The Determination of the Operation Parameters at the Axial

Hydraulic Turbine

Adrian Ion Simedru1

1SSH Hidroserv Iron Gates Section Drobeta Turnu Severin,Romania
E-mail: simedru.a@gmail.com

Abstract: In the operating point of the monitoring moment there are asumed from
process monitoring measured parameters: the active and reactive power, upstream
and downstream water levels (after the intake trash rake and at the outlet of the
turbine draft tube), wicket gate and runner opening blades, the differential pressure in
the spiral chamber and the hydrounit speed.So, there was established the
characteristic curves obtained on analytic basis and similitude and compared with the
curves measured experimentally on the hydraulic machines from the power plant. The
cavitational coefficient of the machine and the cavitational coefficient of the equipment
in function of the system parameters between them especially the suction head, the
runner and wicket gates blades angles of opening. The solution proposed is a method
of determining the operating turbine parameters and of the cavitation, by reducing the
error caused by the similitude phenomenon, using an accurate estimation of the
turbine operating parameters according to the universal diagram of the turbine.The
numerical obtained values permit the necessary correlation through a complex
function which is able to reduce or eliminate the unwished effects of the cavitation
phenomena on the hydraulic turbines of the Iron Gates power plant.

1. Introduction
Cavitation is normally defined as the formation of bubbles filled with vapour, gas or their mixture and
its colapse.
Cavitation is the main obstacle to development of high performance hydraulic turbines. Cavitation
erosion occurs, affecting performance hydraulic machines, noises, vibrations and oscillations of the
whole system.
Iron Gates I Power Plant is functioning from 1971 and is located on the Danube at the 942,450 km
upstream from Drobeta Turnu Severin town. Considering the long time of the hydrounit operation, and
the volume of the reparation in the last years, it was actual the problem of refurbishment units for
preparing the next cycle of 30 years in exploitation.
To combat cavitation, appropiate measures should be carefully considered and balanced throughout
the planning of hydro schemes, machine selection and parametric design, machine (hydrodynamic)
design and material selection, mechanical design, determination of machine setting level (the turbine
cavitation number) and machine repair. If we corectly measure the suction head parameter of the axial
turbine of great power we can find the real cavitation of the turbine.
Hydro units operating at variable falls due limited retention or lack thereof, the fall is basically
dependent on flow. Turbine at rates higher than inflow causes power reduction by reducing failure and
control under certain conditions required for the protection against flooding of land upstream of the
dam can generate energy losses by dumping. Hydro works actually fall under the variable is set to H =
cst combinatorial relationship., Several values are approximate and then fall for other operating points.
If we evaluate properly the cavitation phenomenon and the operating parameters, the hydraulic
turbine can avoid the unfavorable regimes in order to obtain optimized operation and to reduce the
cavitation phenomenon.

Table 1 Nomenclature
Parameters: Measuring units Meaning
P MW Power
PC MW Generator power
 0
Wicket gates opening
 0
Runner blades opening
Q m3/s Flow
rot/min speed
H m head
HS m Turbine suction head
HSt m Static head
p pascals Pressure
PV pascals Vapour pressure of water
Pat pascals Atmosfhere pressure
 kg/m3 Density of water
v m/s Water speed
kW 3M, kV 3M - Speed coefficients of the model
 % Efficiency
inst - Plant cavitation coefficient
T - Turbine cavitation coefficient
Ta % Draft tube efficiency

Table 2 Subscripts
Parameters: Meaning
P Prototype
T turbine
m measured
c calculated

1. The axial hydraulic turbine operation with cavitation

At the axial turbine with great discharges if it is considered only the difference from blade axis to
downstream level at the draft tube outlet. It is not real because results lower than the concordant value
from the exploitation diagram.
To optimize the hidraulic axial turbine it must eliminate the differences between the operating and
cavitation parameters resulted from the model data otherwise from the exploitation diagram with the
measured parameters in the turbine operation.
 Coefficient of cavitation in hydraulics  is a dimensionless size that characterize the phenomenon
of cavitation from such a point M of the fluid flow.
(1)

Cavitation occurs when the pressure of a point is equal to the vapor pressure: pM = pV  inst = T =
crt
To avoid the cavitation is necessary that in every points of the hydraulic layout the pressure must
be greater than the vapor pressure:
pM  pV  inst  T.
where T is obtained from statistical formulae (average formula) and:
(2)

The cavitation phenomenon is examined with the cavitation coefficient inst = on the universal
cavitational diagram which is from the model tests at Astro laboratory.
In the table 3 we have a selection of the registered data in the turbine operation at different angles
of runner and wicket gates at hydrounit 6 from January 2007 to jun 2008, and the model parameters
there are determined with the similitude formula.

