Chapter 5 - Publications, US Army Corps of Engineers

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (4) The variation of efficiency with head can be quite significant at storage projects with large head ranges and at low-head run-of-river projects. %me sequential routing programs have provisions for modeling the variation of efficiency with head, and others can accommodatevariation with both head and discharge. Where only variation with head is ❑odeled, values of efficiency should be selected which are most representative of the discharge levels at which the plant will operate. When kW/cfs curves are used (see Appendix G), the variation of efficiency with head would be incorporated directly in that parameter. At other types of projects, the variation of efficiency with discharge can be an important consideration. Section 5-6k discusses the modeling of efficiency versus head and discharge in more detail. (1) Turbine selection is an iterative process, with preliminary power studies providing general information on approximate plant capacity, expected head range, and possibly an estimated design head. One or more preliminary turbine designs are then selected and their operating characteristics are provided as input for the more detailed power studies. The results of these studies make it possible to better identify the desired operating characteristics and thus permit final selection of the best turbine design and the best plant configuration (size and number of units). (2) Turbine performance data for various types of turbines is essential to the selection process. While data can be obtained directly from the manufacturer, it is recommended that field offices work instead through one of the Corps Hydroelectric Design Centers. Hydraulic machinery specialists in these offices have access to performance data for a wide range of unit designs from various manufacturers, and they are able to recommend runner designs that are best suited to any given situation. Performance curves can then be provided to the field office for the selected turbine design. (3) In preparing a request to a Hydroelectric Design Center for turbine selection, the following information should be provided. . expected head range . head-duration data (not required but very useful) ● design head (optional) . total plant capacity (either hydraulic capacity in cfs or generator installed capacity in megawatts) ● minimum discharge at which generation is desired . alternative combinations of size and number of units to be considered (optional) 5-20
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 . head range at which full rated capacity should be provided if pssible (optional) ● tailwater rating curve (1) The rated output of a generator is chosen to match the output of the turbine at rated head and discharge. As was discussed earlier, the head at which the turbine is rated can vary depending on the type of operation as well as economics. An example will serve to illustrate some of the trade-offs involved in selecting this rating point. (2) Assume that a power installation is being considered for a multiple-purpose storage project which is operated on an annual drawdown cycle, similar to that shown in Figure 5-12. The maximum head (head at full pool) is 625 feet, and the minimum head (head at minimum Pol) is 325 feet. From the initial sequential routing studies, the average head is found to be 500 feet, and that head is used as the design head (head at which best efficiency is desired). It is proposed to investigate a plant which is capable of passing 1000 cfs at the design head. (3) Assume that the turbine selection procedure outlined in Section 5-5f is followed, and it is found that a Francis turbine of the design shown in Figure 5-8 provides suitable performance for the specified range of operating conditions. Applying this turbine to these operating conditions, the performance curve shown as Case 2 on Figure 5-9 is obtained. (4) Rating the unit at three different heads will be considered: design head, maximum head, and minimum head. These are not the only options available. They could be rated at any intermediate head as well, but examining these three alternatives will illustrate some of the factors involved in selecting the conditions for rating a generating unit. (5) Consider first rating the unit at the design head. This would be a reasonable alternative to consider for rating units at a project with a head range of this magnitude. Case 1 on Figure 5-9 shows the performance characteristics of such a unit. The turbine would be rated to produce 36.0 megawatts at a head of 500 feet and a full-gate discharge of 1000 cfs. A generator of the same 36.o megawatt rated output would be specified. Note that the turbine would actually be rated in terms of its horsepwer output, but to simplify the discussion, its equivalent megawatt output will be used. The dashed line shows additional capability of the turbine which is not realized because of the limit imposed by the 36.O megawatt generator. 5-21
Page 1 and 2: 5-1. CHAPTER 5 DETERMINING ENERGY P
Page 3 and 4: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 erations
Page 5 and 6: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 In this
Page 7 and 8: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (SSR) me
Page 9 and 10: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (3) ~~e
Page 11 and 12: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 tailwate
Page 13 and 14: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 selected
Page 15 and 16: (6) It is difficult to generalize a
Page 17 and 18: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 tally. F
Page 19: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 where th
Page 23 and 24: ~ CASE 3: RATED AT MINIMUM HEAD I /
Page 25 and 26: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (7) The
Page 27 and 28: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (5) For
Page 29 and 30: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (1) Not
Page 31 and 32: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 river re
Page 33 and 34: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 TABLE 5-
Page 35 and 36: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 near ful
Page 37 and 38: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 both cos
Page 39 and 40: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 generall
Page 41 and 42: 450 400 1 * I USABLEHYDRO ENERGYIN1
Page 43 and 44: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 should b
Page 45 and 46: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (1) Head
Page 47 and 48: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 size and
Page 49 and 50: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 minimum
Page 51 and 52: 1500 \ \ 1400 \ \ 1300 \ \ 1200 i 1
Page 53 and 54: 1500 1400 {n\ 1 ‘\ l\ 1300 / \ I
Page 55 and 56: 1. (1) releases Compute Dependable
Page 57 and 58: 1300 , I 1200 i I I 1100 1000 300 2
Page 59 and 60: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 Figure 5
Page 61 and 62: kW=—= QHe (400 - 20 cfs)(31 feet)
Page 63 and 64: EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 (5) Ente
Page 65 and 66: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (1) Sequ
Page 67 and 68: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (3) The
Page 69 and 70: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 periods.
Page 71 and 72:
5-1o. bDDWiOnOf SSR to PrO.iects wi
Page 73 and 74:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 b. Bata
Page 75 and 76:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 portion
Page 77 and 78:
EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 make a p
Page 79 and 80:
TABLE 5-5 Factors for Converting Di
Page 81 and 82:
Routing Worksheet EM 1110-2-1701 31
Page 83 and 84:
Explanation of Data in Table 5-6 EM
Page 85 and 86:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 In the s
Page 87 and 88:
Equation 5-16 would be revised to t
Page 89 and 90:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 follow a
Page 91 and 92:
EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 the rese
Page 93 and 94:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 July 1985 power (
Page 95 and 96:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 July 1985 except:
Page 97 and 98:
EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 heavily
Page 99 and 100:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 energy.
Page 101 and 102:
1st reservoir storage above EM 1110
Page 103 and 104:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (4) Figu
Page 105 and 106:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 maintain
Page 107 and 108:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (3) Tabl
Page 109 and 110:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (3) In s
Page 111 and 112:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 The back
Page 113 and 114:
Maximize Maximize firm energy 74,00
Page 115 and 116:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (2) The
Page 117 and 118:
MAXIMUM POWER POOL POWER GUIDE CURV
Page 119 and 120:
EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 . to exa
Page 121 and 122:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (3) If t
Page 123 and 124:
EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 (3) ~ It
Page 125 and 126:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 QHet (18
Page 127 and 128:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 Figure 5
Page 129 and 130:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 assured
Page 131 and 132:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 ● a hi
Page 133 and 134:
i. Coordination with Other Entities
Page 135 and 136:
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 TABLE 5-
Page 137 and 138:
40, 35 .00 .00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15
show all

Chapter 5 - Publications, US Army Corps of Engineers

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?