3rd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in

Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, October 14-16, 2009, Brno, Czech Republic

WATER HAMMER EFFECTS DURING PELTON TURBINE

LOAD REJECTION

Uroš KARADŽIû*
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

H2
Anton BERGANT
Litostroj Power d.o.o., Slovenia
Petar VUKOSLAVýEVIû
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

ABSTRACT
This paper deals with water hammer phenomena in a high-head hydropower plant Peruüica,
Montenegro. During its first phase of modernisation and refurbishment new distributors (needle
valves) have been installed on the first two Pelton turbine units. Water hammer is investigated for the
case of load rejection under governor control from different initial powers of the first turbine unit.
Closure of the Pelton turbine distributors is modelled by two different closing laws i.e. assumed
(numerical) closing law and law that considers actual (measured) needle stroke. Standard quasi-steady
friction model for calculating friction losses in the plant’s penstocks is used. Turbine rotational speed
change, for all cases, is calculated taking into account all influential torques. Numerical results for
different distributors closing laws are compared with results of measurements. All numerical models
show satisfactory agreement between numerical and measured results.

KEYWORDS
Water hammer; Pelton turbine; Load rejection; Turbine speed change.

1. INTRODUCTION
Planning of new or revitalisation and modernisation of existing hydropower plants (HPPs)
requires detailed water hammer analysis in order to get maximum and minimum pressures as
the most important parameters in the design process of the plant components. Causes of water
hammer in hydropower plants may be different, for example: turbine start-up and stop, load
acceptance and load reduction, load rejection under governor control, emergency shut-down
and unwanted runaway, and closure and opening of safety valves. This paper investigates
water hammer effects in Peruüica hydropower plant (HPP), Montenegro during load rejection
under governor control from different initial powers of the first Pelton turbine unit. In the first
part of the paper mathematical tools for solving water hammer equations are presented. Water
hammer is described by two hyperbolic partial differential equations; continuity and
momentum equation. These equations are traditionally solved by the method of characteristics
(MOC) [1], [2]. Friction losses in the plant’s penstocks are calculated using standard quasi-
steady model. Two different Pelton turbine distributor’s closing laws are presented, (1)
*
Corresponding author: Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Montenegro, Džordža Vašingtona
bb, Podgorica, Montenegro, phone: +382 69 381834, fax: +382 20 206131, email: uros.karadzic@ac.me

443
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

closing law that considers the actual (measured) needle stroke (ANS) and (2) the assumed
(numerical) closing law (CNS). Turbine speed change during load rejection under governor
control is calculated taking into account dissipative torques including the shaft bearing
friction torque and ventilation losses in the turbine housing. In the second part of the paper
comparisons of numerical and measured results are made for turbine load rejection cases from
different initial powers. It is shown that all the numerical results give good agreement with the
results of site measurements.

2. THEORETICAL MODELLING
Water hammer is propagation of plane pressure waves in pipelines. For most engineering
applications simplified water hammer equations are used [1], [2]:
∂H a2 ∂Q
+ =0 (1)
∂t gA ∂x
∂H 1 ∂Q f Q| Q |
+ + =0 (2)
∂x gA ∂t 2 gDA2
where, H = piezometric head (head), t = time, a = pressure wave speed, g = gravitational
acceleration, A = pipe area, Q = discharge, x = distance along the pipe, f = friction factor, and
D = pipe diameter. Traditionally a quasi-steady friction factor is used in water hammer
analysis. This approach is satisfactory for the cases considered in this paper (slow transients
[3]). The method of characteristics (MOC) is a standard numerical method for the solution of
water hammer equations. The staggered (diamond) grid [1] in applying the MOC is used in this
paper. At a boundary (reservoir, Pelton turbine), a device-specific equation replaces one of the
MOC water hammer compatibility equations.

Pelton turbine output is regulated by control of discharge that acts on the turbine wheel.
Discharge control is performed by means of a needle which closes or opens the throat of the
nozzle (see Fig.1) and with appropriate position of the jet deflector. The discharge through the
nozzle depends on the position of the needle valve and it is not dependent on the turbine
rotational speed [4]. Consequently, water hammer equations and the dynamic equation of the
turbine unit rotating parts can be solved separately. In this way the instantaneous head at the
nozzle inlet and the instantaneous discharge through the nozzle are calculated by the MOC
algorithm and these values are then used as an input in the solution method for the dynamic
equation of the unit rotating parts.

