the geometry (including length), approach

velocity and wall roughness.

This

is

the basis for

computation of actual relation between flow diversion ratio and sediment diversion ratio (i.e. the

actual variation in sediment flux over the depth) and

the

overall

trap

arrangement.

efficiency

of

a

split

&

settle

  • 3.1 Physical Hydraulic Modelling

The main hydraulic aspects of the split & settle concept has been studied in the hydraulic laboratory at NTNU/SINTEF. The model comprises 50% of a complete split & settle arrangement, i.e. settling basins of one side and half width of the main centre tunnel. The hydraulic challenge has been to obtain an even head loss through the various water ways of the system when the flow distribution between centre tunnel and the settling basins is as desired. De-Silva found that it is possible to adjust the distribution of flow between the centre tunnel and the settling tunnels, i.e. to obtain the required flow diversion ratio, by introducing an adjustable head loss in the centre tunnel between the inlet and outlet to the settling basins. The flow control structure is located at the second tunnel cross as shown in Figure 1, (de­ Silva, 1996). The laboratory study is not completed yet. The geometry of the diversion tunnels and the upstream transition arrangement in the settling basins with the objective of obtaining an optimum inlet geometry is currently the focal point of the laboratory work. This study is an integral part or' one thesis at the MSc programme in hydropower development at NTNU in 1997.

  • 3.2 Numerical Simulations

Our generation has not contributed as much to the sediment transport theory in turbulent flow as the two former generations. One of the important contributions to sediment engineering by the researchers of today is the ability to make better use of the established theory by use of computers to simulate the flow field and the sediment fluxes in complicated geometries without normal and/or steady flow conditions. Two MSc candidates at NTNU are currently involved in 3-D simulations of the flow and sediment distribution in a split & settle system by use of the SSIIM programs. This is expected to produce a better representation of the distribution of sediment and water fluxes over .the

99

FLOW AND SEDIMENT DIVERSION RATIOS Flow (m3/s): 60.0 - Approach velocity (mls): 0.80 - Tunnel W*H
FLOW AND
SEDIMENT
DIVERSION RATIOS
Flow (m3/s):
60.0
-
Approach
velocity
(mls):
0.80
-
Tunnel
W*H (m):
7.07
*
10.61
100
rv
IR
80
'-'
0
-
er
[[
60
z
0
-
\Il
[[
w
>
-
40
0
f-
Z
W
~
0
20
w
\Il
o
o
20
40
60
80
100
FLOW DIVHISION
RATIO (96)
_____
d
dO. 2S
mm
O. 20
mm
.:
..
,
.......
d
0
18
mm
~d
0.16
mm
--e- d
014
mm
0
12
mm
--7E- d
SPLIT & SETTLE
SEDIMENT SYSTEMS

Figur 4

Q = 60 m 3/s. Computed flow and sediment diversion ratios

COMPUTED TRAP

EFFICIENCIES

SPLIT & sETTLE ARRANGEMENT AT ~HIMRUK HYDROELECTRIC PRO~ECT 120 SILT SAND fRAVEL MEDI.jJM I COARSE I
SPLIT & sETTLE ARRANGEMENT AT ~HIMRUK
HYDROELECTRIC
PRO~ECT
120
SILT
SAND
fRAVEL
MEDI.jJM
I
COARSE
I
FINE
0.02
0.05
0.1
100
.: 0 V
Fo'.~
o 5
r-;
IR
80
\
...
J
'I
U
j
Z
W
~.,
u
60
LL
LL
Ie 1/
/
W
Q.
«
40
a
II
l
V
t
II
1/
20
b ~
~~
Vi
~
......
~
0
FALL
DIAMETER (mm)
_____
a)
EX IST I NG
BAS I NS
b)
SETHI NG TUNNEL
-6- c)
IN HEADRACE
--*- a)
--e- a)
+,
b)
+
c)
+
b)
BUTWAL
POWER
COMPANY
SEDIMENT
SYSTEMS
Figur 5
Sediment Exclusion at Jhirnruk with the Split & Settle Arrangement Installed

100

Table 1

Kali Gandaki, computed civil costs of underground settling arrangements

UNDERGROUND

CONVENTIONAL

 

SPLIT & SETTLE

ARRANGEMENT:

Approach

Central

Settling

Nos. of basins

 

