KATHMANDU UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND GEOMATICS ENGINEERING

Dhulikhel, Kavre

Experiment on Water Hammer effect & surge Analysis in

Surge Tank

Group Member Project Supervisor: Prof.Dr-IngRamesh Kumar Maskey

Raj Kumar KC
Gokarna Sijwal
Ajit Shrestha
Gopal Thapa
Suraj Prajapati
Bhusan Neupane
Subarna Kc

Micro Project on Hydropower I (iiiyr/iisem) 2016

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, we would like to express our deepest sense of gratitude to ourProject supervisor,
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ramesh Kumar Maskey, Associate Dean of School of Engineering, who offered
his continuous advice and encouragement throughout the course of this project. We thank him
for the systematic guidance and great effort he put in the completion of this project which is an
unforgettable experience for us.

We would like to thank Er.PratikShahi for his suggestions. Also,Er.GokarnaPaudel, for granting
us access to the mechanical workshop. We are thankful to the staff of TTC for their technical
assistance in construction of support benches required for our project.

This report is an outcome of not only the efforts from the group members but also many others
who have contributed to the project directly or indirectly. We are grateful to those who have
always encouraged and helped us.

2
ABSTRACT
We, the students of Civil Engineering, have done experiment on water hammer and surge
analysis in surge tank as the micro-project of 3rd year 2nd semester, under the supervision of the
Department of Civil and Geomatics Engineering (DOCGE).

The model is located in the Hydraulic lab of Kathmandu University.The model consists of an
upper reservoir with a tunnel connected to it with surge tank and a penstock. Various values of
the parameters were used in the pipe fittings to control the flow in the pipe. The water level in
the surge tank was observed for fully and partially opening of valve. The theoretical and practical
values were compared and analyzed.

This project provides knowledge about Water hammer effect and surge analysis in surge tank of
the Hydropower Plant.

3
Table of Contents
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS ....................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURES ......................................................................................................................... 6
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 7
Transient flow ........................................................................................................................................... 7
Water Hammer ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Classification of valve closure time ........................................................................................................... 8
SURGE TANK (relief device against water hammer) ................................................................................. 8
OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................................. 11
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 11
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................................................... 12
 Desk study ....................................................................................................................................... 13
 Consultation .................................................................................................................................... 13
 Field work ........................................................................................................................................ 13
 Office Work ..................................................................................................................................... 14
 Materials collection......................................................................................................................... 14
 Modeling ......................................................................................................................................... 14
 Model analysis ................................................................................................................................ 14
OBSERVATION AND CALCULATION ............................................................................................................. 15
 When the valve is fully open ........................................................................................................... 15
 When valve is partially open ........................................................................................................... 17
ANALYSIS OF RESULT................................................................................................................................... 18
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................................... 18

4
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

Ast Area of Surge Tank

At Area of tunnel
CPVC Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride
d Diameter of HRT
f Coefficient of friction
g Acceleration due to gravity
Hgross Gross head
Hnet Net head
Hl Head loss in HRT
HPP Hydropower Plant
HRT Headrace Tunnel
l Length of tunnel
Qtur Discharge through turbine
Re Reynolds number
T Time of oscillation
TTC Technical Training Centre
v Velocity through HRT

𝑣 Kinematic viscosity
Zmax Maximum surge height without friction
Zmax,upsurge Maximum surge height with friction
Zmin Minimum surge height without friction
Zmax,downsurge Minimum surge height with friction

5
LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURES

TABLES
Table No. (1) Measurement of Zmax,upsurge and Zmax,downsurge[for valve fully open]

Table No. (2) Measurement of Time of oscillation (T)[for valve fully open]

Table No. (3) Measurement of Zmax,upsurge and Zmax,downsurge[for valve partially open]

Table No. (4) Measurement of Time of oscillation (T)[for valve partially open]

FIGURES
Fig (i) Fluctuation of water in Surge Tank

Fig(ii) The surge cylcle under complete closure

Fig(iii) Damping effect under complete opening

Fig(iii) Autocad Drawing of the setup

6
INTRODUCTION

Transient flow
Transient flow is aflow where the flow velocity and pressure are changing with time. When
changes occur to a fluid system such as the starting or stopping of a pump, closing or opening a
valve, or changes in tank levels, then transient flow conditions exist: otherwise the system is
steady state.It is due to the changes of the flow from kinetic energy of water is transformed to
pressure energy.

Water Hammer
Whenever there is a valve movement in a pipeline a pressure wave propagates up and down the
pipeline often associated with a knocking noise, therefore the phenomenon is known as water
hammering. Water hammer in pipelines can also be defined as the change in pressure above or
below the normal working pressure caused by change in velocity of flow.

