Calculation Waterway

Nam Long 2 HPP Volume 2.2.
2 – Calculation Report For NL2 WaterWay

Detailed Design Appendix 1:Hydraulic Calculation of Intake
APPENDIX 1
HYDRAULIC CALCULATION OF INTAKE
1 CALCULATION TARGET
Determining the sill elevation and the intake structure

2 APPLIED PROCEDURE AND STANDARD
Hydraulic structures - Hydraulic calculation process of ground sluiceTCVN

9151:2012.
Hydraulic handbook issued by Kixilep Publishing House
Hydraulic works handbook
Hydraulic technical handbook, volume V
3 INITIAL DATA
 Max discharge: Qmax =9.71 m3/s

 Full supply level (FSL): 684.0 m
 Check flood level (CFL): 688.85m
 Design flood level (DFL): 687.60m
 Dead water level (DWL): 682.0 m
 Dimension of intake (BxH) BxH=2.5x2.76m
 Coefficient of dimension of gate: h/b = 1.10
4 CALCULATION APPENDIX
4.1 Determining immersion depth of intake
Applying formula: S = (0.54  0.72).V.D0.5(ref: J.L.Gordon)

Where:
S – Distance from DWL to axis of intake gate
V – Velocity of flow at axis of intake gate section
D – Height of section after gate, D = 2.76 m
S = (0.54  0.72).V.D0.5 = (1.311.79)m
Proposed immersion depth: S = 1.74 m
 Elevation of intake sill: 677.50m
4.2 Determining dimension of trashrack
Dimension of trashrack (B, Hcv) is determined to sure velocity of flow before

trashrack is less than 1.2 m/s
PECC3 1.1
Nam Long 2 HPP Volume 2.2.2 – Calculation Report For NL2 WaterWay
Dimension of intake at trashrack:

Height (Hcv): 8.50 m
Width (Bcv): 6.00 m
Coefficient of dimension of trashrack: h/b = 1.416
Velocity of flow at trashrack: v = 0.19m/s
4.3 The equation of above inlet reduced transition curve:
𝑥2 𝑦2
+ =1
5.02 2.52
4.4 Checking occurrence ability of vacuum in intake:
Condition vacuum non-occurrence at calculated point of intake :

P P
    
  N   pg
Delimited vacuum pressure :
P
    10.33m
  Pg
The Bernouly equation in intake segment:
Pa V02 P V2
Z0    Zi  i  i  hw
n 2g  n 2g
Where :
Z0 – Distance from DWL to intake sill
Zi – Distance from calculated point to intake sill
Pa–Air pressure at considering elevation Pa = 9.635 m (at DWL)
Pi – Calculated point pressure
V0 – Velocity at considering calclated point
hw – Total of local and longitudinal loss at required point
hw = hđ + hc
Vi 2
*Local loss : hc   i
2g
Where :
i–Local coefficient at calculated position
 Loss from reservoir to intake
 Loss through slit before trashrack
 Loss through trashrack
PECC3 1.2
 Loss inlet :
 Loss from inlet chamber to intake
 Reduced loss
 Loss of through slit of intake gate and stoplog
Calculation :
z0 Zi pa v0 v1 hw pi
(m) (m)
Section (m) (m)  (m/s) (m/s) (m) 
MC1 4.5 3.50 9.52 0.360 0.46 0.0052 10.51
MC2 4.5 2.76 9.52 0.360 1.41 0.0686 11.10
MC3 4.5 2.76 9.52 0.360 1.41 0.0888 11.07
So. vacuum is not occurrence at ceiling of the intake.

Key plan
PECC3 1.3
Nam Long 2 HPP Volume 2.2.2 – Calculation report for NL2 waterway
Detail Design Appendix 2 – Structure calculation of intake
APPENDIX 2
STRUCTURE CALCULATION OF INTAKE
1 DESIGN STANDARDS
 TCVN 2737 : 1995 “Load and impact - Design standards”

 TCVN 356-2005: Concrete and reinforced concrete structures, design
standard
 TCVN 285-2002: Hydraulic works - The basic stipulation for design
 TCVN 4253-1986: Foundations of hydraulic engineering works, Design
standard
2 DATA
 Full supply water level - FSL :684.00m

 Check flood level CFL :687.6m
 Crest elevation : 690.0m
 Bottom elevation : 676.00m
 Concrete grade :200(Rn=90 kG/cm2, Rk=7.5 kG/cm2).
 Reinforcement : CIII(Ra=Ran=3400 kG/cm2).
3 CALCUALTION CASES
Self- Soil
Case wind CFL Equipment Earthquake
weight pressure
Case 1 x x x
Case 2 x x x x
Case 3 x x x x x
PECC3 2-1
4 CALCULATION DIAGRAM
4.1 Force diagram

4.1.1 Case 1 – Basic loads
4.1.2 Case 2,3 – Special loads
PECC3 2-2
4.2 Calculation diagram
Upstream wall
Slot wall
Side wall
Bottom slab
Figure 4-1 Calculation diagram
PECC3 2-3
5 CALCULATION RESULT
5.1 Case 1: Basic combo
Figure 5-1 Moment diagram of intake
PECC3 2-4
Figure 5-2 Shearing force diagram of intake

5.2 Case 2: Special combo weight
PECC3 2-5
Figure 5-4 Shearing force diagram

5.3 Case 3: Special combo + earthquake
PECC3 2-6
Figure 5-6 Shearing force diagram
Table 5-1 Reinforcement result of intake

Moment b(cm) h(cm) a(cm) M(kN.m) Fa (cm2) Reinforcent
22a200 (perpendicular to the flow)
Bottom slab 1.0 1.5 0.07 584 16.03
22a200 (parallel to the flow)
20a200(perpendicular to the flow)
Head wall 1.0 1.17 0.07 225.56 6.39
Side wall 1.0 2.15 0.07 691.49 10.34
Service gate
+ Bulkhead 1.0 1.0 0.07 405.56 16.67
gate 22a200(parallel to the flow)
PECC3 2-7
Nam Long 2 HPP Volume 2.2.2 – Calculation Report For NL2 Waterway
Detailed design Appendix 3: Head Loss Calculation of Waterway
APPENDIX 3
HEAD LOSS CALCULATION OF WATERWAY
1 CALCULATION DATA
Maximum calculating flow Qmax: Qmax = 9.71 (m3/s)

Full Supplied level (FSL): 684.0m
Dead water level (DWL): 682.0m
Works on waterway: Intake-> Tunnel -> Surge tank-> Underground penstock
> Powerhouse.
Table 1:Main parameters of pipeline are shown in the following table
No. Feature Unit Value Notes
I Type 1- covered by concrete
1 Dimension m 2.5x2.76
Roughness coefficient of
nbt
2 concrete 0.014
3 Thickness of concrete cm 25
II Type 2- covered by concrete
nbt
2 concrete 0.014
III Type 3- covered by concrete
1 Length of type 1, 2,3 m 1889.2
3 nbt
concrete 0.014
IV Rock trap
1 Length m 29.0
0.014 nbt
3 concrete
Transition from tunnel to
V
bottom of surge tank
1 Length m 5.0
2 Dimension m 2.37
0.014 nbt
3 concrete
VI Covered steel section at the bottom of surge tank
1 Length m 10.00
2 Diameter m 1.9
3 Roughness coefficient 0.012
PECC3 3.1
No. Feature Unit Value Notes