Fig.1 Pelton turbine distributor (needle valve)

The instantaneous discharge through the nozzle ((Qu)t) is determined from the following
relation:
(Qu )t = K Q Am 2 g ( H u ,t − H d ) (3)

2
444
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

where, KQ = nozzle discharge coefficient, Am = nozzle area (Am = πdm2/4), Hu,t = head at the
nozzle inlet, and Hd = const. = head downstream the nozzle. The needle closing law is
expressed as follows:
s = τ ⋅ smax (4)
where, s = needle stroke, and τ = dimensionless nozzle opening.

The load rejection under governor control of the turbine unit is the most frequent transient
regime. The turbine is disconnected from the electrical grid followed by simultaneous gradual
closure of the needle(s) to the speed-no-load position and controlled manouvre of the jet
deflector(s) i.e. rapid activation at the first instant followed by gradual adjustment of the
deflector to the speed-no-load position. The equation that describes dynamic behaviour of the
Pelton turbine unit rotating parts during load rejection under governor control is [5]:

H2
dϕ
Ta = mh − m fr − mair (5)
dt
where, ϕ = n/nr = relative speed change, n = turbine rotational speed (traditionally in rpm), r =
rated conditions, Ta = mechanical starting time [2], mh = dimensionless hydraulic torque, mfr =
dimensionless shaft bearing friction torque, and mair = dimensionless fluid damping torque
(ventilation losses in the turbine housing). The dimensionless hydraulic torque is expressed as
follows:
1 D
mh = Fh k (6)
Mr 2
where, Mr = rated torque and Fh = jet hydraulic force defined by the following equation [6],
[7]:
Fh = 2 ρQm (Vm − u ) (7)
with u = peripheral velocity:
D πn
u = k r (ϕ + 1) (8)
60
where, Dk = wheel diameter, Qm = discharge to the turbine wheel, and Vm = jet velocity (Vm =
Qm / Am). The discharge that acts on the turbine wheel can be given from the following equation
(t ≤ tdef) [5]:
0.11
§ t ·¸
Qm = Qu ¨1 − (9)
¨ t ¸
© def ¹

where, tdef = jet deflector operating time. The dimensionless shaft bearing friction torque is
[7], [8]:
1 D
m fr = µb b (RAb + RBb ) (10)
Mr 2
where, Db = shaft bearing diameter, and µb = shaft bearing friction coefficient. The resultant
forces in the shaft bearings RAb, RBb of the horizontal-shaft unit are due to hydraulic force,
weight of the wheels, weight of the shaft and weight of the generator. The dimensionless fluid
damping torque is expressed by [8]:
1 nr2
K air 2 (ϕ + 1)
2
mair = (11)
Mr 60
where, Kair = fluid (air) damping coefficient. The hydraulic torque affects the turbine wheel
until the jet deflector deflects all the water into the tailrace (t=tdef). At t > tdef the hydraulic
torque is set to zero. When the needle reaches speed-no-load position (about 3% of the nozzle
opening), the jet deflector moves to its open position allowing the jet to reach the turbine

3
445
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

wheel. At the needle speed-no-load position the distributor provides sufficient discharge to
maintain the rated turbine rotational speed. In this case the hydraulic torque is balanced with
the disipation torques. The dynamic equation of unit rotating parts is soloved analitically for
all cases considered [5].

3. PERUûICA HPP FLOW-PASSAGE SYSTEM

Peruüica HPP flow-passage system is a complex system comprised of a concrete tunnel (LT =
3335 m, DT = 4.8 m), orifice type surge tank (orifice head loss coefficients: ζin = 1.65 and ζout
= 2.48 during inflow and outflow, respectively) of cylindrical cross-section (DST = 8.0 m)
with an expansion at elevation z = 611.0 m (DST = 12.0 m) and overflow (elevation: zov =
628.0 m; width of the overflow weir: bov = 7.98 m with discharge coefficient µov = 0.4) and
three parallel steel penstocks with horizontal-shaft Pelton turbines built at their downstream
ends (see Fig.2). The maximum water level at the intake is 613 m and the minimum one is
602.5 m. The penstock I feeds two turbine units (A1 and A2) with rated unit power of 39
MW, penstock II feeds three turbine units (A3, A4 and A5) of 39 MW each and penstock III
feeds two units (A6 and A7) of 59 MW each. A new turbine unit (A8) with a rated power of
59 MW is to be installed in the near future. The length of each penstock is 1920 m, 1966 m
and 2014 m, respectively. The respective equivalent penstock diameter [2] is 1965 mm, 2160
mm and 2570 mm. Calculated pressure wave speeds are as follows, aT = 1354 m/s, aI = 1148
m/s, aII = 1123 m/s and aIII = 1152 m/s.