Causes of Water hammer

Water hammer is caused by the changes in velocity which are caused by:
 Valve operation (i.e. closure and opening of valves)
 Power failures
 Starting or shutdown of pumps
 Fluctuation in power demand in turbines
 Rupture of the line
 Mechanical failure of the control devices like valves, etc.

Effects of water hammer

The effects of water hammer are:

 High pressure fluctuations in pipe lines
 Rupture of pipe or valve if beyond safety limit
 Higher pressure requirements for the design of pipelines and penstocks etc.

Magnitude of pressure rise

The magnitude of the pressure rise depends on the time taken to close the valve, the velocity of
the flow, length of pipe and elastic properties of the material and liquid.

7
Classification of valve closure time
To study the pressure change with time at a point in a pipeline, the valve closure time can be
classified as:
1. Instantaneous closure of the valve
2. Rapidly closure of the valve
3. Gradually closure of the valve
The instantaneous closure of the valve is physically impossible.
When the time of closure is less than 2L/C, then the closure is rapid closure.
When the time of closure is greater than 2L/C, then the closure is slow closure.

SURGE TANK (relief device against water hammer)

Surge tank is located between the headrace pressure conduit and the steeply sloping penstock
pipe. In some instances surge tanks are applied both upstream of the penstock and the
downstream of the powerhouse. Surge tank is generally cylindrical storage reservoir which is
connected to a penstock pipe as close as possible to the turbine.

Fig (i) - Fluctuation of water in Surge Tank

8
Description
When the valve in a hydroelectric power plant is suddenly closed, because of its small inertia the
water in the penstock stops almost at once. The water in the pipeline, with large inertia retards
slowly. The difference in flows between pipeline and penstock causes a rise in the water level in
the surge tank. The water level rises above the static level of the reservoir water, producing a
counter-pressure so that water in the pipeline flows towards the reservoir and the level of water
in the surge tank drops. In the absence of damping, oscillation would continue indefinitely with
the same amplitude. The flow into the surge tank and water level in the tank at any time during
the oscillation depends on the dimension of the pipeline and tank and on the type of valve
movement.

The height of the surge tank is governed by the highest possible water level that can be expected
during operation. Variations in demand initiated by a rapid opening or closure of the valve or
turbine are followed with a time lag by the water masses moving in the tunnel. Upon the rapid
and partial closure of the valve following a sudden load decrease, water masses in the penstock
are suddenly decelerated, and one part of the continuous supply from the tunnel fills the surge
tank. The water surface in the surge chamber will be raised to above static level.
In case of rapid opening, the flow in the tunnel is smaller than the turbine demand to supply
water to the turbine. The water surface in the chamber will start to drop to below of the steady-
state level. To establish steady-flow conditions, the water surface will again start to rise from the
low point, but owing to the inertia of moving water, will again rise over the steady-level. The
cycle is repeated all over again with amplitudes reduced by friction, i.e. the oscillation is
damped. The phenomenon described is the water surface oscillation.

9
Fig(ii) - The surge cylcle under complete closure

Fig(iii) - Damping effect under complete opening

10
OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the project are as follows:

 To study the transient analysis of tunneling.
 To design headrace tunnel, surge tank and penstock through physical modeling.
 To find out the alternative solution of effects regarding transient mechanism.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

The following are the scope of the study undertaken:

 To fulfill the requirement of the micro project in 3rd year/2nd semester of the Hydropower
Engineering I.
 To create a concept on transient analysis on tunneling.
 Hydraulic design of Headrace Tunnel, Surge tank and Penstock for the hydropower plant.
 To familiarize the practical problems likely to face while designing and under taking such
projects.

Although the project was carefully done, we are aware of the limitations and shortcomings.The
following are the limitations of the project:
 The scale of our model is distorted.
 The designs were carried out on the basis of the convenience and availability of the
material in the market. Hence, the design output may not fulfill all the standards.
 Some of the materials that were used differ from that we had initially planned to use.

11
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

FIG(autocad drawing of the model)

All dimensions are in mm

Location of setup: The model was setup in the Hydraulic lab located in Kathmandu University.
Two Buckets were used , one for the purpose of generating a head of 30cm and the other for the
collection of water in the downstream which was used to measure the discharge. A piezometer
was placed alongside the bucket to maintain the constant head. For the headrace tunnel CPVC
pipe of 1.5m was used. The pipe and the bucket (u/s) was connected using a tanki knot and a ball
valve(A) was also placed to control the flow. We used T-joint to place the surge tank. A long
pipe was taken and certain portion of the pipe was cut longitudinally and made transparent using
plastic. To prevent the leakage dendrite and M-seal was used. The vertical penstock and headrace
tunnel along with surge tank was joined by using a elbow joint. Another CPVC pipe of length 70
cm was used as penstock.At the end of the penstock we used another ball valve(B) to control the
discharge of the water flowing to the bucket (d/s).