VII Underground penstock
1 Length m 281.5
2 Dimension m 1.9
VIII Branch penstock segment
Length of branch penstock
1
segment to spiral m 18.05
2 Diameter m 1.2
1.1 Applied procedure and standards
National standard TCVN 9151:2012 “Hydraulic structures - Hydraulic

calculation process of ground sluice”
Hydraulic calculation KIXELEP manual.
Hydraulic handbook
Hydraulic engineering handbook, volume V
National standard TCVN 9154:2012 “Hydraulic structures - Calculation
Process of Hydraulic Tunnel”.
Hydraulic tunnel design standard DL/T5195-2004.
2 CALCULATION HEAD LOSS ON WATERWAY
Total of water head loss is determined:

hw  hwd   hwc
Where:
hwd: Total of longitudinal loss.
h wc : Total of local loss of waterway.
2.1 Local loss
h wc
: Total of local loss of waterway, include:
Loss from reservoir to intake
v2
hv   v
2g
Entry is comfortable for flow:v = 0,2
Loss through slit before trashrack
v2
hkl   kl
2 g , 
PECC3 3.2
Loss through trashrack

v2
hl   l
2g
4
s 3
l      sin 
b
Where:
 factor which depends on trashrack shape, on table 4-31 Hydraulic
calculation KIXELEP manual:  = 2.42.
 s: thickness of bar, s = 0.03m.
 b: distance between bars, b = 0.1m.
 bevelangle of trashrack with the horizontal,  = 90o
Loss through valve slit
v2
hkv   kv
2 g , kv = 0.1.
Loss at segment which is extended on pipeline

2
v2  
hmr   mr ,  mr  k mr  2  1
2g  1 
kmr: factor of extended transition gradually, on table 4-12- Hydraulic
calculation KIXELEP manual.
Loss at the segment which is narrow on pipeline
2
v2 1  0.0432
hth   th ,  th  k th   1 ,   0.57 
2g   1.1  n
kth: factor of narrow transition gradually, on table 4-13- Hydraulic calculation
KIXELEP manual.
Loss at curve segment of waterway.
v2
huc   uc ,  uc   90 .a
2g
 a: factor, depend on intersection angle of pipeline.
  90 : coefficient of resistance when intersection angle is 90o, (on table
34,D,7 and 34,D,8 – Hydraulic engineering handbook, volume V)
Loss at surge tank
v2
hthap   thap
2 g ,   0.1
thap
Loss when the valve is closed quickly
PECC3 3.3
v2
hvan   van
2g
With plate valve when it is opened completely van  0.1
Loss by branch
v2
hr n   rn
2g
 rn on table 34.D.9 page 159 Hydraulic engineering handbook, volume V.
2.2 Longitudinal loss
Longitudinal loss is determined on formula:

L v 2 LV 2
hdd   
D 2g C 2 R
Where:
: longitudinal loss factor
v: velocity of flow in pipeline
D: Inner diameter(equivalent)of pipeline
L: Length of pipeline
2.3 Calculating results
Table 2:Loss calculating results of waterway

Flow (m³/s) Q(m3/s) 1.00 2.50 4.00 5.50 7.00 9.71 11.21
Total of water head
h(m) 0.045 0.280 0.716 1.353 2.191 4.217 5.620
loss (m)
Loss before surge
htt(m) 0.018 0.111 0.283 0.535 0.867 1.668 2.223
tank
Loss after surge
hst(m) 0.027 0.169 0.432 0.818 1.324 2.548 3.397
tank
PECC3 3.4
Figure 1:Relation graph between loss and flow
PECC3 3.5
Detailed Design Appendix 3A:Water Hammer Calculation of Penstock
APPENDIX 3A
WATER HAMMER CALCULATION OF PENTOCK
1 PURPOSE OF CALCULATING
Determination piezometric line on pipeline, positive and negative water

hammer level, test pressure chart of penstock.
2 APPLIED PROCEDURE – GUIDELINES
Hydraulic calculation KIXELEP manual.

Hydropower station curriculum of Publishing Construction.
3 BASIC DATA
 Full Supplied level (FSL): 684.0m

 Dead water level (DWL): 682.0m
 Check flood level (CFL): 688.85m
 Design flood level (DFL): 687.60m
 Maximum calculating flow (2 units) Qmax: 9.71 (m3/s)
 Length of penstock from the surge tank to power house: 281.5m
 Diameter of penstock : 1.9 m
 Turbine opening & closing time: 7s
 Time difference step: 1s
 Acceleration gravity. g: 9.81m / s2
4 WATER HAMMER CALCULATION
According to the Kixilep hydraulic manual

Inertia constant is calculated on formula:
Qmax Li
Ti 
gH 0
F
i
Where: Li is the length of tunnel segment

Fi: cross-sectional area of tunnel
Qmax: design flow
Ho: static water head (ignoring losses).
Ho = 684-566.59 =117.41m
g: acceleration gravity, g = 9.81 m /s2
Calculating result Ti =3.55s
Boundary water hammer is calculated on formula:
PECC3 3A.1
Detailed Design Appendix 3A:Water Hammer Calculation of Penstock
2
𝑇𝑖 ∆𝑞 𝑇𝑖 ∆𝑞 𝑇𝑖 ∆𝑞
′𝑇 = [ ± √( ) + 4]
2𝑇 𝑇(1 − ℎ0 ) 𝑇(1 − ℎ0 )
Where:
q : absolute value of difference of terminal relative flow.
T:Opening& closing time with flow variation
Ti: Inertia constant.
“+”: with positive water hammer (closing).
“-”: with negative water hammer (opening).
h0: factor with consideration dischargespecification of turbines.
ℎ0=0.5− 𝑛𝑠
600
ns: turnaround factor, is determined on table 15.1 the Kixilep hydraulic

manual.
Implication:
T positive water hammer = 0.14.
T negative water hammer= -0.15.
Figure 1:Test pressure chart of penstock
PECC3 3A.2
Nam Long HPP Volume 2.2.2 – Calculation report for NL2 waterway
Detail Design Appendix 5–Surge tank structure calculation
APPENDIX 5
SURGE TANK STRUCTURE CALCULATION
1.1 Description
1.1.1 Input data
 Internal diameter exposed section : 6 m
 Reinforced concrete wall thickness: 0.8 m
 Internal diameter of tunnel section: 3m; 1.6m, 4.5m
 Reinfored concrete wall thickness: 0,5 m và 0.7m
 Maximum water level: 695.12 m
 Low water level: 672,40 m
 Top of surge tank elevation : 675.69 m
 Bottom of surge tank: 626,81 m
1.1.2 Concrete, reinforced and geological data
Reinforced Concrete grade M250 physical property:
 Compressed strength: 11000 kN/m2
 Tensible strength : 880 kN/m2
 Elastic module : 2,65x107 kN/m2
 Pooxong factor: 0,167
Reinforcement CB400-V physical property:
 Yeild stress : 400000 kN/m2
 Elastic Module : 2,0x108 kN/m2
 Poison factor: 0,2
 Rock aroud surge tank property
PECC3 5-1
Figure 1: Calculation diagram surge tank

1.2 Geological conditions
 EdQ layer: clay, clay and clay are reddish-brown, yellow-brown, yellow-
gray, hard-pressed, with few chips of original stone, less firm
 Intense weathering zone IA1: A component of clay, sandy sand mixed with
20-30% lumps and the base of the original stone, less firm.
 Strong weathering zone IA2: Composition is weathered rock, macadam,
hard to medium, and 15-20% clay, sandy.
 Weathering IB: Stone, granite hard, cracked very strong, mainly crushed
macadamia, there are sometimes discolored, surface sell a lot of iron oxide;
1.3 Calculation Model
The structure of the pressurized tower is simulated by 3d block elements,
using finite element method - using sap 2000 software.
1.4 Material property
Fondation material parameter
PECC3 5-2
Table 2: Material property

Material Elastic modul Poisson Natural
(kG/cm2) factor density
(kN/m3)
Silty clay (old soil) 56,08 0,4 17,0
Fully weatherd rock (eQ) 100,00 0,4 17,0
Strong weathering rock (1A1) 100,00 0,4 22,0
Weakly weathering rock (1A2) 5000,0 0,26 26,0
Weak weathering rock (IB) 15000,0 0,2 26,5
1.5 Combination load and load

