IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

Related content
- Treatise on water hammer in hydropower
Water hammer caused by closure of turbine safety standards and guidelines
A Bergant, B Karney, S Pejovi et al.
spherical valves - Numerical and field tests of hydraulic
transients at Piva power plant
Z Giljen
To cite this article: U Karadži et al 2010 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 12 012096
- Case studies for solving the Saint-Venant
equations using the method of
characteristics: pipeline hydraulic
transients and discharge propagation
R M Barros, G L Tiago Filho, I F S dos
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Santos et al.

This content was downloaded from IP address 124.41.240.178 on 19/04/2018 at 05:59

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

Water hammer caused by closure of turbine safety spherical

valves
U Karadžić1, A Bergant2 and P Vukoslavčević1
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Montenegro
Džordža Vašingtona nn, Podgorica, 81000, Montenegro
2
LitostrojPower d.o.o., Litostrojska 50, Ljubljana, 1000, Slovenia
E-mail: uros.karadzic@ac.me

Abstract. This paper investigates water hammer effects caused by closure of spherical valves
against the discharge. During the first phase of modernisation of Perućica high-head
hydropower plant (HPP), Montenegro, safety spherical valves (inlet turbine valves) have been
refurbished on the first two Pelton turbine units. The valve closure is controlled by the valve
actuator (hydraulic servomotor). Because the torque acting on the valve body is dependent on
flow conditions the valve closing time may vary significantly for different flow velocities
(passive valve). For the passive valve the torques acting on the valve body should be
considered in the valve model. The valve closing time results from numerical simulation. On
the contrary, for the active valve the valve closing time is assumed prior to simulation. The
spherical valve boundary condition is incorporated into the method of characteristics (MOC)
algorithm. The staggered (diamond) grid in applying the MOC is used in this paper. The passive
valve boundary condition is described by the water hammer equations, the valve equation that
relates discharge to pressure head drop and the dynamic equation of the valve body motion
(torque equation). The active valve boundary condition is described by the first two equations,
respectively. Standard quasi-steady friction model is used for estimating friction losses in
plant’s tunnel and penstocks. Numerical results using both the active and the passive spherical
valve models are compared with results of measurements. It has been found that the influence
of flow conditions on the spherical valve closing time is minor for the cases considered.
Computed and measured results agree reasonably well.

1. Introduction
Water hammer is occurrence of pressure rise or drop in penstocks of hydropower plants and pumping stations
due to change in flow velocity. Water hammer loads must be kept within the prescribed limits because they can
disturb operation of hydraulic system and damage system’s components. During construction of new or
modernization of existing hydropower plants detailed water hammer analysis is required in order to get
maximum and minimum pressures as one of the most important parameters in the design process of the plant
components. In hydropower plants water hammer is induced by turbine load acceptance and reduction, load
rejection under governor control, emergency shut-down and unwanted runaway, and closure and opening of the
safety shutoff valves. This paper investigates water hammer effects caused by closure of safety spherical valves
against the discharge. In the first part of the paper mathematical tools for solving water hammer equations are
presented. The water hammer is described by continuity and momentum equations and equations describing
boundary elements (reservoir, valve, surge tank, turbine). Two different models of valve closure are introduced;
passive, where closure time is dependent on torques that act on the valve body and active, where closure time is
specified in advance. In the second part of the paper comparisons of numerical and experimental results are
made for both passive and active spherical valve models. It is shown that the influence of flow conditions on the
spherical valve closing time is minor for the cases investigated. It is also concluded that numerical models show
satisfactory agreement with results of measurement.


c 2010 IOP Publishing Ltd 1
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

2. Theoretical model
Water hammer is the propagation of pressure waves along the pipeline resulting from a change in flow velocity.
For most engineering applications simplified water hammer equations are appropriate (Chaudhry [1]),

