Field measurements

• Field measurements
• Pressure-time (Gibson)
• Ultrasound
• Current meter and pitot
• Thermodynamic
• Winter-Kennedy
 Data from Norwegian Power Plants
Installed Annual Average 1%
Power Plant Capasity Production Price Income loss
[MW] [GWh] [NOK/kWh] [MNOK/year] [NOK/year]
Kvilldal 1 240 2 913 0,4 1 165 11 652 000
Sima 1 120 2 812 0,4 1 125 11 248 000
Tonstad 960 3 666 0,4 1 466 14 664 000
Aurlans I 675 1 956 0,4 782 7 824 000
Tokke 430 2 142 0,4 857 8 568 000
Evanger 330 1 229 0,4 492 4 916 000
Brokke 330 1 417 0,4 567 5 668 000
Svartisen 310 1 200 0,4 480 4 800 000
Nedre Vinstra 308 1 212 0,4 485 4 848 000
Skjomen 300 1 085 0,4 434 4 340 000
Aura 290 1 605 0,4 642 6 420 000
Jostedal 286 867 0,4 347 3 468 000
Turbine Hydraulic Efficiency
measurements in the field
produced power Pproduced Pproduced
 hydraulic   
available power Pavailable Pproduced  Losses

• The losses includes:

–Friction losses
–Leakage losses
 Pproduced PGenerator
 hydraulic  
Pavailable  Generator  Q  p

• Gibson
• Ultrasound
• Current meter
• Thermodynamic
• Winter-Kennedy
Uncertainty of the measurements
3
Thermodynamic
Termodynamisk
Gibson
Current meter
Flygel
Uncertainty [%]

2
Ultrasound
Ultralyd
Målenøyaktighet

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Head [m]
Fallhøyde
Gibson (Pressure-time)
• Measuring the differential pressure upstream
the turbine while closing the guide vanes
• L > 9m (2D)

Apenstock
 Gibson (Pressure-time)
We apply Newton 2. law to an
element of the penstock:
dc
  g  dA Penstock   h     L  dA Penstock 
dt

Apenstock
 Gibson (Pressure-time)
dc
  g  dA Penstock   h     L  dA Penstock 
dt

By integration of the differential

pressure the equation becomes:
t  t1 c0 Q 0
L L
c
  h  dt  
g
  dc  
g  A Penstock
  dQ
A p e n s to c k t0 c Q
 Gibson (Pressure-time)
t  t1 c0 Q 0
L L
  h  dt  
g
  dc  
g  A Penstock
  dQ
t0 c Q

t  t1
By looking at the figure below we can see that: A    h  dt
t0

c
A p e n s to c k

Area = A

Closing time tl
 Gibson (Pressure-time)
t  t1 Q 0
L
  h  dt  
g  A Penstock
  dQ
t0 Q

Area = A 
L
A   Q
Closing time tl g  A Penstock


c
A p e n s to c k
g  A Penstock
Q  A
L
 Ultrasound
• Measurements along acoustic paths
• Measures along several paths to decrease uncertainty
• Can be combined with CFD
• The flow rate has to be calculated

t
Q  c i
 dA i c   cons tan t
A 2 l
c

Acoustic paths
Receiver Transmitter
 Velocity measurements with
current meter

• Measures velocity at one single point

• The flow rate has to be calculated

Q   c i  dA i
A
 Velocity measurements with Pitot
• Measures velocity at one single point
• The flow rate has to be calculated c  2  g  h

h = Differential pressure [m]

g = Gravity [m/s2]
c = Velocity [m/s]

h
 Pitot measurements
c
2 1 2 2
c1 c2
h1   z1  h 2   z2
2g 2g


2 1 2
c2
h  h1  h 2   h
2g

c  2  g h
 Pitot
measurements

A1
A2

A3
A6 A5 A
4

A8
8 A7

Q   Ai  c i
i 1
Q  A1  c 1  A 2  c 2  A 3  c 3  A 4  c 4  A 5  c 6  A 7  c 7  A 8  c 8
Winter-Kennedy
Relative measurement

Q  a (  h )
n

a and n have to be
decided from other flow
measurements
0,44 < n < 0,56

h
Example:
Winter-Kennedy measurements at Jhimruk
• Thermodynamic efficiency measurements gives
the accurate flow rate
• Winter-Kennedy measurements where carried
out at the same time
Pressure
taps
 Winter-Kennedy
Relative measurement at Jhimruk Power plant
2 ,4