6

2

4

8

Net width (m)

14.0

8.0

8.0

8.0

Net height (rn)

18.2

11.5

11.5

13.2

Net length (m)

176.7

114.5

164.4

164.4

Costs (1000 US$)

81 144

52435

 

Table 2: Jhirnruk, computed trap efficiency with the split & settle arrangement

 

Fall diameter (mm)

   

0.10

0.15

0.20

 

Fall velocity '(cm/s)

   

0.648

0.150

1.949

  • a) existing basins

   
  • 29.5 %

%

  • 55.7 %

79.1

  • a) existing basins

   
  • 55.8 %

%

  • 84.2 %

96.0

  • b) split & settle tunnel

 
  • a) existing basins

   
  • 63.4 %

%

  • 90.5 %

98.5

  • b) split & settle tunnel

 
  • c) deepened headrace tunnel

 

depth

in

a

tunnel

flow

than the one presented in

mountain" in order to provide space for surface

Figure 4.

 

settling basins. The framework of the study carried

  • 3.3 Case Studies

 

out by Bajaracharya was to compare two alternative arrangements, i.e. an underground pressurized conventional basins, and an underground pressurized

Several of the MSc candidates at the hydropower development programme at NTNU has studied the possibilities of applying the split & settle concept for sediment exclusion at various projects. The study of the Kali Gandaki project in Nepal (140 m 3/s) was

arrangement with the split & settle concept. Both arrangements should meet the design criteria for the surface arrangement with respect to trap efficiency. The split and settle arrangement is shown in Figure 6. The main dimensions of the two arrangements and the estimated costs are given in

completed in 1996 (Bajaracharya,

 

1996).

The

Table 1. The cost of the split & settle arrangement

Melamchi Diversion Scheme in Nepal (8 m 3/s) and

in this study is found to

be 65 % of the cost of a

the Sankosh hydropower project

in Bhutan (260

conventional underground arrangement

3.3.2

Jhimruk

m 3/s) are currently approached by two MSc candidates. Finally, the author has produced a concept design for a split & settle arrangement for Jhimruk hydropower plant in Nepal (7 m 3/s) for

design.

(Bajaracharya, 1996).

Butwal Power Company with the objective of adding sediment exclusion capacity to the existing arrangement. BPC Hydroconsult is currently carrying out a feasibility study based on this concept

The sediment transport observed in Jhimruk Khola during the first years of operation has ben far more severe than expected during the planning and design process of Jhimruk hydropower plant. This includes the content of hard minerals (quartz) and the c-oncentrationof suspended sediments which both are

3.3.1

Kali Gandaki

 

higher than expected. Butwal Power Company has experienced unexpected high rates of sediment

The

contract

for

the construction of the Kali

induced wear of the hydraulic machinery (Basnyat,

Gandaki hydropower project in Nepal was signed in

1996). The sediment induced wear is so high that an

January

 

1997.

It

was

decided

to

"remove a

overhaul frequency of one year'! is not sufficient in

'

101

<«; I .. I ~-I ",. IJ X .. lllY:'i3U1 Split & settle arrangement for Kali
<«;
I
..
I
~-I
",.
IJ
X
..
lllY:'i3U1
Split & settle arrangement for Kali Gandaki a = 140 m 3/s (Bajaracharya, S. 1996)
Figur 6

102

"'/ \l~i
"'/
\l~i

~

~

"'/ \l~i ~ ~ 8 l\ -, -1'1'­ , j ; ! " ~ i. ~
"'/ \l~i ~ ~ 8 l\ -, -1'1'­ , j ; ! " ~ i. ~

8

l\

-, -1'1'­

"'/ \l~i ~ ~ 8 l\ -, -1'1'­ , j ; ! " ~ i. ~
"'/ \l~i ~ ~ 8 l\ -, -1'1'­ , j ; ! " ~ i. ~

,

j

; ! " ~ i. ~ If .. 61 '­ - - _. ­ io ..
;
!
"
~
i.
~
If
..
61
-
-
_.
­
io
..
~
U ~
III
!

d-,

"'/ \l~i ~ ~ 8 l\ -, -1'1'­ , j ; ! " ~ i. ~

Q)

(g

c'i5

(I )

E --

r-­

II

o

"'/ \l~i ~ ~ 8 l\ -, -1'1'­ , j ; ! " ~ i. ~

...

