See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/295164497

Quality assurance of hydro equipment

Article · January 2009

CITATION READS

1 473

1 author:

John Gummer
Hydro-Consult
68 PUBLICATIONS   181 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Cavitation View project

Drin river rehabiliation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by John Gummer on 06 June 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Quality assurance of hydro
equipment
J.H. Gummer, Hydro-Consult Pty Ltd, Australia
Fortunately major incidents at hydro facilities are few, considering the number of hydro plants operating
worldwide. However, when things do go wrong the resulting damage and destruction is awe-inspiring. The
recent accident at the Sayano-Shushenskaya powerplant in Russia is a terrible reminder of the sheer power
of water and the forces which we in the hydro industry are controlling. Although the cause of the Sayano-
Shushenskaya accident is yet to be determined, the event does reinforce the need for constant vigilance, of
which, as explained in this paper, quality assurance during all phases of hydro work forms a major part.

P
eople can generally recognize quality in arte-
facts. Indisputable is the craftsmanship embod-
ied in a piece of Chippendale furniture, in the
translucence of fine Dresden china and in the vibran-
cy of the colours of a Matisse painting. This innate
recognition of quality extends to functioning equip-
ment such as automobiles, kitchen appliances and gar-
den tools. As soon as one hears the welcome thump of
the closing of a door of an automobile at the high end
of the market, one is assured of its quality of manu-
facture.
However, quality and resulting fitness for service
comes at a cost to the user; a cost that we, when pur-
chasing equipment for hydroelectric powerplants, are
quite often unwilling to accept. Our modi operandi in
the compiling of specifications, letting of contracts,
contract administration, manufacturing and erection
of such equipment over recent years has been tuned to
obtaining dubious quality at the lowest possible cost.
This often results in, at best, delays and costly rectifi-
cation and, at the worst, accidents and failure of the
equipment to meet project objectives.
In our personal life we mull and deliberate over the
design and building of our houses, and in the purchase
of our appliances. Our personal specifications are
detailed, and seldom do we choose the cheapest just
because it is the cheapest. In the building of our pri-
vate houses we inspect the workmanship as the build-
ing progresses, and would never think of allowing the
builder to be solely responsible for quality control.
However, when it comes to equipment for our
hydropower stations, so often our specifications are
full of nebulous and meaningless phases such as “best
manufacturing practice” and “internationally accept-
able standards” and accordingly are imprecise as to
exactly what we require. Thus, in some instances, this
can lead to the installation of inappropriate equipment.
With the general acceptance of standards such as
ISO 9001-2000, we have subcontracted inspection
during manufacture and erection to the very contrac-
tor who is doing the work. In some cases this may
work, but in others it may not, resulting in mistakes
that may not be rectifiable when the item reaches site
or, worst still, may not be found until the item is in
service and is well outside the guarantee period.
1. General
There is often an assumption that it is only when the
installation of equipment has started at site that things
become interesting for the electro-mechanical special-
ists. In fact nothing could be further from the truth. Site
installation in reality is the culmination of a long series
of important decisions and events, all of which are far
more important than site installation. Although quality
control at site is important, and should be correctly exer-
cised and monitored, no amount of site inspection will
compensate for an inappropriate specification, a poor
design or major undiscovered manufacturing errors.
Quality control must be established at the very
beginning of the project, and be followed through the
specification, design, manufacturing, erection and
commissioning phases, well into the operation and
maintenance period. This includes complete and clear
commissioning records and as-built documentation
and drawings, as well as comprehensive and well
ordered operation and maintenance manuals. Without
these, on-going station operation is difficult and may
be potentially dangerous.
The analogy with building a house mentioned above
is far more relevant with respect to equipment for a
hydroelectric facility than manufacturing an automo-
bile. In the case of an automobile, the product will be
designed and manufactured for sale on the open mar-
ket. If quality in design or manufacture is lacking, then
it is entirely the responsibility of the manufacturing
company. In the case of a hydroelectric facility, as
with a house, many of the major decisions regarding
both design and manufacture are made by the ‘Client’.