2 ,2

2 ,0

1 ,8

1 ,6
F lo w R a t e [ m /s ]
3

1 ,4

1 ,2

0 ,4 5 1 9
Q = 2 ,7 6 4 8  p
1 ,0

0 ,8

0 ,6

0 ,4

0 ,2

0 ,0

0 ,0 0 ,1 0 ,2 0 ,3 0 ,4 0 ,5 0 ,6 0 ,7

D if f e r e n t ia l P r e s s u r e [ b a r ]
 Thermodynamic efficiency
measurements
• Assume that all losses will increase the
temperature of the water
• Typical temperature difference between
the inlet and outlet of a turbine will be:
0.01 - 0.03 °C

Emechanic
 hydraulic 
Ehydraulic

E mechanic  a   p T 1  p T 2   C p  T 1  T 2  
1
 
 V T 1  V T 2  g  Z T 1  Z T 2    E m
2 2

E hydraulic     p1  p 2  
1

 V1  V 2
2 2
  g  Z 1
 Z2
2
Thermodynamic efficiency
measurements
 Uncertainty in Thermodynamic Measurements
Temperature measurements
• Specific heat capacity for water, Cp = 4200 J/kg K

• If we assume that all of the energy in the power

plant is transformed in to heat:

Head T E  Cp  T  g  H n
[m] [K]

1000 2,338
500 1,169 g H
T  n

200 0,468 Cp

100 0,234
50 0,117
30 0,070
10 0,023
 Measured differential temperatures during
Thermodynamic Measurements

Head Differential temperatures at different losses

100% 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5%
[m] [K] [K] [K] [K] [K] [K] [K]
1000 2,338 0,234 0,210 0,187 0,164 0,140 0,117
500 1,169 0,117 0,105 0,094 0,082 0,070 0,058
200 0,468 0,047 0,042 0,037 0,033 0,028 0,023
100 0,234 0,023 0,021 0,019 0,016 0,014 0,012
50 0,117 0,012 0,011 0,009 0,008 0,007 0,006
30 0,070 0,007 0,006 0,006 0,005 0,004 0,004
10 0,023 0,002 0,002 0,002 0,002 0,001 0,001
 Uncertainty in Thermodynamic Measurements T e r m o d y n a m is k e v ir k n in g s g r a d s m å lin g e r
M å le u s ik k e r h e t

2 ,0
M å lin g e r u tf ø r t i p e r io d e n 1 9 8 6 - 1 9 9 8 ( B e r d a l S tr ø m m e / N o r c o n s u lt) B e r e g n e t e tte r IE C 6 0 7
1 ,9
B e r e g n e t e tte r IE C 4 1
1 ,8
B e r e g n e t e tte r p r o f . A lm in g
1 ,7 G rø n s d a l
Absolute uncertainty [%]

1 ,6

1 ,5

1 ,4
A b s o lu tt m å le u s ik k e r h e t + (% )

1 ,3 H e rv a , p u m p e

1 ,2

1 ,1

1 ,0

0 ,9

0 ,8

0 ,7

0 ,6

0 ,5

0 ,4

0 ,3

0 ,2

0 ,1

0 ,0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Head [m]
F a llh ø y d e , H e ( m )
 Thermodynamic Efficiency Measurement
100

95

90
Hydraulic Efficiency [%]

85

80

75

70

65

60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Generator Power [MW]
 Thermodynamic Efficiency Measurement
100

95 Guarantee
90
Hydraulic Efficiency [%]

85

80 Old measurement
75

70
New measurement
65

60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Generator Power [MW]
Thanks
Thermodynamic Efficiency
Measurements at
Saurdal Power Plant
 Saurdal Power Plant
Unit 1

• Owner: Statkraft
• Commissioned: 1985
• Turbine: Francis
• Manufacturer: Kværner
• Max Power: 160 MW
• Head: 425 meter
• Flow rate: 38 m3/s
• Speed: 428,5 rpm
• Speed number: 0,317
 Efficiency measurements at Saurdal Power Plant
Turbine 1
95

94
Hydraulic Efficiency [%]

93

92

91

90

2007
89
2006

88
60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Turbine Power [MW]
1-1

2-1
 T1-1 T2-1
P1-1
[J/kg]

1-1
Enthalpy, h

P2-1
2-1

Entropy, s [J/kg K]
 T1-1 P1-1
Enthalpy, h

1-1
Isentropic process

2-1 P2-1
s
T2-1
Ts

Entropy, s
 Hydraulic Efficiency

produced power Pproduced Emechanical  Q

 hydraulic   
available power Pavailable Ehydraulic  Q

h1  1  h 2  1 Em
  
h1  1  h s Eh
 553,7

542,4
540,5
1

537 535,51
529,7 2 529,7

0
Reference line
Mean sea level
 Hydraulic Energy
 c 
1 1 2 2
Eh   ( p1  p 2 )  g  ( z1  z 2 )  1
 c2
 2
p 2  p 2 '   g  ( z p '
 z2)
2

Zp
2’
Z1

Z2
Reference line
 Mechanical Energy
E m  a  ( p 1  1  p 2  1 )  c p  ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 ) 
1

 c11  c 2 1
2 2
 E m
2
p 2 1  p 2 '   g  ( z p '
 z 2 1 )
2

1-1
Z1-1

Zp
2-1

2’
Z2-1
Reference line
 Mechanical Energy
E m  a  ( p 1  1  p 2  1 )  c p  ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 ) 
1

 c11  c 2 1
2 2
 E m
2
 Inlet Temperature

5,879

5,878
Temperature [oC]

5,877

5,876

5,875

5,874

5,873

5,872
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

Measurement #
 Mechanical Energy
E m  a  ( p 1  1  p 2  1 )  c p  ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 ) 
1

 c11  c 2 1
2 2

2
 Outlet Temperature

5,922

5,921
Temperature [oC]

5,920

5,919

5,918

5,917

5,916

5,915
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

Measurement #
 Difference Temperature

-0,041
Difference Temperature [oC]

-0,042

-0,043

-0,044

-0,045
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Measurement #

T = 0,0433 oC
 Leakage Water

Q Leakage
E m    E Leakage
Q Turbine

c Leakage  c 2  1
2 2

E mLeakage    
 a  p Leakage  p 2  1  C p  T Leakage  T 2  1  
 g  Z Leakage  Z 2  1 
2


E mLeakage   
  a  p 2  1  C p  T Leakage  T 2  1  g  Z Leakage  Z 2  1 
 Calculation of the efficiency

Em
 
Eh

E m  a  ( p 11  p 2 1 )  C p
 ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 ) 
1

 c11  c 2 1
2 2
 E m
2

Eh 
1
 ( p1  p 2 )  g  ( z1  z 2 ) 
1
 2
 c1  c 2
2

 2
 Calculation of the hydraulic energy
Eh 
1
 ( p1  p 2 )  g  ( z1  z 2 ) 
1

 c1  c 2
2 2

 2

1
• Pressure energy: Eh pressure
  ( p1  p 2 )

p 2  p 2 '   g  ( z p '
 z2)
2

• Potential energy: Eh potential

 g  ( z1  z 2 )

• Kinetic energy: E h kinetic 

1
 2
 c1  c 2
2

2
Calculation of the mechanical energy
E m  a  ( p 11  p 2 1 )  C p
 ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 ) 
1

 c11  c 2 1
2 2
 E m
2

• Pressure energy: Em pressure

 a  ( p 11  p 2 1 )

• Thermal energy: E m thermal  C p  T 1  1  T 2  1 

Em  g  ( z 11  z 2 1 )
• Potential energy: potential


1
 2
 c11  c 2 1
2

• Kinetic energy:
Em kinetic
2
 Calculation of Em

 
Q Leakage
E m     a  p 2 1  C p   
 T Leakage  T 2  1  g  Z Leakage  Z 2  1
Q Turbine

• Pressure energy:
E m leakage pressure
  a  p 2 1
• Thermal energy:

• Potential energy:
E m leakage thermal
 C p  T leakage  T 2  1 

E m leakage potential
 g  ( z leakage  z 2  1 )
 Example calculation
Measurement # 3
Date 25.07.2007
Turbine no. 1
Time when measurements start 10:09
Pressure at the outlet from the draft tube kPa 696,0
Waterlevel Blåsjø moh 1054,9
Waterlevel Sandsavatn moh 604,2
Waterlevel Lauvastøl moh 604,2
Servo Unit 1 mm 272
Servo Unit 2 mm 0
Servo Unit 3 mm 332
Servo Unit 4 mm 328
Load from controlroom Unit 1 (guide vanes) % 79,8
Load from controlroom Unit 2 (guide vanes) % 0
Load from controlroom Unit 3 (guide vanes) % 41,2
Load from controlroom Unit 4 (guide vanes) % 48
Number of pulses from the kWh-meeter imp 8000
Time for the kWh-meeter measurement s 646
Generator Power from the Controlroom Unit 1 MW 131,4
Generator Power from the Controlroom Unit 2 MW 0
Generator Power from the Controlroom Unit 3 MW 100
Generator Power from the Controlroom Unit 4 MW 100,5
Pressure inlet (temperature probe) kPa 5094
Pressure inlet kPa 5008
Atmospheric pressure kPa 93,358
o
Temperature at the inlet C 5,8741
o
Temperature at the outlet C 5,9172
o
Temperature in the leakage flow C 9,713
Time for filling the bucket s 205
Reactive Power Mvar 5,2
Flow rate leakage water l/s 90,5
End time - 10:23
 Generator efficiency
Load factor 1,0
99
Generator efficiency [%]

98

Gen = -0,0001∙PGen2 + 0,0345∙PGen + 95,928

97
60 80 100 120 140 160

Generator power [MW]

 Calculation of the flow rate

PTurbine 133354 3
Q Assumed    27 , 01 m
p 1  p amb 5030 , 4  93 , 35 s

PGenerator 131 , 4
PTurbine    133 . 3 MW
 Generator 0 , 9853

PGenerator = 131,4 MW
Generetor = 98,53 %
pamb = 93,35 kPa
p1 = 5030,4 kPa
Calculation of the mechanical energy
Pressure term

p 2 1  p 2 '  2  g  ( z p '
 z 2  1 )  786 , 28 kPa
2

g  9 , 7 8 0 3   1  0 , 0 0 5 3  s in      0 , 0 0 0 0 0 3  z S a u rd a l  9 , 8 1 7 m
2
 s
2

2 = 1000,3 kg/m3
1-1 z2-1 = 534,0 m
zp2’ = 543,19 m
p2’ = 696,04 kPa
f = 59,29
Zp
2-1

2’
zsaurdal = 538 m
Z2-1

Reference line
Calculation of the mechanical energy
Pressure term
 1  g   z 11 1002 , 27  9 , 817  0 , 92
p 11  p 11   5094 , 08   5103 ,13 kPa
'

1000 1000


g  9 , 7803  1  0 , 0053  sin
2
f   0 , 000003  z  9 , 817 m 2
s

1 = 1002,27
p1-1 = 5094,08 kPa
z = 0,92 m
z1-1
 Calculation of the mechanical energy
Pressure term

Em  a  ( p 1  1  p 2  1 )  4266 J
pressure
kg

 2  g  h 2 1
p 2 1 a b s   p m ea su red  7 8 6 , 2 9 k P a
1000

a1  a 2 3
pmean = 2944,708 kPa a   0, 98819 m
2 kg
Tmean = 5,8971 deg C
T1-1 = 5,8754
T2-1 = 5,9187
2 = 1000,27
pamb = 93,36 kPa
p1-1 = 5103 kPa
h2-1 = 9,18 meter
g = 9,817 m/s2
 Difference Temperature

-0,041
Difference Temperature [oC]

-0,042

-0,043

-0,044

-0,045
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Measurement #

T = 0,0433 oC
Calculation of the mechanical energy
Thermal term

E m thermal  C p  T 1  1  T 2  1    181 , 38 J
kg

C p  4189, 43 J
kgK

Cp = Is interpolated from pmean and Tmean

Pmean = 2944,708 kPa
Tmean = 5,8971 oC
T1-1 = 5,8754 oC
T2-1 = 5,9187 oC
Calculation of the mechanical energy
Potential term

Em  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 )  76 ,1799 J
potential
kg

z1-1 = 541,76 meter above sea level

z2-1 = 534 meter above sea level
g = 9,817 m/s2

-1,7
1-1

-6,3
Z1-1

2-1

Z2-1
Reference line
Calculation of the mechanical energy
Kinetic term

Em kinetic

1
 2
 c11  c 2 1
2
   2 , 2857 J
kg
2

Q Pr obe
c11   0 ,155 m
A Pr obe s

Volume m
3
Q Pr obe   4 , 878 E  5
Bucket

Time s

Q A ssum ed
c 2 1  c 2   2 ,1 4 m
A2 s

VolumeBucket = 0,010 m3
Time = 205 s
AProbe = 0,000314 m2
A2 = 12,6 m2
Calculation of the mechanical energy
without leakage water

