21st Century Dam Design

Advances and Adaptations

31st Annual USSD Conference

San Diego, California, April 11-15, 2011

Hosted by
Black & Veatch Corporation
GEI Consultants, Inc.
Kleinfelder, Inc.
MWH Americas, Inc.
Parsons Water and Infrastructure Inc.
URS Corporation

On the Cover
Artist's rendition of San Vicente Dam after completion of the dam raise project to increase local storage and provide
a more flexible conveyance system for use during emergencies such as earthquakes that could curtail the regions
imported water supplies. The existing 220-foot-high dam, owned by the City of San Diego, will be raised by 117
feet to increase reservoir storage capacity by 152,000 acre-feet. The project will be the tallest dam raise in the
United States and tallest roller compacted concrete dam raise in the world.

U.S. Society on Dams

Vision
To be the nation's leading organization of professionals dedicated to advancing the role of dams
for the benefit of society.
Mission USSD is dedicated to:
Advancing the knowledge of dam engineering, construction, planning, operation,
performance, rehabilitation, decommissioning, maintenance, security and safety;
Fostering dam technology for socially, environmentally and financially sustainable water
resources systems;
Providing public awareness of the role of dams in the management of the nation's water
resources;
Enhancing practices to meet current and future challenges on dams; and
Representing the United States as an active member of the International Commission on
Large Dams (ICOLD).

The information contained in this publication regarding commercial projects or firms may not be used for
advertising or promotional purposes and may not be construed as an endorsement of any product or
from by the United States Society on Dams. USSD accepts no responsibility for the statements made
or the opinions expressed in this publication.
Copyright 2011 U.S. Society on Dams
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011924673
ISBN 978-1-884575-52-5
U.S. Society on Dams
1616 Seventeenth Street, #483
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: 303-628-5430
Fax: 303-628-5431
E-mail: stephens@ussdams.org
Internet: www.ussdams.org

INTELLIGENT FLOW CONTROL AFTER LOAD REJECTION AT THE

JUNIPER RIDGE HYDROELECTRIC POWER GENERATION PROJECT
BEND, OREGON
Alden C. Robinson, PE1
Z. (Joe) Zhao, PE, Ph.D.2
ABSTRACT
A new hydroelectric project with a long and large diameter steel penstock was designed
and constructed with a bypass system for the Central Oregon Irrigation District (COID).
During normal operation, flow passes through the turbine to generate electricity.
However, for abnormal conditions or maintenance, flow will be switched to the bypass
system. There are two major requirements for the hydraulic system. First, the flow rate
downstream of the hydroelectric facility must remain constant always. Second, transient
pressures in the hydraulic system after load rejection must be properly controlled. To
meet these requirements, intelligent flow controls are required. In order to design and
implement a proper flow control scheme, numerical modeling of the entire hydraulic
system was performed. The numerical modeling helped evaluate various flow conditions
in the system with three goals: 1) control the discharge downstream of the powerhouse by
adjusting turbine wicket gates and valves; 2) compute the highest hydraulic pressures
including positive transient pressures along the entire hydraulic system such that they are
lower than the allowable design values of the penstock and the associated components;
and 3) compute the lowest hydraulic pressures including negative transient pressures
along the entire hydraulic system such that vacuum conditions are not induced. These
challenges were successfully resolved by COID at the Juniper Ridge Hydroelectric Power
Generation Project in 2009-2010 and are described herein.
INTRODUCTION
The Juniper Ridge Hydroelectric Power Generation Project is a 5-MW hydroelectric
project located in central Oregon between the City of Bend and the City of Redmond.
This is an Engineer, Procure and Construct (EPC) project constructed by a team led by
Slayden Construction Group, Inc. The team includes Sunrise Engineering Inc. for civil
design, CFM Engineers Inc. for electrical/control design and Burke Electrical Inc. as an
electrical contractor. The project mainly consisted of a hydraulic system, powerhouse,
substation, switchyard and site improvements. Two of the important project requirements
specified by COID are to maintain downstream flow rate and to control transient
pressures in the hydraulic system. These two requirements were met by installing various
valves and flow controls in the hydraulic system. The flows and pressures in the
hydraulic system were evaluated first and the penstock and valves were designed and