  • - o

iii

..

  • II ,.l:.

II

c::::

  • 1 E

Q)

Q)

0)

c::::

IU

... ...

IU

41

-.:;

103

order to avoid unrepairable damages if the plant is operated at full load throughout the monsoon season. There are two settling basins at the headworks of Jhimruk hydropower plant. A split and settle arrangement will provide additional settling capacity to the plant. It is therefore not considered feasible nor necessary to build a complete split & settle arrangement with four settling basins at Jhimruk as described in Chapter 2. The split & settle arrangement at Jhimruk will make use of the accumulation of suspended sediment load in the water flowing close to the floor in the headrace tunnel. This bottom flow will be diverted to a settling tunnel running parallel to the headrace tunnel at its downstream end. The settling tunnel is ending up in the existing access tunnel just upstream of the surge tank:. The new settling tunnel can be constructed while the project remains in operation. There are two bends in the headrace tunnel upstream of the surge tank: and the inclined shaft. These bends are introducing secondary currents which cause mixing of the flow. Sediments carried along the floor are to some extent brought back to the upper layers downstream of these bends. The, best location for the split point is therefore just upstream of the first of these two bends. There are some 860 m straight reach of the headrace tunnel upstream of this point and the accumulation of suspended load' in the lower water segments has reached a maximum at this point, considering the entire tunnel system. The uniform length of the settling tunnel is 98 meter. It is possible to divert about 2.1 m 3/s (30% of the flow) to the settling tunnel when the span of the settling tunnel is 3.5 m. This arrangement is shown in Figure 7. A small headloss must be introduced in order to obtain the most favourable split ratio. The split ratio is hydraulically controlled by the throttling structure in the main tunnel just upstream of the access tunnel. This will be obtained by a stop log structure or a "throttling gate" which will be tuned in when the plant will start to operate. The trap efficiency of the existing situation

with the plant

operating at full load is shown in

Figure 5 and marked with label a). The computed trap efficiency for the settling tunnel is shown with label b). Some sediments will also settle out in the main tunnel downstream of the split point. The trap

efficiency of this tunnel may be increased if the depth is increased in the tunnel by 1.6 meter (including the 0.6 meter deep hopper) as shown on the graph labelled c). The computed overall trap

efficiency combining the exclusion of sediments in the existing basins, the settling tunnel and the headrace tunnel downstream of the split point is computed for particle sizes 0.10, 0.15 and 0.20 rum

  • a) + b) + c). If the main tunnel is not enlarged and

no flushing arrangement is installed, the overall trap

efficiency of the project will be as shown with label

  • a) + b). A summary of these results are shown in

Table 2.

4

REFERENCES

Aspen, B.V. and Stale, H, (1992): "Serpent sediment sluicing systems: A milestone in sediment handling techniques", Small hydro 92, New Delhi.

Bajaracharya, S.M. (1996): "Sediment exclusion at ror projects, the split and settle concept. Case study: Kali Gandaki 'A' hydroelectric project, Nepal", Trondheim.

Basnyat, S. (1996): "Monitoring of sediment load and it's abrasion effects in Jhimruk power plant", BPC Kathmandu.

de Silva, A.W.C,J. (1996): "Sediment exclusion at ror projects, the split and settle concept, hydraulic model study", Trondheim.

Jacobsen, T., Lysne, O.K .• Olsen, N.R.B. and Stale, H. (1995):

"Sediment control: recent developments in headworks", Hydropower & Dams March 1995.

Stale, H. (1993): Withdrawal of water from Himalayan rivers ­ sediment control at intakes, Trondheim.

104

Hydropower'97, Broch, Lysne, Flatab0 & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5410 BBB 6

First world development in a third world environment: The challenges and solutions to environmental impact mitigation during construction phases of hydropower projects in Tanzania, East Africa

P.A. McCauley Terhell

WEGS Consultants, Arusha, Tanzania

ABSTRACT: Integration of the Environmental impact assessment (EIA) in the

project cycle is the accepted

method of ensuring environmentallysound projects. The EIA and required mitigation are often perceived by engineers and contractors as a barrier, rather than an aid, to project development. Third world infrastructure and support are limited, making project and mitigation implementation difficult. If perceptions are not changed, and mitigation is not pro-active, the ErA slowly becomes separated from the project cycle and

avoidable negative impacts occur. This paper discusses the reasons that EIA separation occurs and how the environmental specialist, as a partner in the project cycle, shares the responsibility of project development and construction impact mitigation. The environmental specialist interprets the first world environmental concepts and provides mitigation specifications and criteria to assist in overcoming third world challenges encountered by the engineer and contractor.· Experiences of Pangani Falls and Lower Kihansi Hydropower Projects in Tanzania illustrates the benefits of EIA integration.