12
METHODOLOGY

DESK STUDY CONSULTATION

MATERIALS
COLLECTION OFFICE WORKS

MODEL CONSTRUCTION
FIELD WORKS
MODEL
CONSTRUCTION
MODEL
ANANLYSIS

 Desk study: Pre-phase research was done from different sources such as pre report of
Balephi, transient analysis of HPP and other journals, etc. All the related articles were
referred to. Library and the internet were used tremendously to help in our project.
Previous reports and study on the related matters were referred.

 Consultation: We had consulted with our seniors who had worked in potentially study
of Balephi-B. The supervisor of our project, Prof. Dr.-Ing Ramesh Kumar Maskey, was
very helpful to give his precious knowledge related to the topic. During the visit of the
site, the in situ office of the HPP was helpful to provide us with the necessary
information on the ongoing project. During our model construction, regular consultation
with our supervisor was done.

 Field work: On 15th of May we went to Balephi for our site-visit and also we roughly
measured the depth, velocity and discharge of Brahamayani River (Balephi-B). We also
went to the section office of Balephi hydropower and interacted with the locals about the
present situation projects. The visit included the site view of the area where the project
was to be constructed, visit to the tail race area of the tunnel.

13
 Office Work: We had calculated data such as velocity through head tunnel race,
penstock, head loss, net head etc. The method of similitude was applied to scale down the
properties of the actual tunnel, surge tank and penstock to our model. We had also
predicted the upsurge and down surge in the surge tank which will be further studied by
using the model. And further we are going to analysis the transient mechanism according
to that.

 Materials collection: Different markets and shops were visited near Banepa area for
our material collection. According to the available materials in the local markets, we
started to collect materials to be used for the different parts such as PVC pipes (for
tunnel, penstock), transparent pipes (for pressure measurement), ball valve, buckets (for
upstream and downstream reservoirs) etc.

 Modeling: After finishing the collection we started to make our model in hydraulic lab.
Mainly it consists of upstream reservoir, head race tunnel, surge tank and penstock. Since
we could not get desirable materials according to our calculated dimensions, it is in
distorted model. Initially we made two wooden stands for the support in mechanical
workshop. Then the holes required in the headrace tunnel and penstock was made by
drilling for measuring pressures. Also to connect the reservoir to surge tank via tunnel we
fitted MC PVC socket in the bucket. A T-joint socket was used to connect the surge tank
to the tunnel and an elbow socket was used to connect the tunnel to the penstock and at
the end of the penstock a ball valve was used to stop the flow abruptly or gradually to
study the characteristics in the surge tank. It took nearly 4 weeks to complete our model.

 Model analysis: On 4th week of July we started to analyze transient mechanism via our
model.
 At first we set up the instruments and checked whether it is in well condition or not.
 Then the upper bucket (20 liters) was filled with water for reservoir and the head of
30 cm was maintained.
 The valve near the bucket was opened and the static head in surge tank was observed
with the readings in the piezometer near the bucket and surge tank.
 Another bucket of same capacity (20 liters) was kept at the end of penstock, which
was filled with calculation of time to calculate the discharge through the pipe.
 After the bucket was filled, the valve at the end of the penstock was closed suddenly
to measure the oscillation at the surge tank with the maximum upsurge and minimum
down surge.
 The procedure was repeated for various openings at the valve at the end of penstock.

14
OBSERVATION AND CALCULATION

 When the valve is fully open

When the valve of the outlet is fully open there is no water in the surge tank during running
condition, it is due to the conversion of the potential energy in to the kinetic energy.