∂H a2 ∂Q (1)
+ =0
∂t gA ∂x
∂H 1 ∂Q f Q| Q | (2)
+ + =0
∂x gA ∂t 2 gDA2

where, H = piezometric head (head), t = time, a = pressure wave speed, g = gravitational acceleration, A = pipe
area, Q = discharge, x = distance along the pipe, f = Darcy-Weisbach friction factor and D = pipe diameter.
Quasi-steady approach to estimate friction losses in system’s penstocks and tunnel is satisfactory for slow
transients considered in this paper. Equations (1) and (2) are solved by the method of characteristics (MOC) using
staggered numerical grid (Wylie and Streeter [2]). At a boundary (reservoir, spherical valve), a device-specific
equation is used instead one of the MOC water hammer compatibility equations.
2.1 Spherical valve boundary condition
Turbine inlet valves are used as safety elements in the system. Their main function is to close penstock in
case of emergency conditions such as turbine runaway and pipe damage, and in case of regular repair of turbine
components.
The instantaneous discharge through spherical valve (Qu,t) can be determined from the following equation,
(3)
K D2
Qu ,t = Av 2 g (H u ,t − H d ,t )
1 − K D2
where, KD = spherical valve discharge coefficient, Av = valve area (Av = πDv2/4), Hu,t = head upstream the valve,
Hu,d = head downstream the valve, Dv = nominal valve diameter. Equation (3) is valid both for passive and active
valve model. Functional dependency of the discharge coefficient KD and the angle of the valve opening α is
shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Spherical valve discharge coefficient KD (α = 00 – valve fully open, α = 900 – valve fully closed)
The active valve closure model is straightforward and well explained in standard water hammer books
(Chaudhry [1], Wyile and Streeter [2]). On the contrary, the passive valve closure model is not that
straightforward and will be explained as follows. For the case of passive valve closure model a dynamic equation
of the valve body motion (torque equation) have to be considered in the model,
d 2α (4)
J = ∑M
dt 2

2
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

where, J = moment of inertia of valve rotating parts, ∑ M = sum of all torques that act on the valve body.
Figure 2 shows schematic servomotor mechanism of Perućica HPP spherical valve. The hydraulic servomotor
mechanism angle γ2, positions s and e are,

⎡e R ⎤ (5)
γ 2 = cos−1 ⎢ − sin (α + γ 1 )⎥
⎣L L ⎦
s = R cos(α + χ1 ) + L sin χ 2 (6)

e = e0 + (s − s0 ) tanψ (7)

Fig. 2 Servomotor mechanism of the spherical valve (R = 580 mm, s0 = 940 mm, e0 = 400 mm,
L = 1320 mm, γ1 = 400, ψ = 40)

Sum of all torques that act on valve body during closure period is as follows,

∑M = M h + M hs − M fr − M fd − M ds (8)
where, Mh = hydraulic torque, Mhs = hydraulic servomotor torque, Mfr = shaft bearing friction torque, Mfd = fluid
damping torque due to the valve body motion in the fluid, Mds = valve disk sealing torque due to friction between
the valve seal and the pipe wall.
The hydraulic torque Mh is defined by following expression (Guins [3], Bergant and Sijamhodžić [4]),

1 Q2 (9)
M h = KT Dv3
K D2 2 gAv2
where, KT = hydrodynamic torque coefficient.
The hydraulic servomotor torque Mhs derived for the layout of the mechanism shown in Fig. 2 is

M hs = Fhs R sin (γ 2 − 90 + γ 1 + α ) (10)

where, Fhs = hydraulic servomotor piston force whose detailed derivation can be found in Karadžić [5].
The shaft bearing friction torque Mfr is

3
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

Db (11)
M fr = μb Rb
2
where, μb = shaft bearing friction coefficient, Db = shaft bearing diameter, Rb = resultant force in the shaft
bearing due to action of the hydrodynamic force Fh, weight of the submerged valve body Gv and piston force Fhs.
Hydrodynamic force is expressed by the following equation (Bergant and Sijamhodžić [4]),
1 Q2 (12)
Fh = K F Dv2
K D2 2 gAv2
where, KF = hydrodynamic force coefficient.
The fluid damping torque is (Ellis and Mualla [6]),
2 (13)
ρDv5 ⎛ dα ⎞
M fd = ⎜ ⎟
120 K 2fd ⎝ dt ⎠
where, Kfd = fluid damping coefficient.
The valve disk sealing torque is applied at closed position of the valve and it is (Kovalev [7]),

M ds = μ sbs Ds2 ρg (H u ,t − H d ,t ) (14)

where, μs = valve disk sealing friction coefficient, bs = valve disk seal width, Ds = valve disk seal diameter.
Valve coefficients KD, KT, KF, Kfd, direction of hydrodynamic force and conditions downstream of the valve
as well, for particular type of valve, are obtained from the model tests (Ellis and Mualla [6], Strohmer [8]).
Knowing conditions downstream of the valve during the closure period is very important because of possible
occurrence of cavitation phenomena and column separation.
Equations (1) to (4) are solved simultaneously in the passive valve closure model. The unknowns are
discharge through the valve Qu,t, head at the upstream Hu,t and the downstream end of the valve Hd,t, and angle of
the valve opening α. The valve closing time tc is result of simulation.