Loads and load combinations are shown in the following table:
Table 3: Load and load combination
Load
Structure Load Self Static Water Windy Earthquake
combination weight pressure weight pressurer
Exposed Basic case x x x x
Special case x x x x x
1.5.1 Windy pressure
The standard value of the static component of wind load W at height Z
compared to the standard mold is determined by the formula:
W = γ x W0 x k x c
Where:
 Wo: The value of wind pressure is based on the zoning map of Table 4
 4 (TCVN 2737-1995) Wo = 65KG/m2
 K:The coefficient takes into account the change in wind pressure according
to the height of the table 5 (TCVN2737-1995) k=1.24
 Dynamic coefficient taken according to the table 6 TCVN 2737-95
The face of the wind c=+0.8
Windy face c=-0.6
 Reliability coefficient of wind load γ selected 1.2
1.6 Calculation result
1.6.1 Exposed section
PECC3 5-3
Detail design Appendix 5–Surge tank structure calculation
Table 4: Calculation result of exposed section- Basic case and special case
Section
Item b(m) h(m) M(kNm) N(kN) Fa(cm2) Fa'(cm2) d(mm) n Fa(cm2)
name
Basic case Sectional Body shaft 1 0.8 17.46 372.25 7.14 5.45 16 5 10.05
Logitudial Body shaft 1 0.8 52.49 496.44 10.93 5.86 18 5 12.72
Special Sectional Body shaft 1 0.8 18.27 372.70 7.19 5.42 16 5 10.05
case
Logitudial Body shaft 1 0.8 53.73 512.82 11.27 6.08 18 5 12.72
PECC3 5-4
Detail design Appendix 5–Surge tank structure calculation
Table 5: The calculation results of exposed section – Special case
Calculate the flexural reinforced by reinforced torque unit 54-87 14TCN Calculate reinforcement Cracking torque M
oblique
Sele
ct
Shear Dcot obli
Location Details S the Condit
d1 n1 d2 n2 Fa belt que aT [A]
Torque force Size (m) Fa (mm) bar ion
Q select (mm) arm
(kN.m) (cm2)
(cm2) ouri
ng
B m m m
kN h(m) Bar Bar d n mm aT<[a]
(m) m m m
The
bottom 928 945 1 1.50 24.25 20 5 18 5 28.43 16 200 18 5 0.18 0.2 ok
(Basic
case)
The
bottom 905 760 1 1.50 23.64 20 5 18 5 28.43 16 200 18 5 0.18 0.2 ok
(Special
case)
PECC3 5-5
Detail design Stage 1 Appendix 5–Surge tank structure calculation
1.7 Calculation result

1.7.1 Exposed section
Pic 1: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 basic case
Figure 2: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 special case
PECC3 5-6
Detail design Stage 1 Appendix 5–Surge tank structure calculation
1.7.1.1 Slab
Figure 3: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 basic case
Figure 4: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 special case
PECC3 5-7
Detailed design Appendix 6 – Structure Calculation of Tunnel
APPENDIX 6
STRUCTURE CALCULATION OF TUNNEL
1.1 DATA
1.1.1. Data
- Full Supplied level (FSL): 684.0 m
- Minimum operating level (MOL): 682.0 m
- Q: 9.71 m3/s
1.1.2. Material feature
1.1.1 Reinforced concrete M250:

- Calculating compressive strength R’n = 11000 kN/m2
- Calculating tensile strength Rk’ = 880 kN/m2
- Weight = 25 kN/m3
- Poisson ratio = 0.2
1.1.3. Geological feature
Hydropower tunnel usually applies rock classification of Q-system (Barton)
and RMR-system (Bieniawski). In previous design stage, the T-system
(China) is applied and devided rock surrounding tunnel in to 5 types (I ~ V)
with total evaluated poits of 100. Bieniawski and other authors were
established relationship between RMR-values and Q-value. The relationship
between 3 systems is as follows.
Table 1: Relationship between 3 systems of rock classification for the
tunnel
Q value in RMR value in Tvalue in
Type of
Quality of Rock Q-system RMR-system T-system
Rock
(Barton) (Bieniawski) (China)
T = (100 –
I Very good > 40 100 – 81
86)
II Good 10 – 40 80 – 61 85 ≥ T > 65
III Fair 4 – 10 60 – 41 65 ≥ T > 45
IV Poor 1–4 40 – 21 45 ≥ T > 25
V Very poor <1 ≤ 20 T ≤ 25
In this design, Q-system and guideline of EVN for using Q-system shall be
applied to estimate the temporary support for underground structures. The
excavation support ratio (ESR) of 1.60 is adopted for hydropower tunnels.
The water table elevation is equal to the elevation of MNDBT 684m and will
be adjusted according to the actual geological survey drilling results in the
construction drawing design stage
PECC3 6.1
Table 2: Physical –mechanical parameters of rock foundation

Unit
Deformati
The parameters Bulk Friction Poison elastic
Cohesion on
of rock mass Q density angle ratio resistance
modulus
value coefficient
in Q 
 C Eo  Ko
fk system
(Barto
n)
(
kN/m3 KN/m2 KN/m2 - MPa/cm
Classification of (degree)
surrounding rock
IV
(Type of Strong
2 (1-4) 22.5 31 133 300 000 0.4 
support weathering
3)
III
(Type of Weakly
3 (4-10) 26.5 35 266 8 000 000 0.26 
support weathering
2)
II
(Type of Subtle
4 (10-40) 26.5 42 300 10 000 000 0.16 
support weathering
1)
Table 3 Soil physical and mechanical indexes recommend value

Natural Saturated
Compression Poison
density density Shear strength
modulus ratio
Name m
 C  ES 
kN/m3 kN/m3 kN/m2 (degree) kN/m2

Weathered
soil
17.0 17.2 35 20 8000 0.43(0.42)
Gravel silty
clay
1.2 SOFWARE AND METHOD

Using Ansys software to calculate.
Reinforcement is calculated on Concrete and reinforced concrete structures of
hydraulic engineering constructions TCVN-4116-85, 14TCN 54-87,
Calculation Process of Hydraulic Tunnel TCVN 9154:2012.
PECC3 6.2
1.3 CALCULATION MEHTOD

The calculation of deformation stress and strain state for “tunnel bottom”
system was conducted by finite element method (FEM) under the conditions
of plane strain problem (usually using elastic-linear problem). The tunnel
bottom is considered no gravity in calculation cases.
Figure 1: Calculation model of tunnel type 2
Figure 2: Calculation model of tunnel type 3
PECC3 6.3
Figure 3: Calculation model of rock trap

Table 4: Load combinations
Load
Underground Underground
Load Internal Horizontal Vertical
Gouting water pressure water pressure Earthquake
combinations Gravity water rock rock
pressure (water is (no water pressure
pressure pressure pressure
inside) inside)
Case 1: Under
X X
construction
Case 2: X X X
X
Maintenance
Case 3: Normal X X
X X X
Operation
Case 4: Operating X X
X X X
at check flood level
Case 5: Operating X X X
at Full Supply level X X X
+ earthquake
Case 6: Operating X X
at Full Supply level X X
+ water hammer
1.4 Forces diagram effect to tunnel

Parch : arch pressure
Pside: Side pressure
Pbottom: bottom pressure
PECC3 6.4
Figure 4: Calculation diagram for tunnel type 1,2,3
Figure 5: Calculation diagram for rock trap
PECC3 6.5
Figure 6: Forces effect to tunnel type 1,2,3
Figure 7 Forces effect to rock trap
PECC3 6.6
2. STRUCTURE ANALYSING OF TUNNEL & ROCK TRAP
2.1 Stress calculation results