Table 3. The registered data in the turbine operation

n11 σinst T
  Q11
[rot/
σ0,5 11 T [%]
σ 0,5 T HSTm HTm QTm PCm G
[-]
  [m3/s] [-] [%] [-] [m] [m] [m3/ s] MW [%]
min]

27,53 -3,84 0,74 124,51 0.188 91,14 94,13 0,252 28,73 28,73 368 97,12 98,24 0,678
30,00 -1,60 0,86 126,91 0.238 91,34 94,30 0,311 27,66 27,65 415 104,39 98,40 0,733
32,03 0,26 0,95 128,71 0.271 91,47 94,43 0,352 26,90 26,89 454 112,54 98,41 0,765
34,08 3,94 1,09 125,16 0.313 91,8 94,90 0,397 28,44 28,43 536 139,19 98,59 0,700
36,00 6,60 1,21 126,04 0.342 91,97 94,98 0,436 28,05 28,04 593 151,57 98,65 0,721
38,00 8,07 1,32 129,54 0.388 91,84 94,84 0,496 26,56 26,55 627 151,41 98,61 0,786
40,00 12,45 1,50 124,67 0.475 91,4 94,49 0,591 28,66 28,64 740 190,90 98,71 0,687
42,00 12,67 1,58 129,32 0.514 91,1 94,17 0,646 26,64 26,62 753 179,65 98,69 0,791
44,00 14,19 1,71 131,57 0.588 90,74 93,67 0,738 25,74 25,72 802 181,78 98,69 0,816
46,18 16,67 1,87 129,81 0.679 89,78 92,86 0,845 26,43 26,41 887 192,70 98,69 0,795

So with the measured parameters. the similitude formulae there are determined the doubleunitary
parameters n11 Q11, and then with the universal characteristic of the model (obtained from producer
documentation) the cavitation coefficient 11 0.5. In fig 1 it is presented the universal cavitational
diagram.
 Fig. 1 The model cavitation diagram

To evaluate the cavitation coefficient M = 0,5 from the diagram it is used the parameter Q 11 de-
pending on the parameter n11 and for the prototipe cavitation coefficient it is used the transposition for-
mula:

(3)

Where: – maximum speed coefficient of the model

kPmax 3M  0,3, Ta  0,8 .

 - tangential speed cefficient

Considering:
The parameters Q11m si n11m corresponding to the measured parameters are evaluated with the
similitude formulas, first there are determined the model parameters.

To specify the model parameters from the exploitation parameters of the turbine, I consider

the model head from the model measurements:

(4)

Where: pst = 108.800 Pa – differential pressure between the intake and outlet sectionat the model
tests,  - density of water, g = 9,80661 m/s2 – gravitation acceleration of the model..
From the forrmula (4) and similitude formula for the flow it results the model flow:

(5)

Considering the similitude equation for transition from prototipe to model :

(6)
Where It is replaced the head in the equation (4).
D = 0,308m – model diameter.
nP – hydraulic turbine speed,  = hydraulic efficiency of the model

For the transition from the model parameters to the universal diagram we have :
11 =  (7)

From the similitude formula of the flow and formula (4) it results the flow formula of the
transition from the model to the doubleunitary parameters:

(8)

Lakewise it results from the similitude formula of the speed and the formula (4):

(9)
 În the table 4 there are presented the doubleunitary parameters of the model, determined with
the similitude formulae (8) și (9) from the measured parameterers from table 3 and cavitation
coefficients of the model and prototype:
Table 4. The doubleunitary parameters of the model
n11 σinst T


Q11
[rot/
σ0,5 11 σ 0,5 T
[-]
 [m3/s] [-] [%] [-]
min]

27,53 -3,84 0,74 124,51 0.188 91,14 0,252 0,678

30,00 -1,60 0,86 126,91 0.238 91,34 0,311 0,733
32,03 0,26 0,95 128,71 0.271 91,47 0,352 0,765
34,08 3,94 1,09 125,16 0.313 91,8 0,397 0,700
36,00 6,60 1,21 126,04 0.342 91,97 0,436 0,721
38,00 8,07 1,32 129,54 0.388 91,84 0,496 0,786
40,00 12,45 1,50 124,67 0.475 91,4 0,591 0,687
42,00 12,67 1,58 129,32 0.514 91,1 0,646 0,791
44,00 14,19 1,71 131,57 0.588 90,74 0,738 0,816
46,18 16,67 1,87 129,81 0.679 89,78 0,845 0,795

Figure. 2 The variation of the turbine and unit cavitation coefficient

with the “measured” flow of the prototype turbine.

It is noticed that the coefficient value σ 0,5T is greater for higher flows and lower cavitation
conditions.

2.The determination of the “calculated” parameters of the axial hydraulic turbine

On the universal characteristic Fig. 3 of the turbine resulted from stand tests, the corresponding point
of the industrial turbine operating point is defined by values " P" = " M" and " P" = " M" of the
model and there are determined with Lagrange interpolation.the universal model parameters.
 Figure. 3. Universal characteristic of the turbine model at the Iron Gates I turbines

In order to determine by calculation the prototype parameters, first there are determined the
doubleunitary parameters of the model, knowing the opening angle of the wicket gates and runner.
Then for the transition from the universal diagram to the model parameters it is considered the
equation (7).
From the similitude formula for the flow and formula (4) it results the flow formula for transition
from the doubleunitary parameters to the model parameters:

(10)

We have:
SM1 = 1,22846 m2 intake section of the model, SM2 = 0,25556 m2 outlet section of the model draft
tube, Q – model flow, g = 9,80661 N/kg – gravitational acceleration.
For the speed it is considered the equation (9) and results:

(11)

For the transition from the model to prototype there are considered the next similitude formulas:

(12)

(13)
 (14)
The model efficiency determined by the universal diagram fig. 3, we obtain with Lagrange polynomial as a
function of the opening angles of the wicket gates and runner at the turbine exploitation, resulting the values Q 11
and n11. In order to determine the model efficiency for the measured parameters of the turbine, with the similitude
formulas we have Q11 și n11. and when it results from the universal diagram. The prototype efficiency is obtained
with the formula CEI 995 recommended by the Sultzer Hydro documentation from the model tests:

(15)

 = 1,0025 x 10-6 m2/s - cinematic vascozity of the model with temperature 19,24 [C]
6
u opt
Re = 6,6011 x 10 - Reynolds model number at optimum operation conditions
h opt
 = 0,91738 [-] - optimum hydraulic efficiency recommended by the producerr
P = 1,0036 x 10-6 - [m2/s] – cinematic vascozity of the prototype with the
temperature 20 [C]
6
u ref
Re = 7x 10 - Reynolds number for the reference turbine
nP = 71,43 [rot/min] - turbine speed
V = 0,8 - report between longitudinal and totat losses of the turbines

(16)

The formula was obtained from the equations (13) and (14) where PP = PCm

Considering the turbine head formula and measured static head results the formula:

(17)

T T:
Finally it results the turbine power where there are replaced Q and H
(18)
[MW]
1  e =1,024 - Coriolis coefficient
S1 – intake rectangular section of the turbine
Se – outlet rectangular section of the turbine

In order to study and optimize the turbine operation and to reduce the cavitation effect, there are
evaluated the calculated parameters using the similitude formulas for different measured parameters
at constant static heads. At the beginningt with the corresponding angle of the runner and wicket gates
 openings there are resulted from the universal diagram of the model the double unitary parameters
and then with the similitude formulas, the model parameters.
The figures represent the variation of the turbine and unit cavitation coefficient with the
“calculated” flow of the prototype turbine at different static heads.

inst T,  0,5 T [-] inst T, 0,5 T [-]

0,80 1,00
0,70 0,90
0,80
0,60
0,70
0,50 σ 0,5 T 0,60 σ 0,5 T
0,40 [-] 0,50 [-]
0,30 0,40
σinst T σ inst T
0,20 [-]
0,30 [-]
0,20
0,10 0,10
0,00 0,00
411,81

515,16

546,04

631,04

720,90

786,76

558,01

663,19

842,70
406,35

522,34

774,16
QT [m3/s] QT [m3/s]

Fig. 4. The cavitation coefficient variation Fig. 5. The cavitation coefficient variation
with flow HSTm = 28,73m with flow HSTm = 26,56m

It is noticed that for the calculated parameters the cavitation coefficient σ 0,5T grows at greater flows.

3.The necessary corrections for the optimum operation of the axial hydraulic turbine
We have for the flow s = f(PCm, HSTm) which is an additional correction coefficient of flow resulting
from the processing of a large number of measurements taken during hydrounits operation.

(19)

(20)
The correct evaluation of the cavitation phenomenon and of the operation parameters of the turbine
is obtained with the correction coefficient of the flow which reduces the errors of flow calculation.

Tabel 5. The measured parameters and calculated flow with the method described previously at
constant static measured heads HSTm = 28,73 m
σinst T
  σ 0,5 T ZAM PR ZAV PR HTm QTm PCm G QTc
[-] [m] [m] [m3/ s] T [%] [-] HS [m] s [-]
  [m] MW [%] [m3/s]

27,53 -3,84 0,253 69,09 40,36 28,73 368 94,24 97,12 98,24 0,678 -11,40 0,7651 363,40
31,74 1,14 0,289 69,37 40,64 28,72 467 94,87 123,82 98,50 0,688 -11,20 0,8439 469,85
32,83 2,45 0,373 69,180 40,450 28,72 502 94,93 132,79 98,550 0,681 -11,47 0,8681 504,34
35,45 6,11 0,417 69,530 40,800 28,72 574 94,95 155,99 98,590 0,693 -11,21 0,9054 593,87
38,33 10,37 0,510 69,510 40,780 28,72 679 94,82 176,73 98,690 0,693 -10,88 0,9392 686,05
40,68 12,79 0,585 69,340 40,610 28,71 736 94,55 193,88 98,650 0,687 -11,29 0,9661 757,99

Tabel 6. The measured parameters and calculated flow with the method described previously at constant static measured heads HSTm = 26,56m

σinst T
  σ 0,5 T ZAM PR ZAV PR HTm QTm PCm G QTc
  [-] [m] [m] [m] [m3/ s] T [%]
MW [%]
[-] HS [m] s [-] [m3/s]

28,43 0,247
-4,16 68,520 41,960 26,56 351 93,64 86,29 98,09 0,793 -10,96 0,6745 342,17
33,34 1,30 0,370 68,130 41,570 26,55 479 94,66 115,30 98,44 0,779 -10,57 0,7712 462,39
34,67 2,96 0,390 68,560 42,000 26,55 507 94,71 125,71 98,51 0,795 -11,00 0,7870 499,68
38,00 8,07 0,493 68,32 41,76 26,55 627 94,90 151,41 98,61 0,786 -10,76 0,8388 609,51
42,03 12,33 0,606 68,380 41,820 26,55 729 94,35 177,60 98,65 0,789 -10,82 0,8720 723,59
44,27 15,02 0,714 68,660 42,100 26,54 805 93,83 193,41 98,7 0,799 -11,10 0,8804 792,10

In the next diagrams there are presented for the measured flows QTm, the variation of the turbine
and unit cavitation coefficient inst T, 0,5 T at constant static measured heads.
inst T,  0,5 T [-] inst T,  0,5T [-]
0,80 0,90
0,70 0,80
0,70
0,60
0,60
0,50 σ 0,5 T σ 0,5 T
0,50 [-]
0,40 [-]
0,40
0,30 σ inst T 0,30 σ inst T
[-]
0,20 [-] 0,20
0,10 0,10
0,00 0,00
351,00

479,00

507,00

627,00

729,00

805,00
502,00

574,00

679,00
368,00

467,00

736,00

QTm
QTm
[m3/s]
[m3/s]
Figure 6. The cavitation coefficient variation Figure 7. The cavitation coefficient variation
with flow at HSTm = 28,73m with flow HSTm = 28,73m

It is noticed that for the measured parameters the same as calculated parameters the cavitation
coefficient σ 0,5T is greater at greater flows. In order to compare the measured with the calculated
parameters it is observed that for the calculated parameters there are lower cavitation condition from
the measured parameters.
It is recommended to determine the real exploitation diagram using a correction coefficient of an
accurate assessment of the flow at the turbine, which will reflect the reality by reducing the error
caused by the phenomenon of similitude. If there are reduced the differences between the measured
parameters and the “calculated” prototype parameters, the cavitation fenomenon is minimized.

4. Conclusions
Studying the parameters of cavitation in turbine operation with internationally known formulae, there
are observed some substantial differences between data resulting from the calculation by universal
diagram and those obtained from the measured parameters.
 Comparing the diagrams translated from model to prototype with the corresponding diagram of the
measured data, it is shown that for the second situation, the turbine operates in lower conditions in
terms of cavitation.
The dinamic coefficient of supplementary correction of the flow ensure at the hidraulic turbines the
permannent monitoring of the flow with a good precision.
Hence we need to use a correction coefficient of the “calculated“ parameters in accordance with the
cavitation erosion phenomenon observed and found to comply with the existing reality and with the
parameters measured in turbine operation at the Iron Gates I hydro-power plant.

5. References
[1] Li S.C., (2000), Cavitation of Hydraulic Machinery, Imperial College Press, London.
[2] Knapp R. T., Daily J. W., Hammit F. G., (1997), Cavitation, McGrawHill Book Company, New
York.
[3] Bǎrglǎzan M., (1999), Turbine hidraulice şi transmisii hidrodinamice, Ed. Politehnica,
Timişoara.
[4] Simedru Adrian I, Bărglăzan Mircea, (2006), The Cavitation Problems Of The Axial Hydraulic
Turbines Maintenance, HERVEX - Salonul international de hidraulica si pneumatica,
sisteme de etansare, mecanica fina, scule, dispozitive si echipamente electronice specifice,
mecatronica, editat de INOE – Institutul de Cercetări pentru Hidraulică și Pneumatică,
Camera de Comerț și Industrie Vâlcea.
[5] Anton I., (1979), Turbine hidraulice, Ed. Facla Timisoara.
[6] Anton I., (2002), Energetic and cavitational scale-up effects in hydraulic turbines, Ed.
Orizonturi Universitare Timisoara.