3. Perućica HPP flow-passage system

Perućica HPP flow-passage system is a complex system comprised of a concrete tunnel (LT = 3335 m, DT =
4.8 m), orifice type surge tank (orifice head loss coefficients: ζin = 1.65 and ζout = 2.48 during inflow and outflow,
respectively) of cylindrical cross-section (DST = 8.0 m) with an expansion at elevation z = 611.0 m (DST = 12.0
m) and overflow (elevation: zov = 628.0 m; width of the overflow weir: bov = 7.98 m with discharge coefficient
μov = 0.4) and three parallel steel penstocks with horizontal-shaft Pelton turbines built at their downstream ends
(Fig. 3). The maximum water level at the intake is 613 m and the minimum one is 602.5 m. The penstock I feeds
two turbine units (A1 and A2) with rated unit power of 39 MW each, penstock II feeds three turbine units (A3,
A4 and A5) of 39 MW each and penstock III feeds two units (A6 and A7) of 59 MW each. A new turbine unit
(A8) with a rated power of 59 MW is to be installed in the near future. The length of each penstock is 1920 m,
1966 m and 2014 m, respectively. The respective equivalent penstock diameter (Chaudhry [1]) is 1965 mm, 2160
mm and 2570 mm. Calculated pressure wave speeds are as follows, aT = 1354 m/s, aI = 1148 m/s, aII = 1123
m/s and aIII = 1152 m/s.
The Pelton wheel diameter of units A1 to A5 is Dk = 2400 mm and for units A6 and A7 is Dk = 2100 mm. The
turbine inlet spherical valve diameters are Dv = 1000 mm for units A1 to A5 and Dv = 1200 mm for units A6 and
A7. Two valves belong to each 2-wheel turbine unit. The valves are equipped with a passive actuator comprised
of a hydraulic servomotor that is closed by water pressure from the penstock and opened by oil pressure from the
hydraulic pressure unit. The nominal closing time of the spherical valves is tc = 200 s. Main characteristics of the
Pelton turbine units are presented in Tab.1 below.

4
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

Fig. 3 Layout of Perućica HPP, Montenegro

Table 1 Characteristics of Pelton turbine units

Rated unit power Rated net head Rated speed
Turbine unit
Pr (MW) Hr (m) nr (min-1)
A1,A2,A3,A4 39 526 375
A5 39 526 375
A6,A7 59 526 428
The polar moment of
Number of wheels Number of needles
inertia of the unit
Turbine unit per turbine unit per turbine wheel
rotating parts J (tm2)
A1,A2,A3,A4 2 168.8 1
A5 2 168.8 1
A6,A7 2 200 2
Closing time of the Opening time of the
Stroke of the needle
Turbine unit Needle needle
smax (mm)
tc (s) to (s)
A1,A2,A3,A4 150 85 30
A5 195 80 30
A6,A7 166 80 50

Influential quantities have been continuously measured during transient operating regimes including pressure
at the upstream and the downstream end of spherical valves, spherical valve opening angle, stroke of the needle,
stroke of the jet deflector and turbine rotational speed. These measurements have been carried out on turbine
units A1 and A2. During closure of the spherical valves against the discharge the Pelton turbine nozzles stay in
their open position without influence on transient regime.

4. Comparisons of numerical and field test results

Various transient operating regimes have been performed in the plant during commissioning of the turbine
units A1 and A2, including the unit start-up, load acceptance and reduction, load rejection under governor control
and emergency shut-down, and closure of turbine safety valve against the discharge. In this paper results of
measurements and corresponding numerical simulations for the case of simultaneous closure of two safety
spherical valves against the discharge on turbine unit A1 are presented; turbine unit A2 was at standstill. Closure
of two spherical valves against the discharge has been done for two different initial discharges, the maximum
discharge (Test SVA1Q100) and half of the maximum discharge through the 2-wheel turbine unit A1 (SVA1Q50).
The main initial parameters for these two tests are shown in the Tab.2. Initial discharges are determined
according to measured openings of the nozzles and the available net head.