President/CEO, Sunrise Engineering Inc., 25 East 500 North, Fillmore, Utah 84631, arobinson@sunriseeng.com
2
Project Engineer/Manager, Sunrise Engineering Inc., 12227 South Business Park Dr., Draper, Utah
84020, zzhao@sunrise-eng.com

Intelligent Flow Control

477

selected accordingly. The hydraulic system, the flow and pressure evaluation techniques,
the flow and pressure evaluation results and design considerations are discussed herein.
HYDRAULIC SYSTEM
The Juniper Ridge Hydroelectric Power Generation Project was constructed within a
section of an existing COID irrigation canal. Inflow to the canal is diverted from and
regulated through a gate at the Deschutes River near the City of Bend. The hydraulic
system consists of a forebay with diversion structure, 2.5-mile long108-inch diameter
steel penstock with air/vacuum relief valves, 5-MW vertical Francis turbine/generator
unit with tailrace, and a bypass pipeline with energy dissipation valve-stilling basin
followed by the existing canal. The penstock splits before it enters the powerhouse. The
main penstock continues to the turbine/generator unit while the bypass pipeline continues
around the powerhouse to an energy dissipation valve. Flow discharges from the
hydroelectric facility to the canal downstream. A schematic diagram of the present
hydraulic system is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. System Schematic Diagram

Currently the total static head from the intake to the tailrace is 126 feet (ft) and the design
flow rate is 500 cubic foot per second (cfs). However, the project was designed and
constructed using the design criteria set for a possible future upgrade. Under a possible
future condition, the penstock will be extended upstream for approximately 4,600 ft,
increasing the total static head to 173 ft and the flow rate will remain at 500 cfs. For this
presentation, only the present condition is discussed. Figure 2 shows the end of the
penstock, the powerhouse and the bypass stilling basin under construction.

478

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Figure 2. Construction of Project

Excavated from the basalt rock in the existing canal, the forebay is approximately 200-ft
long by 60-ft wide and 24-ft deep. The diversion structure was designed with a normal
entrance of water to the penstock through a trash rack, and an auxiliary entrance through
an overflow weir.
The penstock system was designed to offer years of service. The 13,497-ft long, 108-inch
diameter, 3/8-inch thick steel penstock from the forebay to the powerhouse is
polyurethane-lined and coated. Each of the 40-ft long sections of steel pipe was
fabricated at the Portland Facility of Northwest Pipeline Company and welded together at
the project site. Six sets of air release/vacuum valves were installed along the penstock at
selected locations. Pipe access man-ways were typically installed at 2,000-ft intervals.
There are three irrigation turnouts along the entire penstock. Before the penstock enters
the powerhouse, a bifurcation anchored to basalt rock splits the flow to: either a 108-inch
diameter section to the powerhouse or a 78-inch diameter section to the bypass structure.
In the powerhouse, the penstock is connected to an 84-inch diameter turbine shut-off
valve (TSV) immediately upstream of the turbine /generator unit. Flow through the
turbine discharges to the tailrace after the hydraulic energy is extracted by the runner of
the turbine/generator unit. In the bypass structure, the 78-inch diameter bypass pipe is
connected to a 78-inch diameter bypass shut-off valve (BSV) before entering a 42-inch
diameter ring-jet-type-fixed-cone valve (FCV). FCV is used to dissipate energy in
conjunction with a stilling basin during bypass operations. The vertical Francis unit was
provided by The James Leffel & Co. The generator is a vertical brushless synchronous
type provided by Hyundai-Ideal. TSV, BSV and FCV were provided by Rodney Hunt.
Normal flow controls are performed by the turbine wicket gates and FCV. TSV is used
for emergency shut-off and normal maintenance of the turbine/generator unit. BSV is for
the maintenance of FCV.

