This article was downloaded by: On: 28 December 2010 Access details: Access Details: Free Access Publisher

Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Hydraulic Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t916282780

Effect of intake head wall and trash rack on vortices

Hamed Sarkardeha; Amir Reza Zarratia; Reza Roshanb a Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran b Water Research Institute, Tehran, Iran Online publication date: 18 March 2010

To cite this Article Sarkardeh, Hamed , Zarrati, Amir Reza and Roshan, Reza(2010) 'Effect of intake head wall and trash

rack on vortices', Journal of Hydraulic Research, 48: 1, 108 112 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00221680903565952 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221680903565952

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 48, No. 1 (2010), pp. 108 112 doi:10.1080/00221680903565952 # 2010 International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research

Technical note

Effect of intake head wall and trash rack on vortices

HAMED SARKARDEH, Post Graduate Student, Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez Avenue, Tehran 15914, Iran. Email: h.sarkardeh@aut.ac.ir AMIR REZA ZARRATI, Professor, Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez Avenue, Tehran 15914, Iran. Email: zarrati@aut.ac.ir (author for correspondence) REZA ROSHAN, Academic Staff, Water Research Institute, Hakimiyya, Tehran, Iran. Email: roshanreza@gmail.com
ABSTRACT The effect of the intake head wall slope and the installation of a trash rack on the type and strength of vortices are studied experimentally. The strength within each vortex was determined by measuring its tangential velocity utilizing an Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter (ADV). Experiments were carried out with a projected intake and an intake with various head wall slopes, discharges and submerged depths. The results from the projected intake tests indicated that Type 6 vortex was present. However, the vortex strength and type reduced as the intake head wall slope increased up to the vertical position. In addition, increasing the intake head wall slope increased the vortex instability. All tests were repeated with a trash rack. A relationship was developed for vortex strength and the intake critical submerged depth based on the intake Froude number and the head wall slope. Moreover, a relationship has been found between vortex strength and type.

Downloaded At: 04:02 28 December 2010

Keywords: Circulation number, critical submergence, experimentation, head wall, trash rack, vortex 1 Introduction the average tunnel ow velocity, D tunnel diameter and g gravitational acceleration. The critical (subscript cr) submerged depth of air core vortices was described by Gordon (1970)   S lF D cr or by Amphlett (1976)   S C F0:5 0:5 D cr (3) (2)

Vortexformationatpowerintakesmayoccuratlowerreservoirlevels. Theintakesubmergeddepthandthegeometryandlayoutoftheintake have a direct effect on the vortex strength. Vortices can draw debris and air into an intake causing vibration and damage to turbines. Based on the visual classication of Alden Research Laboratory (Fig. 1), vortices can be divided into six types (Knauss 1987). Vortex strength is evaluated by its circulation at the irrotational vortex region as

G 2prvu

(1) where l 2.3 for asymmetric intake geometry is selected here for comparison. In Eq. (3), C 3.3 if B/D 4 and C 3.95 if B/D 0.5, where B is the distance between intake axis and approach ow invert. A reduction in vortex strength in general means a lower critical submerged depth, i.e. as the vortex strength decreases, the safe operating submerged depth is reduced. Any disturbance or obstacle within a vortex increases internal friction and

where G is the vortex circulation and vu the tangential velocity at a distance r from the vortex axis. To prevent formation of air core vortices, a minimum operating depth, called critical submerged depth Sc, is recommended. The distance between the water surface and the intake axis is dened as S (Fig. 2). The critical submerged depth of air core vortices was found to vary with the intake Froude number F V/(gD)1/2, where V is

Revision received 15 September 2009/Open for discussion until 31 August 2010. ISSN 0022-1686 print/ISSN 1814-2079 online http://www.informaworld.com 108

Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 48, No. 1 (2010)

Effect of intake head wall and trash rack on vortices

109

where r is the water density, y kinematic uid viscosity, s uid surface tension, Z intake head wall slope, T percentage of trash rack opening, NG G/(2pg1/2D3/2) the circulation number, S/D relative intake submergence and R VD/y and W rV2D/s the intake Reynolds and Weber numbers, respectively. If R and W are large enough (see below), their effects can be neglected and therefore Eq. (4) may be written as NG
Figure 1 Types of vortices (Knauss 1987)