The calculation results are shown by displacement, internal force diagrams in
XYZ coordinate system with following symbols:
- Ux, Uy (unit: m): displacement in X, Y direction, the value is (+) when it’s
direction is the same with X, Y, Z direction.
- U (m): Total displacement (the value is always (+))
- Sx, Sy, Smax, Smin (unit: N/m2): stress in X, Y direction, tensile &
compress stress.
Reinforcement is calculated by internal force results according to hydraulic
design process of reinforced concrete.
2.1.1. Tunnel type 1
a) Case 1
Figure 8: Case 1-Displacement in X, Y direction (Ux,Uy)
PECC3 6.7
Figure 9: Case 1-Total displacement (Utotal)
Figure 10: Case 1 - Stress
PECC3 6.8
b) Case 2
Figure 11: Case 2- Displacement in X, Y direction (Ux,Uy)
Figure 12: Case 2- Total displacement (Utotal)
PECC3 6.9
Figure 13: Case 2- Stress

c) Case 3
PECC3 6.10
PECC3 6.11
d) Case 4
PECC3 6.12

e) Case 5
PECC3 6.13
PECC3 6.14
f) Case 6
PECC3 6.15
Figure 25: Case 6-Stress
 Reinforcement calculation
Figure 26: Calculation sections
PECC3 6.16
Table 5: Stress combinations

M N B H Fa Fa’
Section
Kn.m kN m m cm2 cm2
1-1 0.22 37.42 1 0.3 0.69 0.58
2-2 3.08 60.55 1 0.3 1.90 0.00
3-3 0.22 29.68 1 0.3 0.56 0.45
4-4 1.55 26.58 1 0.3 0.87 0.40
5-5 0.13 22.22 1 0.3 0.41 0.34
Table 6: Check Q and cracked

Qbt Choose
Mo Qbt Number
Q normal Conclude the aT [a]
men calculate of bars
Location 105tr69 skewers
(kN.m) kN kN kN d n mm mm
-
mc 1-1 0.22 0.01 70.38 198.00 Skewers 12 5 0.2
0.01
mc 2-2 3.08 95.65 211.14 198.00 Skewers 12 5 0.00 0.2
-
mc 3-3 0.22 0.41 90.17 198.00 Skewers 12 5 0.2
0.01
mc 4-4 1.55 43.86 211.14 198.00 Skewers 12 5 0.00 0.2
-
mc 5-5 0.13 0.00 70.38 198.00 Skewers 12 5 0.2
0.01
Proposed reinforcement arrangement

Inside layer: 12 a200
Outside layer: 12 a200
Along the flow direction: 10 a200
a) Case 1
PECC3 6.17
PECC3 6.18

b) Case 2
PECC3 6.19
c) Case 3
PECC3 6.20
PECC3 6.21

d) Case 4
Figure 36: TH4- Displacement in X, Y direction (Ux,Uy)
PECC3 6.22

e) Case 5
PECC3 6.23
PECC3 6.24

f) Case 6
PECC3 6.25
Figure 43: TH6-Total displacement (Utotal)

 Reinforcement calculation
PECC3 6.26
Figure 45: Calcualtion sections
Table 7: Stress combination

M N B H Fa Fa’
Section
Kn.m kN m m cm2 cm2
1-1 8.39 122.95 1 0.3 3.55 1.42
2-2 34.89 361.15 1 0.3 12.55 0.00
3-3 8.95 204.05 1 0.3 5.13 2.00
4-4 17.95 403.45 1 0.3 10.20 3.45
5-5 1.96 499.11 1 0.3 8.76 8.12

Qbt Choose
Mo Qbt Number
mc 1-1 8.39 0.01 1 0.30 Skewers 0 0 0.00 0.2

mc 2-2 34.89 351.42 1 0.30 Skewers 18 5 0.05 0.2
mc 3-3 8.95 2.32 1 0.30 Skewers 0 0 0.00 0.2
mc 4-4 17.95 204.63 1 0.30 Skewers 18 5 0.02 0.2
-
mc 5-5 1.70 0.05 1 0.30 Skewers 0 0 0.2
0.01
PECC3 6.27
Proposed reinforcement arrangement Proposed reinforcement arrangement

Along flow direction 10 a200
a) Case 1
PECC3 6.28
PECC3 6.29
b) Case 2
PECC3 6.30

c) Case 3
PECC3 6.31
PECC3 6.32
d) Case 4
Figure 55: TH4- Displacement in X, Y direction (Ux,Uy)
PECC3 6.33

e) Case 5
PECC3 6.34
PECC3 6.35
f) Case 6
PECC3 6.36

 Reinforcement calculaion
Figure 64: Calculation sections
PECC3 6.37

M N B H Fa Fa’
Section
Kn.m kN m M cm2 cm2
1-1 45.93 209.60 1 0.3 11.00 0.00
2-2 63.39 145.93 1 0.3 12.36 0.00
3-3 34.06 264.43 1 0.3 9.77 2.96
4-4 28.37 323.12 1 0.3 10.83 2.05
5-5 15.11 372.07 1 0.3 9.13 4.07

Qbt Choose
Mo Qbt Number
mc 1-1 45.93 0.01 89.61 198.00 Skewers 18 5 0.07 0.2

mc 2-2 63.39 185.84 151.59 198.00 Skewers 18 5 0.10 0.2
mc 3-3 34.06 26.46 89.61 198.00 Skewers 18 5 0.05 0.2
mc 4-4 12.37 133.82 220.00 198.00 Skewers 18 5 0.01 0.2
mc 5-5 15.11 0.78 89.61 198.00 Skewers 18 5 0.01 0.2

2.1.4. Rock trap
a) Case 1
PECC3 6.38
PECC3 6.39

b) Case 2
Figure 68: TH2- Displacement in X, Y direction x, y (Ux,Uy)
PECC3 6.40

c) Case 3
PECC3 6.41
PECC3 6.42
d) Case 4
PECC3 6.43

e) Case 5
PECC3 6.44
PECC3 6.45

f) Case 6
PECC3 6.46
PECC3 6.47
 Reinforcement calculaion
Figure 83: Calculaion sections

M N B H Fa Fa’
Section
Kn.m kN m m cm2 cm2
1-1 8.50 346.52 1 0.3 7.46 4.26
2-2 42.75 626.91 1 0.3 19.30 1.18
3-3 4.10 87.45 1 0.3 1.52 1.44
4-4 21.20 423.68 1 0.3 11.15 3.18
5-5 12.33 801.07 1 0.3 15.86 11.23

Qbt Choose
Mo Qbt Number
mc 1-1 8.50 0.69 97.73 198.00 Skewers 25 5 0.00 0.2

mc 2-2 42.75 404.24 220.00 198.00 Skewers 25 5 0.03 0.2
-
mc 3-3 4.10 0.68 97.73 198.00 Skewers 25 5 0.2
0.01
mc 4-4 21.20 254.49 220.00 198.00 Skewers 25 5 0.02 0.2
mc 5-5 12.33 0.12 97.73 198.00 Skewers 25 5 0.01 0.2
PECC3 6.48

Inside layer:
- Bottom : 25 a200
- Side : 20 a200 two layers
- Arch: 20 a200
Outside layer:
- Bottom : 16 a200
- Side : 16 a200
- Arch: 16 a200 two layers
PECC3 6.49
Detailed design Appendix 7 – Stability calculation of excavated slope of outlet
APPENDIX 7
STABILITY CALCULATION OF EXCAVATED SLOPE OF OUTLET
1. APPLIED STANDARD
QCVN 04 - 05 : 2012/BNNPTNT – National technical regulation on hydraulic

structures – The basic stipulation for design.
2. CALCULATION DATA
Table 1:Physical-mechanical parameters for slope stability

Deformation
Natural Saturated modulus characteristic Permeability
Shear strength
density density ES value of coefficient
Name γ γm bearing
total stress effective stress 100~ 200~ capacity fak
C φ C’ φ’ 200 kPa 400 kPa
kN/m3 kN/m3 kPa “o” kPa “o” MPa MPa kPa cm/s
Silty clay 17.0 18.0 26 14 30 18 5. 5 7.5 160 1*10-5
Weathered
soil
17.0 17.2 30 16 35 20 6.0 8.0 180 1*10-4
Gravel silty
clay
(Other parameters which there are not in this report, it is shown in geology
report)
Grade of work: grade III according to QCVN 04-05/2012
Allowable safety factor:
 Basic combination: K = 1.15
- Special combination: K = 1.035
 Under construction combination: K=1.09
PECC3 7.1
3. CALCUALTION CASES
 Case 1– Under construction combination: the slope has

just been excavated.
 Case 2 – Basic combination: normal operation
4. CALCULATION SECTIONS
Figure 1:Calculation sections position ( Section 1A-1A, 1B-1B)

5. CALCULATION PROGRAM AND METHOD CALCULATION
Using stability, seepage calculation program: Geo-Slope programme of

Canada.
Ordinary method: this method has not taken into account pressure at two sides
and friction load on side soil bar
Stability factor on formula:
 Gn . cos  n .tgi   Ci .li
K at 
 Gn" sin  n
Where:
Ci: unit cohesion of material layer i
i: inner friction angle of material layer i
ln: length of slip circle in limit of material column n
Gn: Weight of material column do not effect of seepage pressure.
G’n: Weight of material column n includes seepage pressure.
: Angle between central normal of slip circle n with vertical line
Bishop method
PECC3 7.2
 It is different from above method so it takes into account

pressure at two sides soil bar.
JanBu method:
 It is different from above 2 methods so it takes into
account bottom pressure at two sides and friction soil bar.
In this calculation, Bishop method is selected
PECC3 7.3
6. CALCULATION RESULTS
Table 2:Stability factor result (Bishop method)

Case 1 – under Case 2 – Basic
construction: combination:
the slope just Normal
Section Combination has been operation [K] Note
excavated
Left side Left side
Basic
- 1.156 1.15 OK
1A-1A Under
construction 1.158 - 1.09
OK
Basic OK
- 1.155 1.15
1B-1B Under
construction 1.140 - 1.09
OK
PECC3 7.4
Nam Long HPP Volum
Detailed design Appendix 7 – S
7. CALCULATION RESULT APPENDIX
7.1 Section 1A-1A
690
670
1.156
650
630
Lo p mat
Elevation
D u oi lo p mat
610 Lo p 3 s a o v a 4 s ao
570 Lo p mat
Lo p mat
D u oi lo p mat
Lo p 3 s a o v a 4 s ao
550
Lo p 2 s a o
530
510
490
-15 5 25 45 65 85 105 125 145 165 185 205 225 245 265 285 305 325
Distance
PECC3
Nam Long HPP Volum
Detailed design Appendix 7 – S
7.2 Section 1B-1B

 Case 1 – Under construction: Slope has just been
excavated
710
690
670 1.140
650
630
Elevation
Lo p m at
Du oi lop m a t
610 Lo p 3 sao v a 4 sao
570 Lo p m at
Du oi lop m a t
Lo p 3 sao v a 4 sao
Lo p 2 sao
550
530
510
490
-85 -65 -45 -25 -5 15 35 55 75 95 115 135 155 175 195 215 235 255 275 295
Distance
710
690
670 1.155
650
630
Elevation
Lo p m at
Du oi lop m a t
Lo p m at
570 Lo p m at
Lo p m at
Du oi lop m a t
Lo p 2 sao
550
530
510
490
-85 -65 -45 -25 -5 15 35 55 75 95 115 135 155 175 195 215 235 255 275 295
Distance
PECC3
Detailed design Appendix 7A – Stability calculation of excavated slope of intake
APPENDIX 7A
STABILITY CALCULATION OF EXCAVATED SLOPE OF INTAKE
1. APPLIED STANDARD
 QCVN 04 - 05 : 2012/BNNPTNT – National technical regulation on

hydraulic structures – The basic stipulation for design.
2. CALCULATION DATA

Deformation
Shear strength
Name γ γm bearing
kN/m 3
kN/m 3
kPa “o” kPa “o” MPa MPa kPa cm/s
Silty clay 17.0 18.0 26 14 30 18 5. 5 7.5 160 1*10-5
Weathered
soil
17.0 17.2 30 16 35 20 6.0 8.0 180 1*10-4
Gravel silty
clay
Other parameters which there are not in this report, it is shown in geology
report)
Grade of work: Grade III
PECC3 7A.1
Allowable safety factor :

 Special combination: K = 1.035
3. CALCUALTION CASES
 Case 1 – Basic combination: Normal operation

 Case 2 – Special combination: Normal operation with earthquake grade 7.
4. CALCULATION SECTIONS
Figure 1:Calculation sections position ( Section A-A)

Using stability, seepage calculation program: Geo-Slope programme of Canada.

K at 
 Gn" sin  n
Where:
PECC3 7A.2
Bishop method.
 It is different from above method so it takes into account pressure at two
sides soil bar.
JanBu method:
 It is different from above 2 methods so it takes into account bottom pressure
at two sides and friction soil bar.
In this calculation, Bishop method is selected.
PECC3 7A.3
6. CALCULAITON RESULTS

Case 1: Basic Case 2: special
combination: combination:
Normal Normal operation
Section Combination
+ earthquake [K] Note
operation
grade 7
Basic
1.648 - 1.15 OK
A-A Special
- 1.293 1.035 OK
PECC3 7A.4
7.1 Section 1A-1A

 Case 1 – Basic combination: Normal opeartion
1.648
745
D u o i lo p ma t
L o p 2 s aLoo v
pa2 3s a
saoo
725
715
705 Lo p 2 s a o
Elevation
Lo p 2 s a o
695
685
BT
675
665
655 Lo p 2 s a o
645
635
625
-15 5 25 45 65 85 105 125 145 165
Distance
 Case 2 – Special combination: Normal operation with earthquake

grade 7
1.293
745
D u o i lo p ma t
735 Lo p 2 s a o vp
a2
3 ssa
aoo
Lo
725
715
705 Lo p 2 s a o
Elevation
Lo p 2 s a o
695
685
BT
675
665
655 Lo p 2 s a o
645
635
625
-15 5 25 45 65 85 105 125 145 165
Distance
PECC3 7A.5
Detailed design Appendix 7B – Stability calculation of excavation slope of surge tank
APPENDIX 7B
STABILITY CALCULATION OF EXCAVATED SLOPE OF SURGE
TANK
1. APPLIED DATA
 QCVN 04 - 05 : 2012/BNNPTNT – National technical regulation on

hydraulic structures – The basic stipulation for design.
2. CALCULATION DATA

Deformation
Shear strength
Name γ γm bearing
kN/m3 kN/m3 kPa “o” kPa “o” MPa MPa kPa cm/s
Silty clay 17.0 18.0 26 14 30 18 5. 5 7.5 160 1*10-5
Weathered
soil
17.0 17.2 30 16 35 20 6.0 8.0 180 1*10-4
Gravel silty
clay
(Other parameters which there are not in this report, it is shown in geology
report)
Grade of work: grade III according to QCVN 04-05/2012
Allowable safety factor:
 Special combination: K = 1.035
3. CALCULATION CASES
 Case 1 – Under construction: the slope has just been excavated
PECC3 7B.1
4. CALCULATING SECTIONS
Figure 1:Calculation sections position ( Section B-B)

Using stability, seepage calculation program: Geo-Slope programme of

Canada.
K at 
 Gn" sin  n
Where:
Bishop method
 It is different from above method so it takes into account pressure at two
sides soil bar.
JanBu method:
 It is different from above 2 methods so it takes into account bottom pressure
at two sides and friction soil bar.
In this calculation, Bishop method is selected
PECC3 7B.2
6. CALCULATION RESULTS

Case 1 – Under
construction: slope
Section Combination
has just been [K] Note
excavated
Under
B-B construction
1.113 1.09 OK
PECC3 7B.3
7.1 Section B-B

 Case 1 – Under construction: the slope has been excavated
1.113
710
700
690
680
Lo p m at
670
Du oi lop m a t
660
650
640
Elevation
630 BT BT BT
Lo p m at
620
Du oi lop m a t
610
600
590
570
560
550
540
530
-130 -110 -90 -70 -50 -30 -10 10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150
Distance
PECC3 7B.4
Nam Long 2 HP Project 222. Calculation Report for NL2 waterway.
Detail Design Appendix 8
APPENDIX 8
TUNNEL LINING CALCULATION
1. In the operation case.
During operation the the tunnel lining is applied two stress circuferential stress and logitudial stress as follows:
- Circuferential stress, σ1
- Logitudial stress, σ2
1.1.circuferential stress :
Circuferential stress is calculated by below formula:
P ( Do   )
1 
2(to   )
Where:
 1 : Circuferential Stress at calcualation point (N/mm²)
P: Internal Pressure (icluding hammer effect), MPa
Do:Internal diameter, mm
to: usage lining thickness, mm
 : corrosion allowable thickness: 1,5mm
The resuls shown as below table:
Table 1.1: Parameters of pipe
Internal
Space Lining
Pressure Static
Total length between Internal Diameter Thickne slope Material
and head
supports ss
hammer
Piperun name L l Do to P P Ф
m m mm mm Mpa Mpa °
 D   D  s 4 t 1 e q3
PiperunN01
1 2 : :
137,00 0 1200  
12 0,26 0,200 2,86 Q345B
Table 1.2: Circuferential stress.
Circufe
Linning Internal Internal pressure Effect welding
rential Allowable stress
thickness Diameter x1,3 factor
stress
Piperun name To Do P  1 α σa σa x a
mm mm Mpa N/mm² N/mm² N/mm²
 D   D  s 4 t 1 e q3
PiperunN01
1 2 : :
12 1200

0,34
19 0,95 180 171
1.2.longitudial stress
(1) Local stress at girder
t r hr PD
 f  1.82 (1   )
At 2t
u  0 . 78 r m .t
rm  ( D o  to ) / 2
PECC3 Page1/6
rm  ( D o  to ) / 2
Where:
D = Do – ε ,mm
t = to - ε , mm
P: Internal pressure, Mpa.
hr: girder, mm
tr: Thickness of girder, mm
Ar : Area girder effect, mm²
(2) Possion effect
Stress due to possion effect on girder face
 t 3   1
 : Possion factor (0,3)

 t 3: Stress due to possion efect, N/mm2
 1 : Circuferetial stress (N/mm2)
(3) Stress due to temperature change
 t 2   S .E S  T
 t 2: Longitudial stress due to temperature change (N/mm2)

 s : Elongation factor (1,2 x 10^-5/oC)
Es : Elastic modul (206 kN/mm2)
∆T :Temperature change (±1ºC)
Temperature increase 1
Temerature decrease: -1
(4) Total long gitudial stress :
Temperature increse
 2   t2   t3   f
Temperature decrease
 2   t 2   t3   f
Where:
 t 3 : Stress du to Poisson effect, N/mm2
 t 2 : Stress due to temperature change (N/mm2)
σf : Local stress at girder, N/mm²
The reesults as shown in the table below:  
Table1.3: Longitudial stress :

Poissio
Internal lining stress due to
Cross ssection effect Material
diameter thicksess girder
Pipername stress
Do To cross section area σf  t3
mm mm mm² N/mm² N/mm²
 D   D  s 4 t 1 e q3
PiperunN01
1 2 : :
1900 12 71628 11 6 Q345B
PECC3 Page2/6
Temperature change Welding

Longitudial stress Allowable stress
stress effect
Piperuns name incresae Decrease incresae Decrease
 t2 t2 '  2
2 ' α σa σa x a
N/mm² N/mm² N/mm² N/mm² N/mm² N/mm²
PiperunN01
 t 2   S
-2,47
. E
2,47S  T
-7 19 
1 0
0,95 
180 
1 0
171
1.3. combination stress
In case temperature increase
   1   2   1 2
In case temperature decrease

 '   '1  ' 2  '1  ' 2
The result á shown in the table below:
internal Thickness Circuferential Sharing
Logitudial stress Combination stress
pipe run diameter of lining stress stress
Increas
Decrease Increase Decrease
e
Do To σ1 σ2 σ2` τ σ σ`
mm mm N/mm² N/mm² N/mm² N/mm² N/mm² N/mm²
PiperunN01 1900 12 19 -7 19 0 27 1
welding
Allowable stress
factor
piperun α Material σa σa x a Result
N/mm² N/mm²
PiperunN01 0,95 Q345B 180 171 OK
2. Empty case calculation
2.1. Permanent external stress:
The water head is the defference between elev. Of natural surface of ground and elev. Center
fo pipe:
Residual stress occurred due to reinforcement concrete holding steel lining
steel lining :
2.2 External pressure applied on the steel lining with girders:
Pressure applied on steel lining is calcualated by S. Timoshenko empirical formula as follows:
 
 
1   r P 2
S 0
'
K2

1   S2

t 2

 2
n  1 
2n 2  1   S
 
ESt 2
12 r0' 2  n 2 l '2 
 
 
2 '2
n l  1  2 '2 
n  1  1  2 ' 2
2

 r0
  r0   
Where:
PK 2 : Alloweable Limited pressure appilied on steel lining, N/mm2
l ' : The distance between the two girders, mm
n : Number of ripples:
0 .25
0 .5  D ' 
n  1 .63D ' o   o 
 t 
r0' 2 
t  1 . 56 r m t r0' 2
 r

2 t S 0  1 . 56 t r m t
T   1, 5
t r  1 . 56 rm t 3  r0'  sinh  l  sin  l 2 r0' 2
   
3 1    2
S
0 . 75
 t  cosh  l  cos  l S 0  1 . 56 t rm t
PECC3 Page3/6

l '  l  156 rm t  cos 1

  1  0 . 037
rm t

t3 


 l  156 rm t  cos 1
 IS 
tr
1
1 . 56 rm t
  1  1  T 
S0
1
1 . 56 t rm t
tr
IS  h r  t 3
12
S 0  t r t  h r 
 
31    2
S
0 .25
rm t
Where:
l : Disctance between the two girders, mm
I S : Moment innertia of girder section, mm4
Gross Section
safety factor Sf2 as follows :
PK 2
S f 2 
P0
P0 : External permanent pressure, N/mm2
when S f 2 >1.5 : means that safety enough,
The calculation result shown in the below table:
Girder Height Girder Distance

Internal Lining Number
Thicknes of Cross of the two to-ε (Do+ε)/2
diameter thickness of ripples
s girder section girders
Pipe run
Do To tr hr So n l t 




10
p
ro
mm mm mm mm mm² mm mm  
PiperunN01 1900 10,5 12 80 960 8 2.000 12,0 1924
Effective
disctan Allowable
Moment (Do+to) Cross External
Factor ß factor T ce two factor λ limitation
innertia /2 section of pressure
girder Pressure
Pipe run girder
Is ß T l' rm λ Ar Pk 




10
p
Po
mm4 mm mm mm² N/mm²   Mpa
PiperunN01 778688 0,0120 13901 1787 955 -14049 3.108 2,400 0,80
PECC3 Page4/6
Conclusion : The pipe is safety by external pressure.
2.3. Girder calculation:

The allowable limitation pressure of girder is calculated by formula E.Amstutz as folown:
1, 5
 k0  N   r2   rm  F    1 r   
     1  m2  N   1, 68  N
 1   m  F N

 rm ES   i ES  e ES  4 e ES 
where:
i: Radius of combination parts of girder, mm
e: The distance between combination parts of girder and internal surface of pipe, mm
ko: gap between steel and concrete, mm
k o  0 .0004 rm
Where  N is calulaed by above formula and  Cr - The allowable limitation pressure

by below equation:
 
 r 0' 2  F   N 
 Cr   N 1   
 e 3 
 (1   )E S 
2
σF: Yeild stress of matrial, Kgf/cm²

For SM400,  F =245 N/mm²( t <16mm)
Then , average weighted pressure of girder as folown:
 

P ' r0' t r  1 . 56 rm t 
c
S 0  1 . 56 rm t
P :
' External adjusted pressure:
P 0 : Pressure applied to both sides of girders;


 
r0'2 t r  1.56 rm t r0

'2 

P0  t S 0  1.56t rm t 
P 
'
(t r  1.56 rm t )  2  1.5 
t r  1.56 rm t  3  r0'  sinh l  sin l 2r0'2 
     
 3 1  S2  0.75 
 t  cosh l  cos l S 0  1.56t rm t 
The safety factor is calculated by below formula:
 cr
Sf3 
c
PECC3 Page5/6
When S f 3 >1.5 then the girder is safe.