Intelligent Flow Control

479

FLOW CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

The two major requirements for the hydraulic system are: 1) the flow rate downstream of
the hydroelectric facility must remain constant whether or not the turbine/generator unit
is operational; and 2) transient pressures in the hydraulic system must be controlled to a
reasonable level. In order to meet these requirements, intelligent flow controls are
required.
Flow Control for Discharge Conditions
When the turbine/generator unit is operational, flow at the powerhouse discharges
through the turbine to the tailrace. Alternatively, flow discharges to the bypass pipe line
and through FCV to the stilling basin when the turbine/generator unit trips off line or is
down for maintenance. During normal operations, flow through the system is controlled
by the turbine wicket gates and FCV. During abnormal conditions, TSV is used for flow
control. Because the flow characteristics of the turbine wicket gates, TSV and FCV are
not identical, maintaining a constant flow downstream of the powerhouse through
operation of these gates and valves becomes a challenge. For example, closing the turbine
wicket gates and opening FCV at the same rate will not result in a steady-state flow
downstream of the powerhouse.
Flow Controls for Transient Conditions
The hydraulic system must be operated safely when switching flow between the power
generation portion and the bypass portion of the hydraulic system. When the flow is
steady, pressures within the hydraulic system remain constant at every location of the
system. However, when the flow conditions in the hydraulic system are being changed or
are unsteady, a hydraulic transient (or water hammer) condition is created. During the
transient period from one steady condition to another, transient pressures are induced.
Transient pressure at a location in the hydraulic system is the change in pressure that
fluctuates around the steady-state pressure. If the total pressure, equal to the sum of the
steady-state and transient pressure, becomes too large, the allowable pressure of the
hydraulic system may be exceeded, possibly causing the penstock or the associated
equipment to fail. On the other hand, if the total pressure becomes too low, a vacuum
condition may be induced in the hydraulic system and possibly cause failure, especially
for sections of the penstocks exposed above the ground surface.
There are many scenarios when transient conditions may occur. One example is when the
turbine/generator load is rejected due to electrical grid problems. In this scenario the
turbine wicket gates or TSV need to be closed relatively quickly to avoid a prolonged
over-speed of the turbine/generator unit. However, the faster the turbine wicket gates
close, the more rapidly the flow rate will decrease, resulting in higher pressure fluctuation
in the hydraulic system. Therefore, specifying an appropriate closing time for the turbine
wicket gates becomes critical to the safe design and operation of the turbine/generator
unit and the hydraulic system.

480

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Several methods of controlling transient conditions are often used in hydroelectric power
generation facilities such as: increasing the closing and opening times of control valves,
increasing the pressure class of pipelines, limiting pipe wave velocities, and use of
pressure relief valves, surge tanks and air chambers, etc. (Tullis, 1989). For the Juniper
Ridge Hydroelectric Power Generation Project, FCV acts as both a bypass and pressure
relief valve. When the turbine wicket gates or TSV are being closed, FCV opens to
discharge flow as well as release transient pressures.
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Due to the importance of flow controls for discharge and transient conditions, it is critical
to understand the flow and transient characteristics in the hydraulic system for its design,
construction and operation.
Flow Rates
Flow Rates Controlled by TSV and FCV:
TSV is located immediately upstream of the turbine/generator unit. The main purpose of
TSV is for normal maintenance and emergency shut-off of the flow. TSV is a butterfly
valve, which consists of a disc mounted on a shaft that rotates in a cylindrical body. The
disc is oriented parallel to the flow to minimize any restriction when open or is positioned
at a right angle to the flow to provide full closure.
FCV is located at the end of the bypass pipe to dissipate energy in conjunction with the
stilling basin during bypass operations. FCV consists of a valve body with a deflector
cone, a cylinder gate, and a hydraulic actuator. Moving the cylinder gate sleeve upstream
and downstream over the valve body opens and closes the valve. The fixed internal cone
spreads the conical discharge jet in such a way that the surface area of the jet and area
that entrains air increase rapidly. When closed, the movable cylinder seals against the
outer edge of the fixed cone. Typically, the valve discharge is sprayed into the air to
dissipate energy. For this project, two additional features were added to the valve, which
include a hood to restrain the spray of water into the air and a power spring attached to
the movable cylinder gate to force FCV open in case the hydraulic actuator fails.
Flow rates through the butterfly valve and the fixed cone valve are calculated by the
following general equation:
(1)
where:
Q = flow rate in cubic feet per second (cfs)
Cd = coefficient of discharge
A = internal area of valve in square feet (ft2)
g = acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/s2)
H = net head across valve (ft)

