1
Pipelines and PenstocksAvoiding operational issues throughout the life of your project
PresenterDan Murrer, P.E.
322 East Front StreetSuite 200
Boise, ID 83702Tel. 208.383.6108
NWHA 2014 Small Hydro WorkshopSeptember 2014
2
Agenda Overview
Design Considerations
The Successful Penstock
Project Examples
Planning Phase: 75 kW Micro-Hydro Installation Fort Collins WaterTreatment Plant, City of Fort Collins, CO
Design Development Phase: 1.2 MW Granby Dam Hydroelectric Project,Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Final Design Phase: 1.28 MW Head of the U Hydroelectric Project, North SideCanal Company, Idaho
Construction Phase: 13 MW Jordanelle Dam Hydroelectric Project, CentralUtah Water Conservancy District
Project Commissioning Phase: 220 kW Dewitt Hydro, City of Logan UT
Questions and answers
Overview: Conveyance - Essential Element of a
Project
Delivers Water to the Turbine
Develops the Net Head
Underpins Power Output and Energy
Safe Conveyance of Water under allConditions
3
Sample of Penstock DesignConsiderations
4
Flow capacity, size, and Velocity
Pressure Rating
Materials of Construction
Transient Conditions
Air/Vacuum Release, Drain Valves
Water Chemistry
Joint type and constructability
Maintenance Access
Upstream screening/trash management
The Successful Penstock:A Proper start means long, trouble-free life
5
Planning – Careful attention to those design considerationsmeans avoiding future surprises
Design – Turn your careful planning into reality
Construction – Build what you design
Commissioning – Don’t overlook the need for a thoroughshake-down
Project Examples:
These are snapshots of actual projects
Recent, firsthand information
Domestic USA locations
Various Types of Project Owners
Each example highlights one of the phases of providing asuccessful penstock – planning, design, construction, andcommissioning.
6
EXAMPLE: Fort Collins WTP Hydropower ProjectCity of Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
7
SIZE •Single 75 kW horizontal Francis unit•Off-the-shelf pump technology•Rated head: 193 feet•Maximum total flow: 6.6 cfs
SETTING •City of Fort Collins Utilities (owner)•FERC Conduit Exemption•Addition at existing raw water supply pressuredissipation valve station, in parallel with controlvalves.•Operates on raw water supply flows.
FOCUS •Flow Capacity•Net Head•Size: Length, Diameter, and Material•Ability to withstand Normal and EmergencyConditions
Focus: Project Planning Phase
EXAMPLE: Fort Collins WTP Hydropower ProjectCity of Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
8
Sampling of Project Specific Investigations
1. When and How Much Water is Available?
2. What does the pipeline and network look like toget to the turbine?
3. Can existing facilities adequately operate with aTurbine installed in parallel?
4. Can existing conveyance features withstandtransient forces?
5. Can an installation be easily assembled,dissembled, isolated, and maintained withinallotted space by maintenance capabilities at theTreatment Facility?
Focus: Project Planning Phase
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
9
SIZE •Twin 600 kW horizontal Francis units•Rated head: 226 feet•Maximum total flow: 76 cfs
SETTING •Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District(owner)•Lease of Power Privilege•Lake Granby is a 540,000 acre-feet (ac-ft)reservoir constructed on the Colorado Riverduring the late 1940s as part of Reclamation’sColorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) project.•Northern Water proposes to install ahydroelectric station that will use the minimumstreamflow obligations and a portion ofadditional releases to generate power.
FOCUS •Confirmation of what was planned•Working through fatal flaws
Focus: Design Development Phase
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
10
Sample of Project Investigations:
1. Relocation of Existing 1950s USBR Hollow Jet Valvesand Retrofitting with electric actuators.
2. High Velocity Environment at the Gate Chamber
3. Cavitation and Transient Force Evaluations
4. Erosion and Corrosion of the Water Passage –Coatings and Linings
5. Bifurcation Design
6. Drainage of the Ring Follower Gate
7. Air/Vacuum Release Locations
8. Vibration
9. Thermal Expansion and Contraction of the Pipeline
10. Weep Hole Maintenance/Pipe Support Locations
11. Rock Fall, Drainage, and Access
Focus: Design Development Phase
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
11
Relocation of Existing Hollow Jet Valves and Retrofitting with electric actuators
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
12
High Velocity Environment at the Gate Chamber, Cavitation and Transient ForceEvaluations, Erosion and Corrosion of the Water Passage – Coatings and Linings
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
13
Thermal Expansion and Contraction of the Pipeline Weep Hole Maintenance/Pipe SupportLocations
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
14
Thermal Expansion and Contraction of the Pipeline, Weep Hole Maintenance/Pipe SupportLocations
EXAMPLE: Granby Dam Hydroelectric ProjectNorthern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Colorado, USA
15
Rockfall, Drainage, and Access
EXAMPLE: Head of the U Hydroelectric ProjectNorth Side Canal Company, Idaho, USA
16
SIZE •Eight 160 kW Siphon Type Units•Rated head: 20 feet•Maximum total flow: 1200 cfs
SETTING •Northern Side Canal Company (Owner)•Located outside of Jerome, Idaho•FERC Conduit Exemption•Planned hydro installation was integrated with the replacement ofan aging diversion structure.•Structure Design occurred summer and fall 2013.•Structure Construction occurred between 2013 & 2014 IrrigationSeasons•Turbine Contract Awarded to Mavel in January 2014•Final Hydropower Project Features Currently in Final Design•Planned Commissioning March/April 2015
FOCUS •Making what was designed, happen.