G
2pg 1=2 D3=2

 f

S ; F; Z; T D

 (5)

Downloaded At: 04:02 28 December 2010

therefore reduces the vortex strength and Sc/D. The proximity of, for example, an adjacent wall (Fig. 2) reduces the vortex strength. In addition, a trash rack induces disturbances in the vortex path reducing its strength. Although these effects on the type and stability of vortices are known, no comprehensive study is as yet available. In the present study, tests were conducted on a projected intake as well as an intake with different head wall slopes 1 : Z (Fig. 2) to investigate their effect on the type and strength of vortices. Relationships are also developed for vortex strength and critical submergence depth. In addition, a relationship is found between vortex strength and vortex type. 2 Dimensional analysis

Experimental set-up

Using the principles of the dimensional analysis, the relationship among parameters affecting the vortex circulation G can be expressed as (Anwar et al. 1978, Jain et al. 1978, Anwar and Amphlett 1980, Knauss 1987, Yildirim et al. 2009)

G
2pg 1=2 D3=2

 f

S V 2 VD rV 2 D ; ; ; ; Z; T s D gD y

 4)

Figure 2 Schematic side view of physical model

Froude similarity was considered as the basis of the model studies (Anwar et al. 1978, Hite and Mih 1994). As the diameter of typical power tunnels in medium and large dams is between 4 and 10 m, and usual tunnel ow velocities are between 4 and 10 m/s, for a usual model with scales between 1/30 and 1/60, the herein selected model tunnel diameter was 16 cm and discharge was between 0.015 and 0.030 m3/s. The intake had a rounded entrance radius of r 0.15D (USBR 1974). Model observations indicated that asymmetric ow from the reservoir was necessary to form a stable Type 6 vortex in a wide range of ow conditions. By studying the layout of typical existing dams, it became evident that the slope of the intake head wall varies between 2 : 1 to nearly vertical. Walls with Z 2 : 1, 3 : 1, 4 : 1 and a vertical wall were installed (Fig. 2) and vortex strength and type in each test determined and compared with the projected intake. The reservoir walls, the intake structure and the tunnel were made of Perspex. The side walls and the reservoir bottom were more than 4D away from the intake axis to eliminate effects on vortex formation (Anwar et al. 1978). To avoid scale effects relative to viscosity and surface tension, minimum values proposed are R ! 5 104 (Daggett and Keulegan 1974), R ! 7.7 104 and W . 600 (Padmanabhan and Hecker 1984), R ! 1.1 105 and W . 720 (Odgaard 1986) and W . 120 (Jain et al. 1978). Minimum R and W values in the present work were 1.2 105 and 1.2 103, respectively, i.e. more than the above minimum values. To study the effect of intake head wall slope on vortices, tests were rst carried out with an intake projecting one diameter into the reservoir. By applying 4 different discharges and 3 different submergences, 12 Type 6 vortices formed at the intake and their strength was determined. Then, the effect of Z was investigated (Fig. 2) for the same hydraulic conditions. Finally, a trash rack made of copper wire nets was installed at the intake face to study its effects on the vortex strength. An electromagnetic ow meter installed in the closed piping system was employed to measure water discharge. The water surface elevation was measured by reading the scales marked on the reservoir wall. The tangential ow velocity of the vortices in the reservoir was measured by an ADV of 25 Hz. The

110

H. Sarkardeh et al.

Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 48, No. 1 (2010)

correlation factor was above 0.8 in all tests. Measurements were conducted at more than D/2 distance from the vortex axis in the free vortex zone. To measure velocity at each point, data over some 20 s were collected and then averaged. Observations indicated that the proximity of the intake head wall to the location of the vortex caused vortex instability. In these conditions, measurements were made only if the vortex was steady.