Intelligent Flow Control

481

For a selected valve the internal area of valve A is known. The coefficient of discharge,
Cd, at various disc positions in degrees (0 degree for complete closure and 90 degree for
100 percent opening) for TSV or at various gate strokes (percent opening) for FCV are
provided by the manufacturer. The Cd parameter at various gate strokes (percent opening)
for FCV is shown as an example in Figure 3.
Equation (1) shows that the flow rate Q is only a function of the head H for a
selected valve. The flow rate during the opening and closing of a valve can be calculated
using the corresponding head across the valve at various opening positions. However, the
head across a valve is related to the flow rate in the valve. Therefore, the computation of
flow rate at various valve openings is not straightforward.

Figure 3. Coefficient of Discharge for FCV

Flow Rates Controlled by Turbine Wicket Gates:
The turbine wicket gates were designed to control the flow in conjunction with FCV. It is
desirable to know the flow rate at various percent openings of the wicket gates or the
wicket gate rating curve. The wicket gate rating curve at the rated turbine speed was
provided by the turbine manufacturer. Flow rates can be obtained from the rating curve
when the head across the turbine and the percent opening of the wicket gates are known
for the rated turbine speed of 300 rpm. However, similar to the case for valves, it is not
straightforward to obtain the flow rate because the head across the turbine is a related
variable. Furthermore, the turbine will not always remain at the rated speed during the
opening or closing of the wicket gates. For example, during load rejection, if the wicket
gates are not closed promptly, the turbine speed will increase until the runaway speed is
reached before it decreases when the turbine wicket gates are gradually closed. Manual
computation of flow rates during wicket gates closure after load rejection is a
complicated task and numerical modeling is necessary.

482

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

4.2 Hydraulic Transient Pressures

Hydraulic transients are disturbances that occur in a fluid during a change from one
steady state to another. Transients will occur in every hydroelectric plant because
changes must be made (e.g. starting-up from standstill and shutting-down). Transient
pressures in a hydraulic system fluctuate until another steady state condition is reached.
There are three methods to calculate hydraulic transient pressures (ASME, 1996): 1) rigid
column theory for slow changes in flow; 2) elastic theory for rapid changes in flow; and
3) numerical modeling for intermediate changes in flow.
When changes in flow are slow, transient pressures may be evaluated using rigid column
theory and the concept of water starting time Tw as defined below (ASME, 1996):
=

(2)

where:
Tw = water starting time is defined as the time required for the water in the water
conduit system to accelerate from zero to rated velocity at rated head (sec)
L = length of water column from upstream free water surface to downstream free
water surface (ft)
V = rated velocity (ft/sec)
g = acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
H = rated head (ft)
When changes in flow are rapid, compressibility effects must be taken into consideration.
Flow changes at the turbine or valves are propagated through the water column by
pressure waves with a celerity or velocity of propagation in the penstock, which depends
on the characteristics of the penstock, and can be estimated. If the closure of the turbine
wicket gates or valves takes place in less time than is required for the wave to propagate
to a free surface and back, the closure is considered rapid. Pressure rise is now
controlled by the conversion of the kinetic energy in the moving water to pressure
energy. For a uniform diameter conduit, the following relationship is used to calculate the
pressure change for a rapic closure (ASME, 1996):

=-

(3)

where:
= pressure change (ft)
c = celerity or velocity of propagation (ft)
= change in flow velocity (ft/sec)
g = acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
The negative sign - indicates that when the flow velocity decreases, the pressure
rises while when the flow velocity increases, the pressure drops.