5
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

Table 2 Main initial parameters

Initial discharge in Steady friction Intake level Closing time for
penstock factor zR (m) active valve model
QI (m3/s) f (-) tc (s)
Test SVA1Q100 8.04 0.0107 605.4 200
Test SVA1Q50 4.11 0.0112 606.2 197

Head and discharge during transient regimes have been computed using the staggered grid based MOC code
with a basic time step of Δt = 0.040 s. Computed and measured results are shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
Numerical and measured heads at the upstream end of the spherical valve, angle of the valve opening and
calculated change of discharge through the valve for Test SVA1Q100 are presented in Fig. 4. For Test
SVA1Q100 the maximum measured head of Hmax = 560.58 m occurred at the end of valve closing period with a
head rise of ΔH = 25.8 m. The maximum calculated head obtained by the active valve model is Hmax = 558.5 m
with head rise of ΔH = 22.6 m. Passive valve model gives the maximum head of Hmax = 561.1 m and head rise of
ΔH = 25.2 m. Numerical model with active valve gives a little lower value of the maximum head compared to
the results of measurement but with their occurrence at the end of the closing period. During the valve closing
period the active valve model predicts negligible pressure fluctuations (Fig. 4a). In contrast to the active valve
model, the passive valve model shows better agreement with the results of measurement during the valve closing
period. The maximum head occurs few seconds prior to the complete valve closure (Fig. 4b). After the valve is
fully closed, the passive valve model simulates pressure trace reasonably well but with little attenuation. On the
other hand, the active valve model gives higher head values with amplitudes that attenuate rapidly. After a time
of about 300 seconds the model shows excellent agreement with measured data (Fig. 4a). The calculated closure
time for the passive valve model is equal to the selected active valve model closure time of tc = 200 s (Fig. 4c). A
numerical value of the valve angle opening excellently matches the measured data till t = 160 s. After this
moment the spherical valve begins to decrease discharge more rapidly (Fig. 4d) and consequently higher
pressure fluctuations at the upstream end of the valve occur (Fig. 4b). These fluctuations influenced the water
side of the hydraulic servomotor and are the source for differences between measured and calculated values of
the valve angle opening. Passive valve numerical model simulates effects of hydraulic servomotor very well.

Fig. 4 Comparison of heads at the upstream end of the spherical valve (datum level z = 65.8 m; time step Δt =
0.04 s). Closure of two spherical valves against the maximum turbine unit discharge (Test SVA1Q100)

6
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

Numerical and measured heads at the upstream end of the spherical valve, angle of the valve opening and
calculated head at the downstream end of the valve for Test SVA1Q50 are presented in Fig. 5. The maximum
measured head for Test SVA1Q50 is Hmax = 560.6 m with head rise of ΔH = 22.1 m. The maximum head values
and head rises given by the two numerical models are Hmax = 549.9 m and ΔH = 11.4 m for the active valve
model, and Hmax = 551.9 m and ΔH = 13.4 m for the passive valve model. The passive valve model shows better
agreement with measured data during and after the valve closure period (Fig. 5b) compared to the results
obtained by the active valve model (Fig. 5a).
For both investigated cases (Tests SVA1Q100 and SVA1Q50) the maximum measured and calculated heads
are much less than the maximum permissible head of 602 m. The calculated valve closure time for Test
SVA1Q50 is tc = 194 s and it is three seconds shorter than the measured valve closure time of 197 s (Fig. 5c).
The initial penstock head at the upstream end of the spherical valve, in this case, has a higher value than for Test
SVA1Q100 and initiates greater discharge towards hydraulic servomotor. Consequently, a little shorter valve
closure time occurs. It may be concluded that hydraulic servomotor orifice is set adequately so the valve closing
time is always about 200 s regardless the hydraulic loads on the valve body during valve closure against the
discharge or in still water. Another interesting outcome of simulation is the computed head trace at the
downstream end of the valve (Fig. 5d). During the closing period a shape of this head trace is similar to the shape
of the discharge trace (Fig. 4d). In addition, it may be observed that at the beginning of the transient event the
values of the downstream and the upstream end heads are practically the same. After some time, the downstream
head decreases slowly in the first two thirds of the closing period and in its last third decreases fairly quickly
until it reaches the datum level (Fig. 5d).

