Chapter 5 - Publications, US Army Corps of Engineers

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EM 111O-2-17O1 31 Dec 1985 700 600 550 i= UI 500 k 400 350 ‘-~” “’{”> -———- DESIGN HEAD — .——-—- . I Rating Point for Case 2 1% MINIMUM HEAD 300 I o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 ❑ ADDITIONAL m ADDITIONAL DISCHARGE (CFS) OPERATING RANGE FOR CASE 1 OPERATING RANGE FOR CASE 2 Figure 5-10. The operating ranges and efficiencies for the alternative turbine rating points shown on Figure 5-9 5-24
EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 (7) The third option being considered is to rate the unit at minimum head. In this case, the turbine would be rated to produce 17.5 megawatts at a head of 325 feet and a discharge of 790 cfs (Case 3 in Figures 5-9 and 5-10). Using this approach, it will be possible to obtain the full rated output throughout the entire operating head range, and this may be a consideration if the projectfs dependable capacity output is of prime concern. However, it should also be noted that the maximum discharge at the 500 foot design head is only 48o cfs, well below the 1000 cfs requirement. To pass 1000 cfs at 500 feet of head, the unit would have to be rated to produce 36.4 megawatts at the rated head of 325 feet. This requirement could be met by installing a larger turbine runner of the same design. The corresponding rated discharge would be 1640 cfs. The larger unit will be able to capture some additional energy when high discharges are experienced in the low head range. This additional performance would be achieved at the cost of a larger runner, a larger penstock and spiral case, and perhaps larger intake and powerhouse structures. In addition, it can be seen from Figure 5-10 that the unit will be operating at relatively low efficiencies much of the time, which will result in a lower energy output over most of the operating range (compared to Cases 1 and 2) and which could result in rough operation of the unit. (8) It can be seen from the examples that matching the generator to the turbine at either maximum head or minimum head is not usually desirable, at least not for a project with a large operating head range. Rating a unit at maximum head usually results in an oversized generator and rating the unit at minimum head results in an oversized turbine. However, the example does show the general effect of varying the rated head on project cost and performance. When making the final analysis of a proposed powerplant, it is common to test a range of rated heads, as well as different turbine runner designs, using economic analysis to select the recommended plan. However, this would not generally be done until the project reaches the design stage. At the planning stage, it is usually satisfactory to consider only a single rated head, selected using the general guidelines presented in Sections 5-5c (3) through (9), but also taking into account the relationships described above. As with the turbine selection process, the determination of rated head should be made in cooperation with hydraulic machinery specialists from one of the Hydroelectric Design Centers. a. fitro~ This section describes the data required for energy potential studies. The data specifically required for a given study varies depending on the type of project and the method used for 5-25
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 and 20: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 where th
Page 21 and 22: EM 1110-2-1701 31 Dec 1985 . head r
Page 23: ~ CASE 3: RATED AT MINIMUM HEAD I /
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?