Intelligent Flow Control

483

Equation (3) shows that for a certain hydraulic system (c is known) the transient pressure
head is proportional to the change in flow velocity. A large flow velocity change will
induce large transient pressures. Both pressure increases and decreases may be induced
and are dependent on whether the flow rate increases or decreases.
Changes of flow in most hydroelectric projects are intermediate (ASME, 1996). These
situations are best analyzed using special purpose computer programs. The following
basic partial differential equations of momentum and continuity for unsteady,
compressible flow in elastic conduits are solved with applications of appropriate
boundary conditions using various computer programs (USACE, 1998):
Momentum:
Continuity:

+
+

=0
=0

(4)
(5)

where:
= total head or energy grade (ft)
Q = discharge (ft3/sec)
x = distance along conduit (ft)
t = time (sec)
g = acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
A = cross sectional area of the conduit (ft2)
D = diameter of the conduit (ft)
f = Darcy-Weisbach friction factor
c = celerity of a compression wave travelling through the conduit and is a
function of modulus of elasticity of pipe wall, thickness of pipe wall and
diameter of the conduit
There are basically two computational schemes in use to solve the above partial
differential equations for pressure transient calculations:
1. Method of characteristics, and
2. Method of implicit finite differences.
The first method is described by Wylie and Streeter (1993) and Chaudry (1988) while the
second method was originally described by Perkins et al. (1964). Details of these two
methods are described in various references (e.g., Zipparro and Hansen, 1993; Streeter,
1971 and USACE, 1998) and will not be repeated.

484

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

NUMERICAL MODELING
Model Description
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) computer program Water Hammer and
Mass Oscillation (WHAMO) has been developed to assist engineers in understanding
and mitigating hydraulic transient by simulating water hammer and mass oscillation in
networks that convey fluids. The program determines time varying flow and head in a
network that may include pipes, valves, pumps, turbines, junctions and other elements.
The WHAMO program is formulated in terms of a four-point implicit finite difference
representation of the governing partial differential equations (4) and (5).
Modeling Cases
Transient pressures along the penstock were analyzed using WHAMO for five scenarios,
each under the present and future conditions during the design of the project. The worst
case scenario occurs when TSV is used for emergency shut-off. For the worst case, it is
assumed that the electrical load is rejected due to trip-off, the turbine wicket gates cannot
be closed and FCV also cannot be opened normally (because of possible hydraulic
system failure, loss of hydraulic pressure, or the power spring actuated FCV is disabled).
The peak transient pressure from this scenario was the highest among the ten scenarios
and was used in the design of the penstock and associated components of the hydraulic
system. However, for the purpose of this presentation, only the following two cases under
the present condition are discussed.
Case 1. Shut-off of the turbine/generator unit due to turbine load rejection with active
bypass system turbine load rejected, turbine wicket gates closing at a specified
starting time and rate, and FCV opening at a specified starting time and rate.
Case 2. Shut-off of the turbine/generator unit due to turbine load rejection with inactive
bypass system turbine load rejected, turbine wicket gates closing at a specified
starting time and rate, and FCV not opening.
WHAMO Model Setup
Major Input Data:
The WHAMO program is relatively well-documented and easy to implement. Input data
to the program include: node number, element of hydraulic system, geometric
information of penstock sections, friction loss coefficients, minor loss coefficients, valve
specifications and characteristics, turbine/generator specifications and characteristics,
turbine operation status, and turbine and valve control schedule.
For this model, node Y is at the bifurcation just upstream of the powerhouse, node T is
the turbine wicket gates, and node F is FCV.

Intelligent Flow Control

485

Model Operation Control:

WHAMO models for the load rejection scenario under the present condition were set up
according to the given input data and calibrated using the flow rate data after load
rejection provided by The James Leffel and Co., which showed that the discharge rate
after turbine/generator trip-off decreased approximately 5 percent. The WHAMO models
were calibrated such that the discharges remained at 500 cfs after the trip-off neglecting
the 5 percent flow decrease. This approach was conservative for the transient analysis and
design. For the load rejection scenarios, the transient analyses were generally performed
from 0 to 1,000 seconds using a 0.5 second computational time step. Various closing
times were evaluated and a specified closing time, considered appropriate by the design
team, was selected for the design of the penstock and control scheme.
WHAMO Model Results
Flow Rate and Transient Pressure at a Location in the Hydraulic System:
Case 1 Turbine Wicket Gates Being Closed and FCV Being Opened
In this case, the turbine/generator unit is being shut-off due to load rejection and FCV is
being opened normally. Two scenarios were simulated in Case 1: In scenario 1, the
turbine wicket gates are closed and FCV is opened linearly and simultaneously in 240
seconds (0 sec time delay). The sum of the flow rate decrease through the turbine (T) and
increase through FCV (F) is shown in Figure 4. The sum of the two flow rates is the total
water discharge to the canal. It is noted that the total discharge rate did not remain
constant and exceeded the design flow of 500 cfs by approximately 80 cfs. The pressures
immediately upstream of the turbine wicket gates (T), FCV (F) and bifurcation (Y) are
shown in Figure 5. The pressures at the turbine wicket gates (T) and FCV (F) dropped
initially in response to the increase of the total flow rate in the penstock, then increased
and returned to their static and steady-state levels, respectively. The stabilized pressure at
the bifurcation (Y) was lower than at the turbine wicket gates because the former was the
steady-state pressure when the flow is 500 cfs while the latter was the static pressure
when the flow is zero. The induced transient pressures at the locations were small. The
small transient pressures were consistent with expectations because the relatively long
turbine wicket gate closing time (240 sec) and FCV acted as a pressure relief valve.

486

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Figure 4. Typical Discharge Rates through the Turbine, FCV and the Sum
(Scenario 1 0 sec Time Delay)

Figure 5. Typical Total Pressures at the Turbine, FCV and the Bifurcation
(Scenario 1 0 sec Time Delay)
Because the total discharge rate exceeded the design rate of 500 cfs during the switching
of flow from the turbine to FCV, different controls were required to maintain the
discharge rate of 500 cfs. Therefore, a scenario 2 was simulated where FCV started to
open 40 seconds after the turbine wicket gates started to close. The resulting three flow
rate variations are shown in Figure 6. It shows that during the switching period the total
discharge rate remained less than 500 cfs and more uniform than in scenario 1.

Intelligent Flow Control

487

Figure 6. Typical Discharge Rates through the Turbine, FCV and the Sum
(Scenario 2 40 sec Time Delay)
Correspondingly, the transient pressures at the turbine wicket gates (T) and FCV (F) rose
initially in response to the decrease of the total flow rate in the penstock, fluctuated and
then returned to the static pressure at the turbine wicket gates (T) and the steady-state
levels at FCV (F), respectively. The pressures immediately upstream of the turbine
wicket gates (T), FCV (F) and the bifurcation (Y) are shown in Figure 7. These transient
pressures were also small as expected because the designated turbine wicket gate closing
time (240 sec) is relatively long and FCV acted as a pressure relief valve.

Figure 7. Typical Total Pressures at the Turbine, FCV and the Bifurcation
(Scenario 2 0 sec Time Delay)

488

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Case 2 Wicket Gates Being Closed and FCV Not Being Opened
In this case, the turbine/generator unit is being shut-off linearly in 240 seconds after load
rejection and FCV remains closed abnormally. The flow rate decreases through the
turbine (T), the zero flow rate through FCV (F) and the total flow rate are shown in
Figure 8. The flow rate vs. time curve shows that during the linear closing process of the
turbine wicket gates the flow rate reduction through the turbine was not linear. Initially
the flow rate decreased slowly before eventually accelerating. This phenomenon is due to
the head loss across the wicket gates. As the wicket gates begin to close, the head loss
across the wicket gates is small compared to the head loss in the entire hydraulic system.
As the wicket gates continue to close and the head loss across the wicket gates increases
to a significant percentage of the total loss in the hydraulic system, the wicket gates can
begin to control the flow. The transient pressures at T, F and Y were significantly higher
than their respective steady-state levels as expected because FCV did not act as a pressure
relief valve in this case (Figure 9). After the turbine wicket gates were completely closed,
the transient pressures fluctuated and returned to the static levels, which were higher than
the initial steady-state pressures.