Focus: Final Design Phase
EXAMPLE: Head of the U Hydroelectric ProjectNorth Side Canal Company, Idaho, USA
17
Sample of Operation andMaintenance Considerations
1. Approach Velocity andFlow Patterns withinthe Forebay
2. Debris Management
3. Isolation of the Forebay
4. Accessing the Forebay
5. Cleaning of the Forebay
6. Drainage of the Forebay
7. Integrating yourTurbines with yourControl Gates andSystem Operation
Focus: Final Design Phase
EXAMPLE: Head of the U Hydroelectric ProjectNorth Side Canal Company, Idaho, USA
18
Approach Velocity to the Structure and flow patterns within the Forebay
EXAMPLE: Head of the U Hydroelectric ProjectNorth Side Canal Company, Idaho, USA
19
Debris Management in the Forebay
EXAMPLE: Head of the U Hydroelectric ProjectNorth Side Canal Company, Idaho, USA
20
Isolation, Draining, Accessing and Cleaning of the Forebay
EXAMPLE: Head of the U Hydroelectric ProjectNorth Side Canal Company, Idaho, USA
21
Making your Turbines work with your Control Gates and System Operation
EXAMPLE: Jordanelle Dam Hydroelectric ProjectCentral Utah Water Conservancy District, Utah, USA
22
SIZE •Twin 6.5 MW horizontal Francis units•Rated head: 270 feet•Maximum total flow: 600 cfs
SETTING •Central Utah Water Conservancy District(Owner)•Lease of Power Privilege•Addition at existing federal dam.•Stringent operating constraints and designreview by Reclamation.•Operates on programmed releases.
FOCUS •Construction supervision to confirm what wasdesigned is installed
Focus: Construction Phase
EXAMPLE: Jordanelle Dam Hydroelectric ProjectCentral Utah Water Conservancy District, Utah, USA
23
Sampling of Construction Inspection
1. Shop Drawing Review
2. Lining Inspection
3. Trench Inspection
4. Connection Inspection
5. Shoring Inspection
6. Field Protection
Focus: Construction Phase
EXAMPLE: Jordanelle Dam Hydroelectric ProjectCentral Utah Water Conservancy District, Utah, USA
24
Shop Drawing Review and Lining Inspection
EXAMPLE: Jordanelle Dam Hydroelectric ProjectCentral Utah Water Conservancy District, Utah, USA
25
Penstock Trench and Connection Inspection
EXAMPLE: Jordanelle Dam Hydroelectric ProjectCentral Utah Water Conservancy District, Utah, USA
26
Erection, Shoring, Field Protection
EXAMPLE: Dewitt Pipeline Hydroelectric ProjectCity of Logan, Utah, USA
27
SIZE •Single 220 kW horizontal Francis unit•Rated head: 146 feet•Maximum total flow: 22 cfs
SETTING •City of Logan, UT (Owner)•FERC Conduit Exemption•Pipeline upgrade.•Addition at existing flow control vault in parallelwith control valve.•Critical surge control on long pipeline.•Operates on raw water supply flows.
FOCUS •Commissioning – Expect the Unexpected
Focus: Commissioning Phase
EXAMPLE: Dewitt Pipeline Hydroelectric ProjectCity of Logan, Utah, USA
28
Sample of Commissioning Considerations
1. Everything is Tested Real-Time
2. Net Head will Dictate Equipment Performanceand Its Confirmation
3. Full-Load Rejections are often the Acid Test ofthe Penstock
4. Careful and Systematic Testing are Essential toSafely Running Plant and Penstock Through itsPaces
Focus: Commissioning Phase
EXAMPLE: Dewitt Pipeline Hydroelectric ProjectCity of Logan, Utah, USA
29
Focus: Commissioning Phase
ADDITION OFFLYWHEEEELTO MANAGE
UNITOVERSPEED
SURGE EFFECT
BURIED SURGESTANDPIPE
EXTENDED UPHILLSIDE
EXAMPLE: Dewitt Pipeline Hydroelectric ProjectCity of Logan, Utah, USA
30
The Unexpected
31
Questions?
PresenterDan Murrer, P.E.
322 East Front StreetSuite 200
Boise, ID 83702Tel. 208.383.6108
NWHA 2014 Small Hydro WorkshopSeptember 2014