  • 1. INTRODUCTION

Third world countries can successfully manage and develop their water resources for hydropower energy generation. Economic and industrial growth are stimulated as the national energy infrastructure is expanded. International engineers, contractors, donors and funding institutions are called upon to be partners to the development of a third world nation. Donors and funding institutions focus on funding sustainable and environmentally sound projects. EIA is a prerequisite to project funding and development, and expected to be successfully integrated in the project cycle. This integration is a familiar theme in policies of the World Bank, UN and many international donor agencies. The project country and implementors are expected to participate in the success of EIA integration, and consequently impact mitigation. Separation of the EIA from the project cycle creates potential for serious impacts to occur. Reactive mitigation to these often avoidable impacts can be more expensive, harder to mitigate and can

become a source of dissension among the impactor and mitigation enforcer. The solution is pro-active mitigation of construction impacts integrated early

on in the project

cycle, avoiding delays, serious

impacts and expensive reactive mitigation

  • 1.1. TheProfiles of the Project Cycle and EIA

The project cycle proceeds with a demand for the development action, feasibility, design, tendering, construction, commissioning, and operation and

maintenance.

Prior

to

the

EIA,

environmental

screening and preliminary assessment take place, reviewing the proposed project demand, feasibility and pre-design criteria. When this preliminary phase recognizes significant impacts, and EIA is undertaken. TheEIA profile consists of impact; identification, prediction, evaluation, mitigation and documen­ tation. The EIA gains pertinent knowledge of the natural, social, and economic conditions.

105

Hydropower'97, Breen, Lysne, FlatabfJ & Helland-Hansen (eds) © 1997 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5410 888 6

Numerical modelling of 2-dimensional dam-break flow

Juha P. Laasonen

Oy Yesirakentaja, Helsinki, Finland

ABSTRACT: The propagation of the dam-break wave in the river is usually modelled by l-dimensional hydrodynamical model. The model assumes constant water level over the cross-section. This model might not

be applicaple in the near-field modelling. The partial

breach might occur and the dam-break wave may

endanger human life or property. The velocity in the cross-section is unevenly distributed and there are local changes in the water level. Therefore 2-dimensional model will be more suitable for simulating the water levels in the near-field. The dam-break is dynamic phenomenon. The flow in the breach section is in most cases supercritical. Also vertical velocities and the differences in the water level might be considerable. The applicability of a 2­ dimensional finite-difference scheme is tested. The equations, which are in conservative form, are solved implicitly. The alternating direction implicit method (ADI) is employed.

The model was tested

by comparing the results of the physical model. Numerical calculations were in good

agreement with the scale model results. In the case study the calculations were made in the occurence of the

partial breach of the dam.

Keywords: hydraulics, dam-break, numerical modelling

1. INTRODUCTION

differences in the water levels can be remarkable. In this case one-dimensional dam-break simulation

Over 100 years have hydraulic researchers studied is not sufficient, if it is necessary to have some

. the dam-break

flow. Already in year 1892 Ritter

introduced the analytical solution of dam-break

wave. The solution was based on

the St Venantin

(1871) equations for unsteady flow. The resistance

information on the water levels behind the dam. One-dimensional calculation assumes that the water level will be constant over the cross-section. More reliable results could be achieved by using two­

term was not included. In the end of the Second dimensional model.

World War the Allied Powers studied dam-break flow to be used as a military weapon and the

In this paper some results of two-dimensional hydrodynamical model is presented. The model is

graphical calculation methods were used to tested in order to simulate dam-break wave in the

determine the water levels (Chow, 1959). The vicinity of a dam. The subject is treated from the

calculation were transfered into the computers during 1950's and 1960's and during that time also

the numerical

methods were developed. First 2­

hydrodynamical point of view. The condition of the breach is notconsidered. First some physical properties of the dam-break flow are described. The

dimensional calculations were made in the end of present numerical model and a review of two­ the 1970's and it became widely used in the 1980's. dimensional dam-break flow modelling are briefly

The water will spread widely during the partial .,breach of a dam. Only part of the cross-sectional area is active while the rest is used for storage. The

presented. Finally, some published experiments

have been used to verify the validity of the present

numerical

model and a case study is described.