Traditionally the ‘Client’ has either been the end user
or the engineer. Recently this has changed, and
increasingly the ‘Client’ is a project management unit
(PMU) aided by a panel of experts (POE) and various
environmental and single interest groups, all of a
which have the power to manipulate a project before
it ever gets to an equipment manufacturer. Whereas
the traditional ‘Client’ or engineer were entities which
could be held to task for lack of quality in conceptual
design and overriding control of manufacture, the
PMU and POE are far more ephemeral organizations,
both probably only existing for the early life of the
project and are subject to many changes in the typical
project gestation period of eight to ten years. In this
paper, the term ‘Client’ is used to embrace all possibly
variants and combinations of PMU, end user and engi-
neer.
2. Quality control during feasibility
and inception phases
The feasibility and inception phases of a project are
seldom associated with quality control of the electrical
and mechanical equipment. However this is the stage
of the project when many of the major decisions
affecting the eventual equipment are made and, if the
choice is inappropriate, these irreversible decisions
will haunt the project throughout its life.
At the feasibility stage, typically the type and
arrangement of the equipment are chosen. For medi-

Hydropower & Dams Issue Five, 2009 83

Brittle fracture of a
spiral casing, circa
1950.
um- to high-head schemes, the maintenance and
operational advantages of a Pelton unit are equated
against the lower civil costs and higher peak efficien-
cy of a Francis unit. The simplicity and lower cost of
a propeller unit is compared with the far better range
of operation of a Kaplan unit. The need for surge
tanks, compared with higher machine inertias, is eval-
uated together with the advantages and disadvantages
of providing both hydraulic isolation in the form of
inlet valves, and electrical isolation in the form of unit
circuit breakers.
Among the most important decisions to be taken at
the feasibility and inception phases are whether to
have an underground or surface powerhouse, and the
need for and capacity of relief devices, such as spill-
way gates, and drainage facilities, such as bottom out-
lets from reservoirs.
All these and others are major decisions from which
equipment specification and eventual design and man-
ufacture will flow. Typically there are no clear answers,
and the final configuration will be a combination of
economics, operational demands, past precedents (and
unfortunately dogmatic opinion) with, regrettably the
principal hindrance to quality decisions at the feasibili-
ty stage being the latter. The challenge, therefore, is to
find a means of maximizing logical and reasoned analy-
sis and minimizing ‘instinctive feelings’.
Hydroelectric plants are naturally dominated by the
civil aspects, as these typically represent between 80
and 90 per cent of the cost. Accordingly, emphasis at
the feasibility stage is on the civil aspects, and electri-
cal and mechanical equipment tend to take back stage.
However, it must be remembered that the end objec-
tives of the construction of the plant are to produce
energy and to control water, both of which are strong-
ly dependent on the suitability of the equipment cho-
sen for the task. Accordingly, decisions relating to
equipment selection and arrangement should be given
the same emphasis as those concerning the civil works
and should be well documented in the form of com-
prehensive reports.
Brittle fracture of a
generator bottom
bracket, circa
2002.
Some lessons
should never be
forgotten.
84
Where economics play an important role in equip-
ment selection (which is almost always) the basis for
the economic analysis must take into account possi-
ble future roles for the facility, and in so doing follow
current trends. Particular examples of this are the pre-
miums placed on peaking power, the need for spinning
reserve, competitive trends governing the sale of ener-
gy, and quick response in electrical networks which
have to accommodate an ever-increasing amount of
unpredictable renewable generation.
As many opinions as feasibly possible should be
sought, and care should be taken to ensure that these
opinions are unbiased. Although the age and experi-
ence of the advisors are important factors, equally
valid are new ideas and developments, especially in
the fast-moving fields of control and monitoring. The
opinions of leading equipment manufacturers should
be solicited and incorporated where appropriate. On
the other hand, the hydroelectric industry has a well
deserved reputation for a conservative approach, and
leading edge technologies should only be adopted
with caution.
3. Specification and tender resolution
3.1 Commercial considerations
The equipment specification will reflect the conclu-
sions of the feasibility and inception studies. Many
items will already be unalterable, and any changes
will be difficult, especially if the feasibility phase has
been vetted and approved by lending agencies and a
panel of experts. Hence, the equipment specification
should be viewed as an extension of the feasibility
report, and as a means of ensuring that decisions made
at the previous stage are implemented in the purchase
and manufacture of the equipment.
However, it should also be realised that important
decisions are necessary before the equipment specifi-
cation can be started, all of which can affect the qual-
ity of the end product, either directly because of inap-
propriate or unrealistic conditions, or indirectly as a
result of future contractual animosity and hindrance to
the programme.
Some of the more important decisions to be taken are
generally as follows:
3.1.1 Split up and number of contracts
There are a myriad of alternatives ranging from a sin-
gle contract for the complete E&M equipment for a
project (inclusive of hydraulic turbines, generators,
transformers, hydraulic gates, auxiliaries, and so on) to
separate contracts for each. Conventional thinking is
that better individual prices can be obtained for small-
er packages. While this is probably true, offset against
any price advantage of a smaller package must be the
In the case shown here, it would have been cheaper and far
easier to have specified a temporary steel draft tube bulkhead.
Hydropower & Dams Issue Five, 2009
cost of bidding and tender resolution, in addition to the
difficulties of contract administration and settling of
interfaces and limits of supply. Also, it must be remem-
bered that the costs of contract administration and
interfacing have not been lost in a turnkey-type con-
tract; they have just been passed on to the contractor,
with a doubtless not inconsiderable mark-up by him.
The final decision really depends upon the strength
and capacity of the client’s organization, or that of his
representative. If the client’s organization is strong
and experienced, then obviously it can handle far
more co-ordination than a small inexperienced organi-
zation. If there is any doubt, then it is best to have the
minimum number of contracts.
3.1.2 Commercial general conditions of contract
If the funding for the contract is originating either
entirely or in part with an international lending
agency, then they may wish to impose their own gen-
eral conditions of contract. These may or may not be
suitable for the works envisaged or, more likely, they
will require extensive add-on clauses, to accommo-
date the particular requirements of the current project.
The author sees nothing wrong with the ‘FIDIC
Conditions of Contract for Electrical and Mechanical
Works’ for most applications. They are widely used,
cover most situations without major modifications
and, most important, are known in detail to client,
consultant and contractor alike.
3.1.3 Pre- and post-qualification
The basic reasoning behind pre-qualification is to
reduce the number of bidders to those who can actual-
ly do the job, in theory reducing the work required
during the bid evaluation process. The process is par-
ticularly relevant to exceptional equipment, or stan-
dard equipment which has to operate in exceptional
circumstances. In the past, when there were numerous
equipment manufacturers, the pre-qualification
process was very necessary, to thin the field. However,
with recent mergers and acquisitions by major manu-
facturers, it is fair to question the relevance of pre-
qualification in today’s commercial environment. The
basic problem with pre-qualification is that, once a
potential bidder is pre-qualified, it is virtually impos-
sible to reject his bid if it is the lowest in price and is
without major divergences to the specification. This
may not be in the interests of obtaining the best possi-
ble equipment for the job.
However, pre-qualification is better than post-quali-
fication, in which a bidder is accepted or rejected on
the basis of certificates as to his past experience,
which are submitted with the bid. In the author’s expe-
rience, as soon as money is involved, all sorts of
excuses and reasons are used to push the lowest bid-
der past the post-qualification hurdle.
Regardless of whether pre, post, or no qualification
is used, it is essential that facilities are available to
check the qualification documentation, especially
when the bidder is not a leading international player.
A certificate or affidavit has no value unless it can be
independently checked, preferably physically or
through data published in the public domain.
3.1.4 Loading during bid evaluation
Bid loading is typically applied to guarantees such as
output, efficiency and dimensions. where those dimen-
sions affect the civil works. The latter is incontestable. If
a machine cannot be fitted into the specified civil works,
then obviously the costs incurred in adjusting the works
must be added to the bid price. These costs must be indi-
Hydropower & Dams Issue Five, 2009
cated in the specification as a rate per dimension or com-
bination of dimensions, and must be commensurate with
the specification drawings. In the interests of the con-
struction programme, the specification compilers may
wish to make some dimensions mandatory, in which
case they should be indicated as such.
Loadings for performance, such as output and effi-
ciency, are much more difficult to define and apply. If
codes such as IEC 60041 are used, then typically the
measured values carry tolerances which, in the case of
site measured turbine efficiency can be as high as ±2.5
per cent, depending on the flow measurement method
used. This gives the bidder plenty of scope to mani-
pulate his guaranteed values, and thus the hypothetical
benefits of the higher guaranteed performance can
never be proven. Even if a zero tolerance approach is
adopted, the assumed benefits of higher guaranteed
values may not be finally realised, because measure-
ment occurs at the end of the contract, when typically
only about 10 per cent of the contract cost is available
for liquidated damages.
Hence, in the author’s opinion, values of loading for
performance guarantees should reflect the tolerances
of measurement and money available for liquidated
damages at the end of the contract.
3.2 Technical specification
Contrary to some popular thinking, the technical
clauses of an equipment specification should not be a
collection of words from a specification library,
rushed to completion on a computer word processor.
Each project has its own particular features and they
should be reflected in tailor-made technical clauses.
Verbosity should be kept to a minimum, and vague
statements such as “to the approval of the client or
engineer” serve no purpose (other than to increase thr
specification volume). Obvious requirements such as
“The turbine head cover shall be made from welded or
cast steel” can be avoided (the author has never seen a
wooden head cover).
International codes such as IEC, ISO, FEM, and so
on, should be used as much as possible, and should not
be paraphrased. It is sufficient just to refer to the code,
to identify and elucidate alternatives, and to identify
the redundant parts of the code. The technical specifi-
cation should have structure and follow exact guide-
lines. For this, the recommendations of the IEC codes
IEC/TR 61366-1 through to IEC/TR 613661-7 are an
excellent start to specifying hydraulic turbines, pump-
turbines and storage pumps, and IEC 34 for generators.
However, they provide only a skeleton on which the
substance of the specification is formed. The substance
will comprise features specific to the scheme, design
and manufacturing requirements and client preferences
based on past experience with similar equipment.
As shown here,
small mistakes can
have far-reaching
consequences.
85
For the want of a
pump suction strainer.
The technical specification must reflect the delibera-
tions and conclusions of the feasibility work and, if
necessary, leave alternatives for the bidders to price
and justify, either as a verification of the alternative
chosen during the feasibility stage or its repudiation. It
is far better that these questionable items are included
as alternatives in the specification because, if the bid-
ding is to lending agency rules, then it is very difficult
to broach them at the bidding analysis stage. Every
word of a specification counts. It is, in effect, a blue-
print for the final equipment. As any shopper knows,
if you want a Rolls Royce then you have to order a
Rolls Royce. Any additions or modifications required
after the contract is signed will come at considerable
cost, and quite rightly so. The bidder has in all hon-
estly tailored his price to the requirements of the spec-
ification and it is unrealistic and naive to expect major
changes to be provided free of charge.
Essential in the technical specification is a clear indi-
cation of the involvement of the client or his represen-
tatives in design approval, in manufacturing and erec-
tion inspection and in commissioning. The drawings
and documents required for client review should be
clearly stated, and be within the client’s capacity to
make a expeditious and timely analysis and reply.
Client review of the design should be commensurate
with the nature of the equipment. Obviously a normal
150 m head 60 MW unit from an established manufac-
turer should require less client review than a 750 MW
unit. In any event, client review should be orientated to
ensuring that the equipment meets the specification
and, in the case of multiple contracts, is compatible
with that of other contractors, and should never be such
as to relieve the contractor of his responsibilities.
Although the lending agencies may not approve of
this, it may only be possible to specify the required
An inferior component
can put the whole
powerhouse in
jeopardy.
86
quality of a proprietary piece of equipment correctly
by manufacturer’s name. This applies particularly to
auxiliary items such as valves, switchgear, pumps,
electric motors, and so on. It is unfortunate that these
items are the first to fail, and their failure or lack of
performance can put the operation of the whole pow-
erhouse in jeopardy.
Also, there is a question of uniformity of spares, with
operation and maintenance becoming increasingly
complicated with a lot of minor components from dif-
ferent suppliers. Hence the author finds nothing wrong
with identifying acceptable manufacturers for auxil-
iary equipment, albeit with the obligatory “or equiva-
lent” rider demanded by the lending agencies.
4. Manufacturing, erection and
commissioning
Manufacturing, erection and commissioning are
regarded as the traditional bastions of quality control.
However, as discussed above, they are but a culmina-
tion of all that has preceded them. The extent of the
quality assurance and the determining standards for
the quality control required by the client should
already be clear from the technical specification. The
onus is therefore on the contractor to develop the spec-
ification requirements into a quality plan, which will
form the basis of all manufacturing and site inspec-
tion, including the client’s and/or his representatives’
involvement in the process.
The accepted starting point for quality assurance of
manufacturing and erection is ISO 9001-2000 and its
related standards. This standard covers the structure of
the contractor’s quality assurance department and, in
particular, the system it uses for documenting the
progress and quality of the work. ISO does not certify
compliance of any organization to ISO 9001-2000;
this is done by certifying agents, usually commercial
inspection bodies such as TUV and Lloyds Register.
Certification to ISO 9001-2000 does not guarantee the
quality of any particular item; it just confirms that
conditions are present in the design and manufactur-
ing facility for it to produce high quality work. Hence,
certification to ISO 9001-2000 is very specific to its
declared aims, which is probably why even minor
builders and garages can now proudly display their
accreditation to this standard.
This is not to decry accreditation to ISO 9001-2000.
A company which has taken the time and trouble to
obtain accreditation is obviously far more aware of
quality requirements than one which has not.
However, any client must understand both the limita-
tions and strengths of the Standard, and take appropri-
ate measures to ensure that it covers the particular
requirements of the equipment specification.
As part of the accreditation process, ISO 9001-2000
requires an audit of the manufacturer by the accredita-
tion agency. This will involve review of the structure
of the manufacturer’s quality assurance organization,
its arrangements for quality control and its processing
of quality assurance and quality control documenta-
tion. The audit is not product-dependent and does not
confirm that, for example, the manufacturer’s quality
assurance arrangements are appropriate to the manu-
facture of, say, a hydraulic turbine. If the contractor in
question is an internationally recognized manufactur-
er of hydraulic turbines and all the equipment is to be
manufactured in his home factory, then the audit
implicitly checks that his home factory’s quality orga-
nization is appropriate for the product. However, the
situation becomes far more nebulous when a large
Hydropower & Dams Issue Five, 2009
 number of sub-contractors are employed, or when the
prime contractor is a trading house and is relying on
others for quality assurance of the product(s). These
days the problems of diluted responsibility are not
only those of sub-contractors. With globalization, the
main contractor may elect to have major parts manu-
factured in his various establishments worldwide,
some of which may not be entirely under his control.
Accordingly, if there is any doubt, the client should
arrange for his own audit of the actual establishments
nominated by the contractor for production of the
works, and thus ensure that the quality assurance and
quality control arrangements in each establishment are
suitable for the product being manufactured there.
Any independent audit by the client should be done in
conjunction with the prime contractor.
As part of the technical specification requirements,
the contractor should prepare a plan for inspection and
testing (PIT) for the manufacture and erection of all
major components. Typically this is in the form of a
table indicating the extent of material, fabrication and
functional testing. The PIT is in effect a checklist and
should be supplemented by written procedures stipu-
lating standards, procedures and acceptance criteria.
Again the extent of the PIT should depend on the
product; for example, a standard turbine should not
require the same degree of quality control as a leading
edge machine.
Although ISO 9001-2000 is essentially a controlling
document for the contractor’s quality assurance, in the
author’s experience it is in the client’s interest to take
an active and continuous interest in all parts of the
process. Although final inspection by the client before
delivery has the potential of preventing a sub-standard
item leaving the factory, the delays which this can
cause are typically unacceptable and will lead to
major losses in eventual generation, the price of which
cannot be recuperated from the contractor. Hence,
every part of the Shewhart cycle of the Plan-Do-
Check-Act (PDCA) of quality assurance should be
accompanied by the client to lesser or greater degree,
to ensure that there are no surprises at the final inspec-
tion or, worst still, when the equipment arrives on site.
Client inspection can either be done by the client’s
own personnel, or by contracted agencies. In both
cases, it is essential that the personnel involved are
skilled and experienced, and know the contract. Only
by mutual understanding with the contractor’s quality
assurance personnel will the client’s representatives
make a meaningful contribution to the project. When
employing a commercial inspection agency, the client
must acknowledge that the most responsible of these
agencies will not expedite manufacture. They will
report progress, usually in relation to an overall man-
ufacturing programme, but will not ‘progress chase’.
The agencies quite rightly consider that expediting
conflicts with their quality assurance role. Hence if
progress needs to be accelerated, it is the client him-
self who must take the necessary action. In taking this
action he must be aware that quality may be compro-
mised, and the gains in accelerating manufacture must
be weighed against increased quality supervision,
which usually involves some cost.
5. Operation and maintenance
An often forgotten ingredient to on-going quality
assurance is the need for a complete comprehensive
set of documents for operation and maintenance of the
equipment. The O&M instructions should be succinct,
easy to apply and relevant to the equipment as
Hydropower & Dams Issue Five, 2009
View publication stats
installed. Unused alternatives should be deleted from
standard equipment brochures and all listed data
should correspond with measurements taken during
commissioning. Final drawings and design documents
should be ‘as built’, with any deviations from the orig-
inal design clearly shown.
Operation and maintenance instructions should be
strictly adhered to by the client, even though this could
possibly conflict with the exigencies of generation.
Limits of operation as determined during the specifica-
tion and design stage must also be firmly adhered to.
As time passes, the reasons for these limits tend to be
forgotten; however, they remain valid to limit tran-
sients, reduce rough running and control cavitation.
Periodic maintenance as recommended by the manu-
facturer should be strictly followed, and damaged or
badly functioning parts should be promptly replaced.
In essence, quality assurance during operation of the
plant is as important as that prior to takeover, and
becomes increasingly so as the plant ages.
6. Conclusions
Quality assurance is a complex, many faceted subject,
which involves all aspects of hydroelectric equipment
specification, design, manufacture, erection commis-
sioning and eventual operation and maintenance. The
purpose of this paper has been to highlight and give an
idea of the various ingredients which, if properly
applied, can result in a product which is the best pos-
sible alternative for the end use and is ‘fit for service’.
Quality assurance is not purely a manufacturing or
erection function, but one which embraces the whole
spectrum of our work. The old maxim of ‘Quality of
manufacturing can enhance a good design but it can-
not correct the errors in a poor design’ is very relevant.
The final word best comes from NASA, an organi-
zation which has found quality assurance to be an ever
moving target. The NASA safety panel conclusions
into the failure of the space conducting cable were:
“The lesson to be learned is that there is no substitute
for good engineering design and judgement review and,
when possible, rigorous testing of the total system”.
Sentiments which are far removed from those of Alan
Shepard who recollected thinking, when standing
before the Atlas rocket which was to take him aloft
during the Mercury Project: “I wasn’t scared, but I was
up there looking around, and suddenly I realised I was
sitting on top of a rocket built by the lowest bidder.”
In the procurement of hydroelectric equipment, as
much as we may aim for the latter sentiment, we
should never forget the former. The ultimate purpose
of quality assurance is to find the best path between
these two conflicting aims. ◊
John Gummer was educated at London and Bristol
universities in the UK, and has spent more than 40 years
working on major hydroelectric and pumped-storage
projects throughout the world. Since leaving the Itaipu
hydroelectric project, where he was the Chief Mechanical
Engineer of the IECO-ELC Co-ordination Group, he has
acted as consultant to the World Bank, ODA, and many
leading engineering organizations and lending authorities.
He is on the Editorial Board of The International Journal on
Hydropower & Dams, and has authored more than 40 papers
on hydropower and fluid dynamics.
Hydro-Consult Pty. Ltd, 15 McLeod Street, Rye,
Victoria 3941, Australia.
87