E m  a  ( p 11  p 2 1 )  C
'
p
 ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 ) 
1

 c11  c 2 1
2 2
  4158 J
kg
2

Em  a  ( p 1  1  p 2  1 )  4266 J
pressure
kg

E m thermal  C p  T 1  1  T 2  1    181 , 4 J
kg

Em potential
 g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 )  76 ,18 J
kg

 c    2 , 29
1 2 2
J
Em kinetic
 11
 c 2 1
2 kg
 Recalculation of the flow rate

PTurbine 3
Q   32 , 03 m
  Em
' s

1   2 kg
   1001 , 3059 3
2 m

PTurbine = 133,35 MW
Em’ = 4158,5 J/kg
1 = 1002,3394
2 = 1000,2724
Calculation of the leakage flow energy
Q L eakage
 Em  
Q T u r b in e

  a  p 2 1  C p
  
  T L ea ka g e  T 2 1   g   Z L ea ka g e  Z 2 1    4 2 , 9 3 3 J
  kg

E m le a k a g e p ressu re
  a  p 2  1   7 7 3, 4 4 J
kg

E m le a k a g e th e r m a l  C p   T le a k a g e  T 2  1   1 5 9 3 7 , 2 8 9 J
kg

E m le a k a g e p o te n tia l
 g  ( z le a k a g e  z 2  1 )  3 0 , 4 3 2 7 J
kg

Q = 32,029m3/s
QLeakage = 0,0905 m3/s
 Calculation of the mechanical energy
1
E m  a  ( p11  p 2 1 )  C  ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 )    c11  c 2 1 E  4114, 4 J
2 2
p m
2 kg

Em p ressu re
 a  ( p11  p 2 1 )  4 2 6 5 , 8 7 J
kg

E m th e r m a l  C p   T1  1  T 2  1    1 8 1, 4 3 5 J
kg

Em p o te n tia l
 g  ( z11  z 2 1 )  7 6 , 1 8 J
kg

1
   c1 1  c 2 1  2,840947 J
2 2
Em k in e tic
2 kg

Q L eakage
 Em    E m le a k a g e   4 2 , 9 3 3 J
Q T u r b in e kg
 Recalculation of the flow rate

PT u r b in e 3
Q   32, 367 m
  Em s

kg
  1 0 0 1, 3 3 3
m

PTurbine = 133,346 kW
Em = 4114,396 J/kg
pmean = 2948,487
Tmean = 5,9199 deg C
 Calculation of the hydraulic energy
Pressure term
zp  5 4 2 ,6 8  5 3 5 ,5 1 5  7 ,1 6 5 m
2

542,68
1

535,515

Zp
2’
Z1

Z2
Reference line
 Hydraulic Energy
Eh 
1
 ( p1  p 2 )  g  ( z1  z 2 ) 
1
 2
 c1  c 2
2

 2
p 2  p 2 '   g  ( z p '
 z2)
2

Zp
2’
Z1

Z2
Reference line
Calculation of the hydraulic energy
1 1
Eh   ( p1  p 2 )  g  ( z1  z 2 )    c1  c 2  4379, 82 J
2 2

 2 kg

p1  p 2
' '

Eh p ressu re
  4 2 5 3, 2 9 J
 kg

Eh p o te n tia l
 g  ( z 1  z 2 )  4 8 ,9 3 8 J
kg

1
E h k in e tic    c1  c 2  77,59 J
2 2

2 kg
Calculation of the hydraulic efficiency

Em 4114, 4
    1 0 0  9 3, 9 4 %
Eh 4379, 82

1 1
Eh   ( p1  p 2 )  g  ( z1  z 2 )    c1  c 2  4379, 82 J
2 2

 2 kg

1
E m  a  ( p11  p 2 1 )  C  ( T1  1  T 2  1 )  g  ( z 1  1  z 2  1 )    c11  c 2 1 E  4114, 4 J
2 2
p m
2 kg
 Recalculation of the flow rate

H D e s ig n 3
Q A t d e s ig n h e a d   Q  3 1, 5 9 m
H s

Eh
H   4 4 6 ,1 4 7 m
g

HDesign = 425 m
Q = 32,37 m3/s
g = 9,817 m/s2
Eh = 4379,82 J/kg
Recalculation of the turbine power
output

3
 H D e s ig n 
2

P A t d e s ig n h e a d     PT u r b in e  1 2 3, 9 8 M W
 H 

PT u r b in e  E m  Q    1 3 3, 3 4 6 M W

HDesign = 425 m
H = 446,147 m
 = 1001,33 kg/m3
Em = 4114,4 J/kg
Q = 32,37 m3/s