4 4.1

Experimental results Effect of intake head wall slope on vortex type

Measurements were conducted for four different values of F and S/D 1.5, 1.75 and 2. All vortex types observed are listed in Table 1, indicating that as the slope of the intake head wall increases, the type of vortex reduces. Note that with a projected intake and for the same ow conditions as in Table 1, all vortices were of Type 6.

together as Class A. Similarly, vortex Types 4 and 3 were classied as Class B (Table 2) and weaker vortices 2 and 1 as Class C. Note that if R is large enough in a model and so scale effects remain insignicant, conditions leading to vortex Class A should be avoided. However, owing to scale effects and the possibility of the formation of weaker model vortices, vortices stronger than Class B (Type 3 or 4) are inacceptable. As can be seen from Tables 1 and 2, the intake wall slope has a signicant effect on reducing the type and stability of vortices, especially for lower F. For example, if F 0.6, stable vortices of Type 6 were observed at the projected intake for all S/D, whereas with the vertical intake wall vortices were reduced to Class B with a stability of less than 5%.

4.3

Effect of trash rack

Downloaded At: 04:02 28 December 2010

4.2

Effect of intake head wall slope on vortex stability

Experiments indicated that vortices become unstable as the intake head wall slope increases toward the vertical position. To study vortex instability, additional tests with the lowest and highest F and 2 : 1 and vertical intake walls were conducted for three different S/D. In each experiment, the time percentage of vortex presence corresponding to the measurement time was recorded and referred to as the vortex stability. It was determined that at least 20 min of run time was required during each test to measure the vortex stability with condence. Note that with the exposed intake and for identical ow conditions, all vortices were stable and of Type 6. Since vortices became unstable for steep walls and the vortex type under the unsteady condition was difcult to recognize, vortex Types 6 and 5 were classied

A trash rack disturbs the ow and can therefore reduce the strength and type of vortices. To study this effect, all the previous tests with various wall slopes, F and S/D were repeated to determine the vortex circulation with trash rack presence at the intake. Most prototype trash racks have an open area of 70 80%. A trash rack was therefore built with 75% opening with copper wires of 2 mm thick installed at the intake. A comparison of Tables 1 and 3 shows that trash rack presence reduces the vortex strength, especially the stronger vortices.

4.4

Calculating vortex strength and type

With over 100 tests of vortex strength for the variable S/D, F and Z, with and without trash rack presence, an equation was developed for NG with a correlation factor of 0.95 as  1:912  0:015 S 1 F0:638 T 0:706 NG 0:06 D Z (6)

Table 1 S/D F Z

Types of vortices for various ow conditions with different intake head wall slopes 2 2:1 3 4 5 6 3:1 3 4 5 5 4:1 2 3 4 4 Vertical 2 2 3 4 2:1 5 5 6 6 3:1 4 5 5 6 1.75 4:1 3 4 5 6 Vertical 3 4 5 5 2:1 5 6 6 6 3:1 5 6 6 6 1.5 4:1 5 5 6 6 Vertical 3 5 6 6

0.6 0.79 1 1.19

Table 2 S/D F Z

Vortex stability for various ow conditions and intake head wall slopes 2 Projected 100% A 100% A 2:1 3% B 3% A, 18% B Vertical 15% B Projected 100% A 100% A 1.75 2:1 2% A, 21% B 64% A Vertical 2% B 20% A Projected 100% A 100% A 1.5 2:1 5% A, 41% B 80% A Vertical 4% B 23% A

0.6 1.19

Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 48, No. 1 (2010)

Effect of intake head wall and trash rack on vortices

111

Table 3 Vortex type with presence of trash rack S/D F Z 2:1 2 3 3 4 3:1 1 2 3 4 2 4:1 2 2 3 4 Vertical 1 1 2 3 2:1 3 4 5 6 3:1 4 4 5 5 1.75 4:1 3 3 4 5 Vertical 2 3 4 4 2:1 5 5 6 6 3:1 4 5 5 6 1.5 4:1 4 5 5 6 Vertical 3 5 5 6

0.6 0.79 1 1.19

where T is the trash rack opening, equal to 0.75 for trash rack presence. Without a trash rack, T 1.0. Based on all test data, a relationship was developed between the circulation number and the vortex type (Fig. 3). Three distinct zones of vortex types are observed. From Eq. (6), the vortex type can then be specied from Fig. 3.