Conclusion: the results shown in the table below:
Averag
Gap
Adjusted Circurfer e Allowa Pipe Girder
between
external etial presse ble safety safety
girder and
pressure stress d stress factor factor
concrete
Đoạn stress
P' ko N C  Cr Sf2 Sf3 Result
Mpa mm N/mm² N/mm² N/mm²
PiperunN01 0,06 0,502 19 40 123 3 3 OK
PECC3 Page6/6
Nam Long HPP Volume 2 – Calculation Appendix
Detail design Appendix 9 – Length of tunnel plug
APPENDIX 9
LENGTH OG TUNNEL PLUG
1 CALCULATION FOR LENGTH OF TUNNEL PLUG
1.1 Calculation methods & formulas

Length of tunnel plug is selected according to following conditions:
a. Required length for anti-shear force
Where:
 P: static water pressure, P = .h
+ γ: unit weight of water
+ h: effect water head, h= flood water level – elevation of tunnel bottom
 A: affected area by water head pressure (cross section of tunnel)
  : shear strength of concrete M200
 l: perimeter
 Fs : safety coefficient
b. Required length for anti-slipping between rock & concrete
Where:
 P: static water pressure, P = .h
+ γ: unit weight of water
+ h: effect water head, h= flood water level – elevation of tunnel bottom
 A: affected area by water head pressure (cross section of tunnel)
  : shear strength of concrete M200
 f: friction coefficient (between concrete & rock foundation)
 c : unit weight of concrete
 l: perimeter
 Fs : safety coefficient
PECC3 1-1
Detail design Appendix 9 – Length of tunnel plug
1.2 Calculation combinations & results

The length of concrete plugging is calculated with following combinations:
+ Combination 1 – Basic case: calculated in case reservoir level is at Full
supply level
+ Combination 2 – Special case 1: calculated with the maximum water
harmer pressure
+ Combination 3 – Special case 2: calculated in case reservoir level is at
full supply level and earthquake.
PECC3 1-2
Detail design Appendix 9- Length of tunnel plug
Table 1: Length of concrete plugging

Z tunnel
Z max h A  f Fs l P L1 L2 Lmax
Item Combination bottom
m m m m2 T/m2 m T/m m m m
Basic combination 688.85 677.350 11.500 11.569 25 0.70 3 7.20 11.50 2.2 2.0 2.2
Adit tunnel 1 Special 1 combination (harmer water) 706.43 677.350 29.080 11.569 25 0.70 2 7.20 29.08 3.7 3.4 3.7
Special 2 combination (earthquake) 688.85 677.350 11.500 11.569 25 0.70 2 7.20 13.23 1.7 1.5 1.7
Basic combination 688.85 623.928 64.922 11.569 25 0.70 3 7.20 64.92 12.5 11.3 12.5
Adit tunnel 2 Special 1 combination (harmer water) 706.43 623.928 82.502 11.569 25 0.70 2 7.20 82.50 10.6 9.6 10.6
Special 2 combination (earthquake) 688.85 623.928 64.922 11.569 25 0.70 2 7.20 74.66 9.6 8.7 9.6
Conclusion:
 Length of adit tunnel 1: L = 4m
 Length of adit tunnel 2: L = 13m
PECC3 1-3
Nam Long HPP
Detailed design Appendix 10 – Temporary support calculation for tunnel, penstock, surge tank
APPENDIX 10
TEMPORARY SUPPORT CALCULATION FOR TUNNEL, PENSTOCK,
SURGE TANK
1. Classify rock grading of tunnel according to Q-System

There are two types of rock classifications used in tunnels in current
hydropower project including classification of Q-system (Barton) and RMR-
system (Bieniawski). In previous design stage, the T-system (China) is applied
to classify rock grading of tunnel and divided rock surrounding tunnel in to 5
types (I ~ V) with total evaluated points of 100. Bieniawski and other authors
were established relationship between RMR-values and Q-value. The
relationship between 3 systems is as follows:
Table 1: Relationship between 3 systems of rock classification for the tunnel
Q value in RMR value in Tvalue in
Type of
Quality of Rock Q-system RMR-system T-system
Rock
(Barton) (Bieniawski) (China)
T = (100 –
I Very good > 40 100 – 81
86)
II Good 10 – 40 80 – 61 85 ≥ T > 65
III Fair 4 – 10 60 – 41 65 ≥ T > 45
IV Poor 1–4 40 – 21 45 ≥ T > 25
V Very poor <1 ≤ 20 T ≤ 25
In this design, Q-system and guideline of EVN for using Q-system shall be
applied to estimate quality and type of temporary support for tunnel. Using Q
graph to define the equivalent diameter De of tunnel/penstock: De =
(Span/ESR) with Span is the height/diameter of tunnel or penstock and the
excavation support ratio (ESR) of 1.60 is adopted for hydropower tunnels. The
Q graph as follows:
PECC3 1
Nam Long HPP
De =
PECC3 2
Nam Long HPP
2. EVN guideline about support type of tunnel/penstock

Table 2 Support methods for underground structure with 10m arch
(can be flexibly applied for larger/smaller 10m arch)
Classification Support method
of Q RMR Anchor
Excavation method Shotcrete
surrounding value value D20mm Steel truss
rock Based on Q graph
Excavate whole tunnel
In general, no support is
section with each
I. Very good 40-100 81-100 required, using anchors at No
excavated distance is
partial position if necessary.
a=3m.
Using anchors
at partial
Excavate & completely position of 50mm
support whole tunnel arch with thickness at
II. Good 10-40 61-80 section with each Lanchor=3m, arch and No
excavated distance is a=2.5m and required
(1.5~3)m. add wire mesh positions
at some
positions
Excavate at arch firstly Using anchor
with each excavated at whole arch (50~100)mm
distance is a= (1.5~3) and side with thickness at
m then expand Lanchor=4m, arch and
III. Fair 4-10 41-60 No
excavation. Using a=(1.5~2)m 30mm
support immediately and add wire thickness at
after each drill & blast mesh at only side.
stage arch.
Using anchor
Using light to
at whole arch (100~150)mm
Excavate & completely medium steel
and side with thickness at
support at arch firstly truss with
Lanchor=4.5m, arch and
IV. Poor 1-4 21-40 with each excavated a=1.5m at
a=(1.5~2)m 100mm
distance is a=(1~1.5)m required
and add wire thickness at
then expand excavation positions.
mesh at both side.
(H≤150mm)
arch & side.
Tunnel section is
Using
divided into many Using anchor
medium to
parts. Excavate & at whole arch
(100~200)mm heavy steel
completely support at and side with
thickness at truss with
arch firstly with each Lanchor=5.6m,
arch and a=0.75m (H
V. Very poor <1 < 20 excavated distance is a=(1~1.5)m,
150mm >150mm), it
a= (0.5~1.5) m then and can use
thickness at need to be
expand excavation. anchor at
side. supported at
Using shotcrete bottom (if
bottom (if
immediately after each necessary).
necessary)
drill & blast stage .
Note: The above guidelines for excavation and support methods can be applied with underground structures
with 10m arch. With structures with arch is larger or smaller than 10m, it can be based on Q graph.
3. Type of temporary support
PECC3 3
Nam Long HPP
Table 3 Type of temporary support for tunnel/penstock/surge tank
De Support Proposed method