459

  • 2. THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF DAM­

BREAK FLOW

The river behind the dam can be narrow or wide. The complete failure of the dam can be assumed, when dam-break flow in the narrow river is simulated. This is not unrealistic assumption which was observed in the failures of Teton and Malpasset dam (Cunge et al, 1980). The complete failure of a dam is not possible in the wide river. The flow through the breach section is dimensional and vertical velocities might be considerable. At the beginning of a dam failure a negative wave is created and it will propagate upstream. The flow in the reservoir is usually subcritical, until the wave reaches the upper end of the reservoir. After that the flow condition will be determined by the reservoir's topography and the discharge which enters into the reservoir. Positive wave propagates downstream of the dam. Initially the river bed can be dry or there exists some water depth. In dry bed the wave front has very strong curvature near its tip, where the roll

waves are. The

celerity of the wave front is equal to

the flow velocity behind the front. When the wave propagates in the water, its front is like hydraulic bore. The wave front has sharp discontinuity (there are two water levels and discharges in the same point). The flow conditions depends upon the topography and the initial downstream water depth. For a rectangular frictionless cross-section, if the ratio of initial downstream depth to the reservoir water depth is less than about 0.14, the flow condition downstream of the dam will be

supercritical. Otherwise it will be subcritical (Cunge

et al, 1980).

  • 3. NUMERICAL MODELLING OF DAM­

BREAK FLOW

The propagation of the dam-break wave in the river is usually modelled by I-dimensional , hydrodynamical model. The flow is like a rapid flood wave. These models are based usually, on the St Venant equations for unsteady flow. The assumptions of the validity of the equations will be violated. The dam-break flow is not one­ dimensional, the vertical accelerations are considerable and there may be large variations in the water levels across the river. The errors will be

mnurrnzed by using full equations (e.g. convective terms are included). The change in the flow condition (subcritical / supercrtical) will make the calculation more difficult, if it will occur simultaneously in different places or at the same location at different time. This will cause stability problems and usually some numerical diffusion is added into the model. The modelling of dam-break flow in dry bed is very difficult task. The water depth in front of the wave will approach zero. The resistance laws are usually inversely proportional to water depth and the resistance term will approach infinity. Although the assumptions are violated and above described problems are difficult, the results of the numerical simulations are in most cases in good agreement with the reality. , Detailed area in the near field can b'e modelled by two-dimensional model. This can be the area downstream ofthe breach site or the river curve, where the water levels and the velocities are different in the inner and outer curve. The other parts of the river can be modelled by one­ dimensional model. The results of the one model can be used as boundary conditions to the other model. The detailed modelling is not necessary to perform, if there is no danger to the human being or property.

4. TWO-DIMENSIONAL NUMERICAL MODEL

The accuracy of the numerical calculation can be divided into the accuracy of the model and the initial data. If the initial data e.g. the topography or boundaryconditions are insufficient, the results can not considered reliable even the model is accurate. On the other hand the weak accuracy of the model can reduce the reliability of the results. Therefore the reliability of the numerical calculation should be based on the accuracy of the model and on the knowledge of the modelled area. '

4.1 The equations of the flow and the numerical solution of the equations

The partial differential equations of the nearly horizontal flow can be presented in the Euler form or in conservative form. The velocities and the water depth are the variables in the Euler form, In ' conservative form the velocities are multiplied by

460

..

IIII l

-

'j'

~-----------------------< ~

the water depth. The present numerical model is based on the conservative form equations. Two­

dimensional nearlyhorizontal flow can be presented by two momentum and continuity equations. The momentum equations in x- and y-directions are

2 o( ud) a(u d) a(uvd) + + -: ..... , ..... .... --: + at
2
o( ud)
a(u
d)
a(uvd)
+
+
-:
.....
,
..... ....
--:
+
at
ax
oy
(1 )
2
a(vd)
a(v
d)
a (uvd)
+
+
+
at
ay
ox
oh
2
n 2
v VU 2
+
v
)
o
+
<