Fig.2 Layout of Peruüica HPP, Montenegro

The Pelton wheel diameter of units A1 to A5 is Dk = 2400 mm and for units A6 and A7 is Dk
= 2100 mm. Basic characteristics of the Pelton turbine units are presented in Tab.1 below.

Rated unit power Rated net head Rated speed

Turbine unit
Pr (MW) Hr (m) nr (min-1)
A1,A2,A3,A4 39 526 375
A5 39 526 375
A6,A7 59 526 428
The polar moment of
Number of runners Number of needles
inertia of the unit
Turbine unit per turbine unit per turbine runner
rotating parts J (tm2)
A1,A2,A3,A4 2 168.8 1
A5 2 168.8 1
A6,A7 2 200 2

4
446
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

Closing time of the Opening time of the

Stroke of the needle
Turbine unit needle needle
smax (mm)
tc (s) to (s)
A1,A2,A3,A4 150 85 30
A5 195 80 30
A6,A7 166 80 50

Tab.1 Characteristics of Pelton turbine units

Influential quantities have been continuously measured during transient operating regimes
including pressure at the upstream end of the distributor, stroke of the needle, stroke of the jet
deflector and turbine rotational speed. These measurements have been carried out on turbine

H2
units A1 and A2.

4. COMPARISONS OF NUMERICAL AND FIELD TEST RESULTS

Various transient operating regimes have been investigated in the Peruüica HPP during
commissioning of the turbine units A1 and A2, including the unit start-up, load acceptance
and reduction, load rejection under governor control and emergency shut-down, and closure
of turbine inlet valve against the discharge. In this paper the results of measurements and
corresponding numerical simulations for the case of load rejection under governor control of
the turbine unit A1 are presented. Load rejection cases of A1 have been done from different
initial powers i.e. P0 = {10, 20, 30 and 40} MW (Tests A1P10MW, A1P20MW, A1P30MW,
A1P40MW, respectively). Tabs.2, 3 and 4 present the main initial parameters for these four
tests. Flow in penstock I is turbulent with a large Reynolds number.

Test QI (m3/s) ReI × 106 QII (m3/s) QIII (m3/s) QT (m3/s)

A1P10MW 2.2 1.42 0 16.6 18.8
A1P20MW 4.1 2.7 0 16.6 20.7
A1P30MW 6.4 4.15 0 16.6 23.0
A1P40MW 8.4 5.46 2.1 19.7 30.2

Tab.2 Initial discharges through tunnel and penstocks

Penstock I Penstock II Penstock III Tunnel

Test
f0 f0 f0 f0
A1P10MW 0.012 0.012 0.016 0.015
A1P20MW 0.011 0.012 0.016 0.015
A1P30MW 0.011 0.012 0.016 0.015
A1P40MW 0.011 0.013 0.016 0.015

Tab.3 Steady friction factors for all tests

Test zR (m) tc (s) s0 (mm) tdef (s)

A1P10MW 606.3 14.1 25.2 1.6
A1P20MW 605.3 28.2 50.6 1.6
A1P30MW 607.0 45.1 82.3 1.6
A1P40MW 605.8 73.0 128.0 2.0

Tab.4 Closure time, intake level and initial opening of the nozzle

5
447
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

4.1 Comparison of numerical and measured heads at the turbine inlet

Transient head and discharge for the Peruüica HPP flow-passage system have been calculated
using a diamond grid MOC code with the basic time step of ∆t = 0.040 s. Calculated and
measured results from two distictive load rejection cases (A1P10MW and A1P40MW) are
shown in Figs.3 and 4. The maximum heads of all four cases are summarised in Table 5.

Calculated and measured heads at the turbine inlet for the load rejection under governor
control of the turbine unit A1 from the initial power P0 = 10 MW are shown in Fig.3 (Test
A1P10MW). The speed-no-load opening of the nozzle in this case is 3.4 % (Fig.3(a)). Note
that the process of attaining the speed-no-load position for all investigated turbine load
rejection cases is governed by the turbine control system. The maximum measured head of
558.5 m occurs at time t = 3.7 s when the reflected pressure wave arrives back to the nozzle
with the head rise of 18.8 m. The maximum calculated heads obtained by the ANS and CNS
models are 558.8 m and 558.3 m, respectively (Figs.3(b) and 3(c)). The calculated maximum
heads match the measured one and are lower than the maximum permissible system head of
602.0 m. The ANS and CNS models show very good agreement with the measured data
during the nozzle closure period. After this, both models give some smaller head amplitudes
but with reasonable shape of pressure traces. At time t = 260 s the nozzle opening is increased
(load increase) with the system head drop that is properly simulated by the ANS model (see
also Fig.3(b)). The CNS model is not able to simulate this process because the nozzle opening
is assumed to be at constant position during this phase of transient regime (Fig.3(c)).

Fig.3 Comparison of needle stroke (s) and head at the turbine inlet (datum level z = 65.8 m; time step
∆t=0.040 s). Load rejection under governor control of A1 from P0 = 10.0 MW (Test A1P10MW).

6
448
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

Numerical and measured heads at the turbine inlet for the load rejection under governor
control of the turbine unit A1 from the maximal initial power of P0 = 40 MW are shown in
Fig.4 (Test A1P40MW). The speed-no-load opening of the nozzle in this case is 4.1 %
(Fig.4(a)). The maximum measured system head for A1P40MW case occurs at the end of the
nozzle closure period and its value is 555.6 m with head rise of 23.5 m. The maximum
calculated heads given by the ANS and CNS model are the same and its value is 555.2 m
(Figs.4(a) and 4(b)). Numerical models show excellent agreement with measured data during
and after the nozzle closure period.

H2

Fig.4 Comparison of needle stroke (s) and head at the turbine inlet (datum level z = 65.8 m; time step
∆t=0.040 s). Load rejection under governor control of A1 from P0 = 40.0 MW (Test A1P40MW).

Tab.5 shows the maximum measured and computed heads for all four load rejection cases,
their head rise and time when the maximum head occurs, measured from the beginning of the
nozzle closure period. Tests A1P10MW and A1P20MW produce the maximum head t = 3.7 s.
This may be explained by smaller effect of system friction losses compared with those in tests
A1P30MW and A1P40MW.

Measurement ANS model CNS model

Test case
Hmax (m) ∆H (m) tocc (s) Hmax (m) ∆H (m) tocc (s) Hmax (m) ∆H (m) tocc (s)
A1P10MW 558.5 18.8 3.7 558.8 19.1 3.7 558.3 18.6 3.7
A1P20MW 553.2 15.9 3.7 553.7 15.4 3.7 552.8 15.5 3.7
A1P30MW 553.9 17.9 42.0 553.9 17.9 42.0 553.7 17.7 42.0
A1P40MW 555.6 23.5 69.0 555.2 23.2 69.0 555.2 23.2 69.0

Tab.5 Maximum measured and computed head, head rise and time when the maximum head occurs

7
449
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

4.2 Comparison of computed and measured turbine rotational speeds

The turbine rotational speed change of the turbine unit A1 during load rejection under
governor control from different initial power has been calculated using the appropriate
solution method of the dynamic equation of the unit rotating parts (Eq.(5)). The instantaneous
head and discharge through the nozzle that is used as an input into Eq.(5) solution formulae
have been previously calculated by the MOC. Fig.5 shows comparison between the computed
and measured rotational speed changes for all case studies considered.

Fig.5 Rotational speed change (n0 = 375 min-1) during load rejection under governor control of A1
from different initial powers P0 = {10, 20, 30, 40} MW

The maximum measured and calculated turbine speed rise for all tests occurs at time t = tdef.
The computed maximum turbine rotational speed rise perfectly matches the maximum
measured value for all four cases (Fig.5). As expected, the maximum speed rise of 11.0 %
occurs for the Test A1P40MW. After the jet deflector deflects the water into the tailrace, the
turbine wheel is not affected by the hydraulic torque and the turbine speed decrease is
influenced by the dissipation torques. There are some discrepancies in the phase of speed
decrease due to the complex flow behavior in the turbine housing. The ventilation losses are
dependent on fluid density inside the turbine housing. At the needle speed-no-load position
the turbine reaches the rated rotational speed with some minor numerical oscillations. In all
four cases the maximum turbine speed rise is well below the permissible speed rise of 25%.