No Location Q Requirement
(m) type
Tunnel/penstock
De = Temporary support: Type 3:
Km0 ~ Km0+123.18m
(3.36/ Type 3: no need to be Shotcrete M300,
1 (Tunnel inlet - horse- 1~4 Type 3
1.6) = supported, partial mesh B40 10cm
shoe shape)
2.10 shotcrete (if required) thickness
De = Type 1: no need to
Km0+123.18m~Km1+
(3.26/ Temporary support: be supported.
505m
2 10~40 1.6) = Type 1 Type 1: no need to be
(Tunnel - horse-shoe
2.04 supported
shape)
Km1+505m~Km1+923 De = Temporary support:
Temporary support:
.17m (3.36/ Type 2: no need to
3 4~10 Type 2 Type 2: no need to be
(Tunnel - horse-shoe 1.6) = be supported.
supported
shape) 2.10
Penstock (including bottom of ST)
Km+923.17m~Km1+9 De = Type 4A: no need to
Temporary support:
95.13m (3.00/ be supported
1 1~4 Type 4A Type 4A: no need to be
(Penstock - round 1.6) =
supported
shape) 1.88
Km1+995.13m~Km2+ De = Type 4: no need to
Temporary support:
131.80m (3.00/ be supported
2 1~4 Type 4 Type 4: no need to be
(Penstock - horse-shoe 1.6) =
supported
shape) 1.88
Type 5:
- Shape steel H150,
a=1m (arch steel)
Km2+131.80m~Km2+ De = - Backfill concrete
Temporary support:
216.12m (3.30/ M200
3 <1 Type 5 Type 5: Shape steel
(Penstock - horse-shoe 1.6) = - Steel gird
H150, a=1m.
shape) 2.06 D1a=4x4
- Steel frame
D12xD10@200x20
0
Surge tank
Type 6:
-Shape steel I100,
a=1m (arch steel)
EL.684.00m ~ De =
Temporary support: - Backfill concrete
EL.673.00m (5.90/
1 <1 Type 6 Type 6: Shape steel M200
(Surge tank - round 1.6) =
I100, a=1m. - Steel girdD1a=4x4
shape) 3.69
- Steel frame
D12xD10@200x20
0
EL.673.00m ~ De = Temporary support: Type 7:
EL.633.30m <1 (4.00/ Type 7 Type 7: Shape steel -Shape steel I100,
(Surge tank - round 1.6) = I100, a=1m. a=1m (arch steel)
PECC3 4
Nam Long HPP
De Support Proposed method

No Location Q Requirement
(m) type
shape) 2.50 - Backfill concrete
M200
- Steel gird
D1a=4x4
- Steel frame
D12xD10@200x20
0
Type 8
-Shape steel I100,
a=1m.
De = - Backfill concrete
EL.633.30m ~ Temporary support:
(2.60/ M200
EL.626.81m 1~4 Type 8 Type 8: no need to be
1.6) = - Steel gird
(round shape) supported
1.62 D1a=4x4
- Steel frame
D12xD10@200x20
0
PECC3 5
Detailed design Content
CONTENT
APPENDIX 1 - HYDRAULIC CALCULATION OF INTAKE
APPENDIX 2 - STRUCTURE CALCULATION OF INTAKE
APPENDIX 3 - HEAD LOSS CALCULATION OF WATERWAY
APPENDIX 3A - WATER HAMMER CALCULATION OF PENTOCK
APPENDIX 4 - HYDRAULIC CALCULATION OF SURGE TANK
APPENDIX 5 - SURGE TANK STRUCTURE CALCULATION
APPENDIX 6 - STRUCTURE CALCUALTION OF TUNNEL
APPENDIX 7 - STABLITY CALCULATION OF EXCAVATED SLOPE OF

OUTLET
APPENDIX 7A - STABILITY CALCULATION OF EXCAVATED SLOPE OF

INTAKE
APPENDIX 7B - STABILITY CALCULATION OF EXCAVATED SLOPE OF

SURGE TANK
APPENDIX 8 - TUNNEL LINING CALCULATION
APPENDIX 9 - LENGTH OF TUNNEL PLUG
APPENDIX 10 - TEMPORARY SUPPORT CALCULATION FOR TUNNEL,

PENSTOCK, SURGE TANK
PECC3

Calculation Waterway

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Calculation Waterway

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nam Long 2 HPP Volume 2.2.

2 – Calculation Report For NL2 WaterWay

Determining the sill elevation and the intake structure

Hydraulic structures - Hydraulic calculation process of ground sluiceTCVN

 Max discharge: Qmax =9.71 m3/s

4.1 Determining immersion depth of intake

Applying formula: S = (0.54  0.72).V.D0.5(ref: J.L.Gordon)

Dimension of trashrack (B, Hcv) is determined to sure velocity of flow before

Dimension of intake at trashrack:

Condition vacuum non-occurrence at calculated point of intake :

MC1 4.5 3.50 9.52 0.360 0.46 0.0052 10.51

MC2 4.5 2.76 9.52 0.360 1.41 0.0686 11.10

MC3 4.5 2.76 9.52 0.360 1.41 0.0888 11.07

So. vacuum is not occurrence at ceiling of the intake.

 TCVN 2737 : 1995 “Load and impact - Design standards”

 Full supply water level - FSL :684.00m

4.1 Force diagram

4.1.2 Case 2,3 – Special loads

4.2 Calculation diagram

Figure 4-1 Calculation diagram

5.1 Case 1: Basic combo

Figure 5-1 Moment diagram of intake

Figure 5-2 Shearing force diagram of intake

Figure 5-3 Moment diagram of intake

Figure 5-4 Shearing force diagram

Figure 5-5 Moment diagram of intake

Figure 5-6 Shearing force diagram

Table 5-1 Reinforcement result of intake

Maximum calculating flow Qmax: Qmax = 9.71 (m3/s)

No. Feature Unit Value Notes

National standard TCVN 9151:2012 “Hydraulic structures - Hydraulic

Total of water head loss is determined:

Loss through trashrack

Loss at segment which is extended on pipeline

Loss when the valve is closed quickly

Longitudinal loss is determined on formula:

Table 2:Loss calculating results of waterway

Figure 1:Relation graph between loss and flow

Determination piezometric line on pipeline, positive and negative water

Hydraulic calculation KIXELEP manual.

 Full Supplied level (FSL): 684.0m

According to the Kixilep hydraulic manual

Where: Li is the length of tunnel segment

ns: turnaround factor, is determined on table 15.1 the Kixilep hydraulic

Figure 1:Test pressure chart of penstock

Figure 1: Calculation diagram surge tank

Table 2: Material property

1.5 Combination load and load

Table 5: The calculation results of exposed section – Special case

1.7 Calculation result

Pic 1: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 basic case

Figure 2: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 special case

Figure 3: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 basic case

Figure 4: Calculation result M11,M22,F11,F22 special case

1.1.1 Reinforced concrete M250:

Table 2: Physical –mechanical parameters of rock foundation

Table 3 Soil physical and mechanical indexes recommend value

kN/m3 kN/m3 kN/m2 (degree) kN/m2

1.2 SOFWARE AND METHOD

1.3 CALCULATION MEHTOD

Figure 1: Calculation model of tunnel type 2

Figure 2: Calculation model of tunnel type 3

Figure 3: Calculation model of rock trap