4.5
Downloaded At: 04:02 28 December 2010

Calculating critical submergence depth

As shown in Fig. 3, a vortex stronger than or equal to Type 5 results in NG . 0.016. Inserting into Eq. (6), the critical submerged depth then is    0:008 Sc 1 2 F0:334 T 0:369 D 5 Z (7)

Figure 4 Comparison of empirical Eqs (2) and (3) with Eq. (7)

Similarly, from Fig. 3, NG . 0.011 denes a vortex stronger than Type 3. Thus, the critical submerged depth then is    0:008 Sc 1 2:43 F0:334 T 0:369 D 3 Z (8)

and the agreement was found to be good. Equation (7) for calculating the submerged depth of vortex Types 5 and 6 is also compared with the empirical Eqs (2) and (3) in Fig. 4. The slope of the intake head wall is observed to affect the relationship between F and Sc/D, an effect not considered in previous empirical equations.

5 To check Eqs. (7) and (8), additional data were collected for 10 various S/D for which the vortex type was measured in terms of F and Z. The submerged depth at which vortex Types 5 and 3 were formed was then compared with the predictions

Conclusions

Figure 3 Relationship between vortex type and measured circulation number NG

Using physical model data, the effects of intake head wall slope and trash rack presence on the type and strength of intake vortices, as well as the critical submerged depth has been studied. The vortex strength was determined by measuring the tangential vortex velocity using ADV. The laboratory tests indicate that the intake head wall slope does affect the type and strength of the vortices, especially at lower Froude numbers F. In addition, it was demonstrated that as the intake head wall slope increases, vortices become more unstable. For example, for F 0.6, stable vortices of Type 6 were always observed at the projected intake, whereas with the vertical intake head wall, vortices were reduced to Types 2 and 3. With trash rack presence, the vortex strength was further reduced, indicating a lower critical submergence depth. Equations among the circulation number, the vortex type and the remaining test parameters were developed. Finally, an equation for the critical intake submergence considering the intake head wall slope and trash rack presence is given. The slope of the intake head wall was demonstrated to affect these relationships signicantly.

112

H. Sarkardeh et al.

Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 48, No. 1 (2010)

Acknowledgements All experiments were conducted at the Water Research Institute, afliated to the Ministry of Energy, Tehran, Iran, whose cooperation is highly appreciated.

References Amphlett, M.B. (1976). Air-entraining vortices at a horizontal intake. Report No. OD/7. HRS, Wallingford, UK. Anwar, H.O., Amphlett, M.B. (1980). Vortices at vertically inverted intake. J. Hydraulic Res. 18(2), 123134. Anwar, H.O., Weller, J.A., Amphlett, M.B. (1978). Similarity of free-vortex at horizontal intake. J. Hydraulic Res. 16(2), 95105. Daggett, L.L., Keulegan, G.H. (1974). Similitude in free-surface vortex formation. J. Hydraulics Div. 100(HY11), 15651581. Gordon, J.L. (1970). Vortices at intake structures. Water Power. 22(4), 137138. Hite, J.E., Mih, W. (1994). Velocity of air-core vortices at hydraulic intakes. J. Hydraulic Eng. 120(3), 284297. Jain, A.K, Ranga Raju, K.G., Garde, R.J. (1978). Vortex formation at vertical pipe intake. J. Hydraulic Eng. 104(10), 14291445. Knauss, J. (1987). Swirling ow problems at intakes. IAHR Hydraulic Structures Manual 1. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 13 38. Odgaard, J.A. (1986). Free-surface air core vortex. J. Hydraulic Eng. 112(7), 610620. Padmanabhan, M., Hecker, G.E. (1984). Scale effects in pump sump models. J. Hydraulic Eng. 110(11), 15401556. USBR (1987). Design of small dams. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Washington, DC. Yildirim, N., Tastan, K., Arslan, M.M. (2009). Critical submergence for dual pipe intakes. J. Hydraulic Res. 47(2), 242249.

Notation D tunnel diameter F Froude number g gravitational acceleration NG circulation number r distance from vortex axis, radius R Reynolds number S submerged intake depth Sc critical submerged depth T cross-sectional trash rack opening V average tunnel ow velocity vu tangential velocity W Weber number Z intake head wall slope G vortex circulation y kinematic uid viscosity r uid density s surface tension of uid

Downloaded At: 04:02 28 December 2010