5. CONCLUSIONS
Numerical results obtained from the two different distributor (needle valve) closing laws are
compared with results of measurements given for the turbine load rejection under governor

8
450
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

control cases from different initial powers. From comparisons between the computed and the
measured results of measurements it may be seen that the general patterns of the computed
transient pressure histories agree well with measured data. Numerical model that considers
the actual (measured) needle stroke (ANS) and the numerical model with the assumed needle
stroke (CNS) show similar behavior. It means that CNS model properly simulates physical
process in the hydraulic system and can be employed in cases when recorded data of needle
stroke are not available. The turbine rotational speed change is calculated separately by the
appropriate solution of the dynamic equation of the turbine unit rotating parts. Developed
numerical model accurately determines the maximum rotational speed rise for all cases. There
are some discrepancies during speed-no-load conditions but with reasonable agreement
between computational and measured results.

H2
6. REFERENCES
[1] Wylie, E.B., Streeter, V.L.: Fluid Transients in Systems. Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliffs.
1993.
[2] Chaudhry, M.H.: Applied Hydraulic Transients. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. New
York. 1987.
[3] Karadžiü, U., Bergant, A., Vukoslavþeviü, P.: A Novel Pelton Turbine Model for Water
Hammer Analysis. Strojniški Vestnik – Journal of Mechanical Engineering. 55. 2009.
Accepted for publication.
[4] Benišek, M.: Hydraulic Turbines. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering. Belgrade. 1998
(in Serbian).
[5] Karadžiü, U.: Modelling of complex boundary conditions for transients in hydraulic
systems. PhD Thesis. University of Montenegro. Podgorica. 2008 (in Serbian).
[6] Nechleba, M.: Hydraulic Turbines – Their Design and Equipment. Artia. Prague. 1957.
[7] Zhang, Zh., Müller, J.: Efficiency and runaway characteristics of a Pelton turbine.
Hydro 2007, 2007. CD-ROM.
[8] Thake, J.: The Micro-Hydro Pelton Turbine Manual. ITDG Publishing. London. 2000.

7. NOMENCLATURE
A (m2) pipe area Q (m3.s-1) discharge
Am (m2) nozzle area Qm (m3.s-1) discharge to wheel
a (m.s-1) wave speed Qu (m3.s-1) nozzle discharge
bov (m) width of weir Rb (N) resultant force
D (m) pipe diameter Re (-) Reynolds number
Db (m) shaft diameter s (m) needle stroke
Dk (m) wheel diameter Ta (s) mechanical starting time
DST (m) surge tank diameter t (s) time
Dk (m) valve diameter tc (s) needle closing time
dm (m) nozzle diameter tdef (s) jet deflector operating time
Fh (N) jet hydraulic force to (s) needle opening time

9
451
 IAHR WG Meeting on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Brno

f (-) friction factor tocc (s) time at maximum head

g (m.s-2) gravi. acceleration u (m.s-1) peripheral velocity
H (m) piezometric head Vm (m.s-1) jet velocity
Hd (m) nozzle down. head x (m) distance along the pipe
Hu (m) nozzle upstream head z (m) water level, elevation
J (kg.m2) moment of inertia ∆H (m) head rise
Kair (N.m.s-2) damping coefficient ∆t (s) time step
KQ (-) discharge coefficient ϕ (-) relative speed change
L (m) length ρ (kg.m-3) water mass density
mair (-) damping torque µb (-) shaft bearing friction coef.
mfr (-) friction torque µov (-) overflow discharge coef.
Mr (N.m) rated torque τ (-) dimensionless nozzle open.
n (rpm) rotational speed ζin (-) surge tank inflow coef.
Subscripts: max maximum
R reservoir r rated conditions
T tunnel 0 initial conditions
I, II, III penstock number Abbreviations:
ANS actual needle stroke CNS assumed needle stroke
HPP hydropower plant MOC method of characteristics

10
452