As we have taken the same cross-sectional area for the Head race tunnel, penstock so they have
same velocity.

vd
Re =
𝑣

Where,
v= 1m/s
d= 0.0254m

𝑣(of water) = 10-6 m2/s

Therefore, Re = 2.54*104
From moody’s chart(f)=0.028

𝑓𝑙𝑣 2
Hl =
2∗ 𝑔 ∗ 𝑑
Where, l =1.5m
g =9.81m2/s
So, Hl = 8.42cm
and The length of Penstock is 0.7m and head loss in penstock is 3.83cm
Constant(r)= (g*At/l*Ast)1/2=2.557
𝑄𝑡𝑢𝑟
Zmax = = 38.59cm
Ast∗ r
P0=(Hl/Zmax)=33.1cm
2 1
Zmax,upsurge=(1-3 P0+9 P02)*Zmax = 33.1cm
1
Zmaxdownsurge= Po *Zmax =-25.57cm
1+7( )
3

𝑃𝑜
Sudden demand = (-1-0.125*(𝑍𝑚𝑎𝑥))*Zmax= -41.3cm

15
Upsurge and down surge obtain from experiment
S. No Zmax Zmin DifferenceZmax DifferenceZmin
upsurge(cm) downsurge(cm) (cm) (cm)
1 34.8 9.7 1.7 15.87
2 36 10 2.9 15.57
3 34.8 9.16 1.7 16.41

Table No. (1)

From above experiment we know that the value for the Zmaxobtain from the observation and
calculation nearly matches while for the Zmin it doesn’t match but difference is in similar manner.

𝑙 ∗ 𝐴𝑠𝑡
T = 2𝜋√ = 2.46sec
𝑔∗ 𝐴𝑡

S.No Time of Difference

oscillation(s)
1 3.15 0.69
2 3.14 0.68
3 2.54 0.08
4 3.23 0.77
5 2.80 0.34
6 3.04 0.58
7 3.21 0.75
8 2.63 0.17

Table No. (2)

The experimentally obtain time of oscillation differ from the theoretical.

16
  When valve is partially open
Upsurge and down surge obtained from experiment
Value in the table is obtain by using formula on the basis of experimental velocity

Velocity Head
Trial through Velocity through Coeff. Of Zmax Zmax Zmin down Zsudden loss in Head loss in
No. nozzle(m/s) HRT/penstock(m/s) friction R (cm) upsurge(cm) surge(cm) draw(cm) HRT(cm) Penstock(cm)
1 3.78 0.323 0.032 2.557 12.65 12 10.67 13.65 1 0.47
2 2.63 0.303 0.033 2.557 11.87 11.27 10.06 12.84 0.91 0.42
3 3.5 0.3 0.033 2.557 11.69 11.11 9.93 12.64 0.89 0.42
4 3.44 0.294 0.033 2.557 11.52 10.95 9.81 12.45 0.862 0.402

Table No. (3)

Zmax Zmin
Trial experiment(without Zmax Zmin down Zmax Zmin Avg.Time of
experiment(without
No using formula) using formula) upsurge(cm) surge(cm) difference(cm) difference(cm) Oscillation(s)
1 16.5 1.5 12 10.67 4.5 9.17 2.58
2 15.3 0.1 11.27 10.06 4.03 9.96 2.69
3 15.9 1.3 11.11 9.93 4.79 8.63 2.78
4 16 1.4 10.95 9.81 5.05 8.41 2.64

Table No. (4)

17
ANALYSIS OF RESULT

When we partially open the valve, the Zmax obtain from experiment was nearer to the theoretical
one. The ratio of Zmax theoretical and Zmax experimental obtain when the valve was fully open
compared to the condition when the valve was partially open were not nearly equal. It may due
to less precise measurement of area of outlet during partial opening of valve. The value for the
difference of Zminin theoretical and practical is large in both fully and partially opening of the
valve.

From our experiment we observed that there was no water in the surge tank during running
condition for the fully opening case, while in case of partially open there was water in the surge
tank during running condition. In fully opening condition due to full conversion of potential into
kinetic energy there was no water in the surge tank but in case of partial open there is remaining
of some Potential energy so there was water in the surge tank.

From above result we came to know that the size require for the surge tank is larger for the fully
opening case than the partial opening one. We also observed that the head loss for higher
velocity is higher than the lower velocity so the size of the penstock should be larger than the
nozzle. The material of penstock should be capable of bearing the pressure generated during the
sudden closure of the valve. In our condition we were unable to close the valve suddenly but
even in the gradual closure there is rise in pressure which shows that we should consider it for
construction of penstock.

The time of oscillation obtain from the experiment is approximate to the theoretical one.

The velocity through the outlet is 4.43m/s in the theory while we obtain only 1m/s for the fully
opening valve and 3.78m/s for (2/13) opening of the valve.

CONCLUSION

The project was about the study on the transient analysis on the tunnel and penstock of the
hydropower plant. To study about the transient mechanism of the tunnel and penstock, we have
constructed the model. After the completion of model set up, we achieved our objective of study
and analysis in the components of the plant. The results obtained from the theory and experiment
was compared for the accuracy of work. The water level in the surge tank was noted for various
flow conditions and closure of valves. The time of oscillation in the surge tank was observed.

18