Fig. 5 Comparison of heads at the upstream end of the spherical valve (datum level z = 65.8 m; time step Δt =
0.04 s). Closure of two spherical valves against the half of the turbine unit discharge (Test SVA1Q50)

5. Conclusion
Numerical results obtained for two different numerical valve closure models are compared with the results of
field measurements. The valve closure is modeled as active when the closing time is assumed prior to simulation
and passive when the valve closing time results from numerical simulation taking into account the dynamic
equation of the valve body motion. It has been found that flow conditions do not have a significant impact on the

7
25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012096 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012096

spherical valve closure time for the cases investigated in this paper. Developed numerical models show
reasonable agreement with measured results.

Nomenclature
A Pipe area [m2] Q Discharge [m3/s]
Av Valve area [m2] Qu,t Discharge through the valve [m3/s]
a Pressure wave speed [m/s] R Hydraulic servomotor lever arm [m]
bov Width of the overflow weir [m] Rb Resultant force in the shaft bearing [N]
bs Valve disk seal width [m] Re Reynolds number (= VD/ν) [-]
D Pipe diameter, diameter [m] s Valve piston position, stroke of the needle [m]
Db Shaft bearing diameter [m] t Time [s]
Dk Wheel diameter [m] tc Valve closing time, needle closing time [s]
Ds Valve disk seal diameter [m] to Needle opening time [s]
DST Surge tank diameter [m] x Distance along the pipe [m]
Dv Nominal valve diameter [m] z Water level, elevation [m]
e Valve piston position [m] α Angle of the valve opening [-]
Fh Hydrodynamic force [N] γ1 Initial hydraulic servomotor mechanism angle [-]
Fhs Hydraulic servomotor piston force [N] γ2 Hydraulic servomotor mechanism angle [-]
f Darcy-Weisbach friction factor [-] μb Shaft bearing friction coefficient [-]
Gv Weight of the valve body [N] μov Overflow discharge coefficient [-]
g gravitational acceleration [m/s2] μs Valve disk sealing friction coefficient [-]
H Piezometric head, head [m] ν Kinematic viscosity [m2/s]
Hd,t Head downstream of the valve [m] ζin Surge tank inflow coefficient [-]
Hu,t Head upstream of the valve [m] ζout Surge tank outflow coefficient [-]
J Moment of inertia [kg m2] ρ Water mass density [kg/m3]
KD Spherical valve discharge coefficient [-] ψ Initial hydraulic servomotor cylinder angle [-]
KF Hydrodynamic force coefficient [N/m3]
Kfd Fluid damping coefficient [-]
KT Hydrodynamic torque coefficient [N/m3] Subscripts:
L Hydraulic servomotor arm, pipe length [m] max Maximum
M Torque [N m] ov Overflow
Mds Valve disk sealing torque [N m] R Reservoir
Mfd Fluid damping torque [N m] r Rated
Mfr Shaft bearing friction torque [N m] ST Surge tank
Mh Hydraulic torque [N m] T Tunnel
Mhs Hydraulic servomotor torque [N m] 0 Initial conditions
n Turbine rotational speed [s-1] I,II,III Penstock number
P Power [W]

References
[1] Chaudhry M H 1987 Applied Hydraulic Transients (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company)
[2] Wylie E B and Streeter V L 1993 Fluid transients in systems, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
[3] Guins G V 1968 Flow characteristics of butterfly and spherical valves (ASCE) J. of the Hydraulics Division
94(HY3) 675-90
[4] Bergant A and Sijamhodžić E 1994 Hydraulic transients caused by shutoff valves Conf. on Hydropower
plants (Budapest, Hungary) pp 331-41
[5] Karadžić U 2008 Modelling of complex boundary conditions for transients in hydraulic systems PhD Thesis
University of Montenegro Faculty of Mechanical Engineering (Podgorica, Montenegro, Serbian)
[6] Ellis J and Mualla W 1984 Dynamic behaviour of safety butterfly valves Water Power & Dam Construction
36(4) 26-31
[7] Kovalev N N 1984 Handbook of hydraulic machinery (Mašinostroenie, Leningrad, SSSR, Russian)
[8] Strohmer F 1977 Investigating the characteristics of shutoff valves by model tests Water Power & Dam
Construction 29(7) 41-46