Figure 8. Typical Discharge Rates through the Turbine, FCV and the Sum
(Case 2 FCV Not Open)

Intelligent Flow Control

489

Figure 9. Typical Total Pressures at the Turbine, FCV and the Bifurcation
(Case 2 FCV Not Open)
Hydraulic Grade Line along Penstock:
The variations of flow rates and transient pressures with time at many selected locations
along the penstock were computed and obtained as described. At each location, the
maximum and minimum transient pressures were read from the model outputs. Hydraulic
grade lines (HGL) were calculated at those locations along the penstock. The steady-state
HGL, the maximum HGL caused by the positive transient pressures and the minimum
HGL caused by the negative transient pressures for Case 2 were plotted in conjunction
with the penstock centerline elevation in Figure 10. The maximum and minimum
pressures along the penstock were used for the hydraulic system design to make sure the
maximum pressures were less than the allowable pressure of the penstock and its
associated valves, and the minimum pressures were positive, resulting in a non-vacuum
condition along the penstock.

490

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Figure 10. Maximum and Minimum Piezometic Head along Penstock

(Case 2 FCV Not Open)
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
WHAMO software provided a valuable tool for the understanding of the flow and
transient conditions in the hydraulic system. Discharge rates during the switching
between the hydroelectric and bypass portions of the system may be controlled by
delaying opening or closing of various valves. The 40-second opening delay for FCV
eliminated the 80 cfs flow surcharge and resulted in a more uniform downstream flow, as
a surcharge may have been significant enough to overtop the canal banks. For the Juniper
Ridge Hydroelectric Project, the surcharge was taken into consideration when the control
scheme of the unit was designed and implemented. The implemented control scheme for
normal operation resulted in discharge downstream of the facility similar to that in the
40-second time delay case.
Significant transient pressures could be induced in the hydraulic system if not controlled
properly. The numerical modeling showed that the transient pressure upstream of the
turbine wicket gates was largest when FCV could not be opened. Therefore, in addition to
the normal design in a typical bypass system, a power spring was added to FCV to force
it open when the other actuation systems malfunction. Negative transient pressures were
also observed in the hydraulic system. However, they were small compared to the steadystate pressures such that vacuum conditions did not happen along the penstock.
Based on the analyses, the following conclusions are made:
1. An appropriate control scheme is required to avoid overflow and drain of the
forebay and overtopping of the canal bank downstream of the hydroelectric
facility.
2. Flow rates downstream of the powerhouse can be controlled by adjusting the rate
and starting time of valve movements.

Intelligent Flow Control

491

3. Maximum positive transient pressures occur at the end of the penstock near the
turbine wicket gates and the control valves, and become less as they move
upstream to a free surface. Significant transient pressures may occur in the
hydraulic system and can be mitigated by controlling the movement of valves and
installation of pressure relief valves.
4. Negative transient pressures along penstocks should be evaluated to prevent a
vacuum condition from happening, especially for long, thin and exposed pipes.
5. Special purpose software such as WHAMO is a valuable tool for the evaluation
and design of hydraulic system.
REFERENCES
ASME Hydro Power Technical Committee, The Guide to Hydropower Mechanical
Design. HCI Publications, Inc., 1996.
Chaudry, H.M., Applied Hydraulic Transients, VNR, New York, New York, 1988.
Perkiins, F.E., A.C. Tedrow, P.S. Eagleson, and A.T. Ippen, Hydro-Power Plant
Transients, Part II: Response to Load Rejection, Report No. 71, MIT Hydrodynamics
Laboratory, September 1964.
Tullis, J. Paul, Hydraulics of Pipelines, Pumps, Valves, Cavitations, Transients. John
Wiley & Sons Inc., 1989.
USACE, Water Hammer and Mass Oscillation (WHAMO) 3.0 Users Manual, U.S.
Army Corp of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Laboratories ADP Report
98/129, September 1998.
Wylie, E.B., and V.L. Streeter, Fluid Transients, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey, 1993.
Zipparro, Vincent J., and Hans Hasen, Editors, Davis Handbook of Applied Hydraulics,
Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, New York. 1993.

492

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations