Submitted:
23 October 2024
Posted:
24 October 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Fatigue Models for Destruction Analysis
2.2. Subject of the Investigations
2.3. Methods of the Investigations
- A1 – analysis of the operational history from the records of the monitoring and control system of the PHES “Chaira” and especially of the damaged HU4.
- A2 – creation of a Virtual Prototype based on a Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) model and the Finite Elements Method (FEM) model for structural-plastic simulations of transient, operating and emergency modes in order to identify the most loaded elements of the system.
- A3 – analysis of the working dynamic pressures through integrated CFD simulations of the transient, working, emergency and compensatory modes of the HU4, as well as the load rejection in the generator and pump modes.
- A4 – as a result of elasto-plastic simulations with the virtual prototype using the operational history of HU4, the most stressed elements of the system are determined and analyzed, with a focus on the defective stay vanes. The critical values of the strains and stresses in the failure elements are calculated.
- A5 – the final analysis is performed making the conclusions of material and low-cycle fatigue. It is estimated the probability of occurrence and avalanche-like growth of cracks, as well as the possibility of complete transverse destruction of eight out of ten stay vanes and a complete loss of unit operability.
2.4. Historical Records of the Loads and the Working Conditions for HU4
- S1 – nominal generator mode;
- S2 – generator mode at peak in transient mode, pressures exceed by approximately 12%;
- S3 – pump nominal mode;
- S4 – pumped mode at peak in transient mode, the pressures exceed approximately 7% the nominal pressures for the pump mode;
- S5 – load rejection in generator mode.
2.5. Design of the Virtual Prototype of HU4
2.5.1. Geometrical Model of the Spiral Casing and the Concrete
2.5.2. Finite Element Model of the Turbine, Spiral Casing and the Concrete
2.6. Materials Used for the Concrete and the Metal Structure of the HUs of PHES “Chaira”
2.7. Boundary Conditions for the Fluid Model
- Full pressure at the system outlet – 7 bar;
- Turbine RPM.
3. CFD Analysis for Detailed Determination of Loads
3.1. Computational Fluid Model
3.1. Results in Generator Mode (S1)
3.2. Results at Pump Nominal Mode (S3)
3.3. Results at the Load Rejection Mode (S5)
4. Results
4.1. Structural Mechanical and Elasto-Plastic Simulations
4.2. Analysis of the Possibility of Sudden Failure and Material Fatigue
5. Discussion
- The results of the fluid simulations of the loads during operation in the Start/Stop/Reversal modes and during Emergency Stops of HU4 in Generator/Pump modes have been used to the structural-mechanical model of behavior of the virtual prototype.
- The results of the elasto-plastic simulations of the stresses and strains for the different modes show with high reliability that the maximum stresses in the specific zones of stay vanes exceeded the allowable limit stresses for steel JIS G 3106 SM 50 A and for the concrete B25 in terms of yield strength.
- The above arguments confirm the hypothesis of the occurrence of low-cycle fatigue as a result of the occurrence of local stresses (cyclic, with the frequency of start/stop/reversal) above the permissible linear values for the corresponding material steel JIS G 3106 SM 50 A. This leads to the accumulation of micro-plastic irreversible deformations and to the appearance of low-cycle fatigue cracks.
- In the moments of emergency modes the intensive spread of micro-plastic deformations occurs. This is accompanied by even higher stresses due to the weakening of the load-bearing capacity of the stay vanes specific areas. The cracks that have appeared after a certain limits lead to an avalanche-like cracking of most of the stay vanes.
- taking physical samples of the damaged areas (cracks) from the front faces of the stay vanes;
- Study of the residual strength of the sample materials by experimental standard test in a certified laboratory.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/water/pumped-storage-hydropower (accessed on 24 July 2024).
- Punys, S.; Baublys, R.; Kasiulis, E.; Vaisvila, A.; Pelikan, B.; Steller, J. Assessment of renewable electricity generation by pumped storage power plants in EU Member State. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2013, 26, 190–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Robert, B.; Jackson, R.B. Opportunities and barriers to pumped-hydro energy storage in the United States. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2011, 15, 839–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egusquiza, E.; et al. Failure investigation of a large pump-turbine runner. Engineering Failure Analysis 2012, 19, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Momčilović, D.; et al. Failure analysis of hydraulic turbine shaft. Engineering Failure Analysis 2012, 20, 54–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorji, U.; et al. Hydro turbine failure mechanisms: an overview. Engineering Failure Analysis 2014, 44, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuo, Z.; et al. Pressure fluctuations in the vaneless space of High-head pump-turbines—a review. Renew Sustain Energy Review 2015, 41, 965–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; et al. A review on fatigue damage mechanism in hydro turbines. Renew Sustain Energy Review 2016, 54, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, A.; et al. Fluid–structure interaction mechanisms leading to dangerous power swings in Francis turbines at full load. Journal of Fluids Structures 2017, 69, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trivedi, C.; Cervantes, M.J. State of the Art in Numerical Simulation of High Head Francis Turbines, Renewable Energy Environ. Sustainability 2016, 1, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
- Yasuda, M.; Watanabe, S. How to Avoid Severe Incidents at Hydropower Plants. Int. J. Fluid Mach. Syst. 2017, 10, 296–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayano-Shushenskaya_power_station_accident (accessed on 4 July 2024).
- Price, J.W.H. The failure of the Dartmouth turbine casing. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 1998, 75, 559–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, X.; Fu, D.; Wu, H. Embedment of Steel Spiral Cases Casings in Concrete: Lessons from a Structural Deformation Accident in China. Applied Science 2022, 12, 8395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, Z.; et al. Effect of concrete cracks on dynamic characteristics of powerhouse for giant-scale hydrostation. Trans. Tianjin Univ. 2008, 14, 307–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Y.; Zhang, Q.L.; Wu, H.G. Reinforcement calculation for spiral casing embedded with cushion layer of hydropower station. Tianjin Daxue Xuebao (Ziran Kexue yu Gongcheng Jishu Ban). J. Tianjin Univ. Sci. Technol 2009, 42, 673–677. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, X.; Li, M.; Ma, Z.; Zhang, H.; He, P. Simulation and analysis of the constant internal pressure spiral casing with non-uniform gap. Shuili Fadian Xuebao. J. Hydroelectr. Eng 2009, 28, 75–80. [Google Scholar]
- Todorov, G., Kralov, I., Kamberov, K., Sofronov, Y., Zlatev, Bl. Failure mechanisms of stay vanes in a PHES Francis turbine unit. In Proceeding of the 13th International Scientific Conference “TechSys 2024” – Engineering, Technologies and Systems, Location of Conference, Plovdiv, Bulgaria, 18 May 2024.
- Todorov, G. Kralov, I., Kamberov, K., Zahariev, E., Sofronov, Y., Zlatev, B., An Assessment of the Embedment of Francis Turbines for Pumped Hydraulic Energy Storage. Water 2024, 16, 2252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Presas, A.; Yongyao, L.; Zhengwei, W.; Bao, G. Fatigue life estimation of Francis turbines based on experimental strain measurements: Review of the actual data and future trends. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2019, 102, 96–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://renewables.gepower.com/hydro-power/large-hydropower-solutions/hydro-turbines/francis-turbine.html (accessed on 24 August 2024).
- Fisher, R.; Seidel, U.; Grosse, G.; Gfeller, W.; Klinger, R.A. Case Study in Resonant Hydroelastic Vibration: The Causes of Runner Cracks and the Solutions Implemented for the Xiaolangdi Hydroelectric Project. In Proceedings of the 21st IAHR Symposium, Lausanne, Switzerland, 9–12 September 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Aliabadi, A.; Shamekhi, A. Von Karman frequency excitation caused cracking of the Karun III Francis runner. In Proceedings of the for HYDRO 6.04, Granada, Spain, 19–24 June 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Takero, M.; Masahiko, N.; Kotaro, T. Study of frequency band in Von Karman excitation of Francis turbine, JSME Journal of Fluid Science and Technology 2024, 19. [CrossRef]
- Liang, Q.W.; Rodríguez, C.G.; Egusquiza, E.; Escaler, X. Farhat M.; Avellan F. Numerical simulation of fluid added mass effect on a Francis turbine runner. Computers & Fluids 2007, 36, 1106–1118. [Google Scholar]
- Gauthier, J.P.; Giroux, A.M.; Etienne, S.; Gosselin, F.P. A numerical method for the determination of flow-induced damping in hydroelectric turbines. Journal of Fluids and Structures 2017, 69, 341–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trivedi et al., Fluid-structure interactions in Francis turbines: a perspective review. Renew Sustain Energy Review 2017, 68, 87–101. [CrossRef]
- Lyutov, A.; Kryukov, A.; et al. Modelling of a Francis Turbine Runner Fatigue Failure Process Caused by Fluid- Structure Interaction, Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science, September 2016, 49.
- Nicolet, C.; Ruchonnet, N.; Avellan, F. One-Dimensional Modeling of Rotor Stator Interaction in Francis Pump-Turbine, 23rd IAHR Symposium, Yokohama, October 2006.
- Chryssanthopoulos, M.K.; Righiniotis, T.D. Fatigue reliability of welded steel structures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2006, 62, 1199–1209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gagnon, M.; Tahan, A.; Bocher, P.; Thibault, D. A probabilistic model for the onset of High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) crack propagation: Application to hydroelectric turbine runner. International Journal of Fatigue 2013, 47, 300–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Xi,; Luo, Y,; Wang, Z. Fatigue Damage Assessment of Turbine Runner Blades Considering Sediment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2016, 54, 1–14.
- Biner, D.; Alligné, S.; Nicolet, C.; Dujic, D.; Münch-Alligné, C. Numerical fatigue damage analysis of a variable speed Francis pump-turbine during start-up in generating mode. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1079, 31st IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Trondheim, Norway, 26 June-01 July 2022.
- Hanel, B. FKM-Guideline, In Book Analytical strength assessment of components in mechanical engineering, VDMA Verlag GmbH, Frankfurt, 2003.
- Flores, M.; Urquiza, G.; Rodríguez, J. A Fatigue Analysis of a Hydraulic Francis Turbine Runner. World Journal of Mechanics 2012, 2, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birtarescu, E.; Câmpian, V.; Nedelcu, D. Strength Calculations Performed on the Spiral Casing of a Francis Turbine Operating in Secondary Control Regime. U.P.B. Sci. Bull. Series D 2021, 83, 261–272. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, Y.; Hwang, W. High-Cycle, Low-Cycle, Extremely Low-Cycle Fatigue and Monotonic Fracture Behaviors of Low-Carbon Steel and Its Welded Joint. Materials 2019, 12, 4111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huth, Hans-Jörg. Fatigue Design of Hydraulic Turbine Runners. Doktoravhandlinger ved NTNU (2005:19). Available online: https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/241313/125212_FULLTEXT01.pdf.
- Available online: https://www.ansys.com/en-gb/products/structures/ansys-ncode-designlife.



















| Generator mode | Pump mode | Compensatory mode | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 754 | 5 021 | 3 081 | 11 856 |
| Parameter | Steel HT60 | Steel JIS G 3106 SM50 A | Concrete B25 |
| Elasticity modulus, E, GPa | 209 | 200 | 30 |
| Poisson ratio, μ | 0.29 | 0.28 | 0.18 |
| Density, ρ, kg/m3 | 7850 | 7700 | 2400 |
| Yield strength Rp0,2, MPa | 461 | 334 | Not used |
| Tensile strength, Rm, MPa | 620 | 520 | Not used |
| Tangential modulus, MPa | 3300 | 3640 | Not used |
| Analysis | Loading mode | Pressure at the inlet of the turbine, pin, MPa | Turbine speed, nt, min-1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | Nominal generator mode | 6.96 | 600 |
| S2 | Peak at generator mode | 7.795 | 600 |
| S3 | Nominal pump mode | 7.1 | 600 |
| S4 | Peak in pump mode | 7.597 | 600 |
| S5 | Load rejection mode | 8.04 | 800 |
| Loading mode | ε - total deformations | N – number of cycles | |
| S1 | Nominal generator mode | 6.96 | 600 |
| S2 | Generator mode at peak in transient mode | 7.795 | 600 |
| S3 | Nominal pump mode | 7.1 | 600 |
| S4 | Pump mode at peak in transient mode | 7.597 | 600 |
| S5 | Emergency modes | 8.04 | 800 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).