The HydroHelp series of hydro design and cost programs - a description with examples of program screens.

A series of programs called HydroHelp has been developed to allow engineers to obtain an initial assessment of a hydro site, with a minimum of site data. All programs use Microsoft Office, Excel 2003 on Windows XP. Some data on charts may be lost if run on older versions of Microsoft Windows.

The programs do NOT include any hydrologic or financial analysis. However, hydrologic

data can be entered into the programs by defining the operating hours on the turbines. The program will then calculate the energy taking into account conduit losses and all equipment efficiencies.

The user starts by using HydroHelp 1 for turbine selection (See the detailed description for this program). At 2.0Mbytes, the HydroHelp 1 is the smallest in the series. Nevertheless, it guides the user through the turbine selection process from a total of 28 types of turbines, ranging from very low head “pit” units to high head multi-jet impulse units.

Once the type of turbine has been selected, the user proceeds to the other programs, HydroHelp 2 for Francis turbines in surface powerplants, HydroHelp 6 for Francis turbines in underground powerplants, HydroHelp 3 for impulse turbines or 4 for Kaplan turbines, both in surface powerplants. HydroHelp 5 for pump-turbine developments is described elsewhere.

HydroHelp programs 2, 3, 4 and 6 guide the user through the design process, providing the user with prompts in the adjacent “Comment” cell, as to the options available, and the best choice. All the user has to do is hold the cursor over a yellow “Comment” cell, and a box opens to provide detailed instructions on data entry. For this reason, the programs do not require a manual. The programs are intended for use by relatively inexperienced hydro engineers, by providing an “expert guide” throughout the project design process. The programs calculate quantities and costs, based on the data input, for all the required structures, including dams (concrete, embankment central core or homogeneous, weir) and the electro-mechanical equipment, from initial clearing to the substation and transmission line. There is no upper limit on project size. The lower limit is at about 1MW, since micro- turbine costs and construction “sweat equity” are not covered by the programs. All cost data has been updated to North American 2008 costs. Equipment prices are based on using European or American equipment.

The HydroHelp programs have a large data input sheet. It includes all instructions on data entry.

Data entry cells are blue, comment cells are yellow, and red cells on the same line indicate that either iteration is needed or there is a restriction on the data range, where the data must be below or above a number provided in an adjacent cell. For example, the program will calculate the upper surge level in a surge tank, and if the tank is in rock, the level of rock at the tank, must be above the upper surge level. All cells with restricted data entry must be re-checked after completing data entry, to ascertain that they are still within the design limits.

There are several warnings to check the more important data entry if this is outside defined limits – for example, if the turbine net head has not been iterated close to the program-defined head, a warning will be shown. Another example is excessive speed rise on load rejection triggers a warning, with instructions for correction of data entry. If negative quantities are accidentally generated due to incorrect input data, a warning will appear adjacent to the cost line, and at the end of the cost sheet. All programs crash on a negative quantity, so care is needed in data entry. Where the user is using the automatic iteration feature in Excel, the program will NOT recover from a negative quantity crash, so frequent saving to file is suggested during data entry.

2

All HydroHelp programs have an input sheet where all input data is grouped. Although there is a

large amount of data input, 186 to 235 items in each program, all can be derived from maps and a casual site inspection with a GPS position locator, without having to resort to surveys and geotechnical investigations. A full site investigation is necessary if the assessment indicates an economic project. The following is an example of the design options available in all programs.

Estimate date 5-Jan-09

Fixed options for design of all alternatives of powerplant and conduit.

6 Currency, Canadian $ = 1, USA $ = 2. 1

7 Turbine distributor, steel casing = 1; concrete casing = 2. 1 Comment8 Horizontal turbine layout, maximum runner throat size, m. 1.7 Comment

9 Maximum allowable speed rise on full load rejection, %. 50 Comment

10 Runner diameter limit for umbrella generators, m. 3.5 Comment11 Turbine inlet valve below crane, yes = 1, no = 0 1 Comment

12 Powerhouse crane capacity limit for single crane, tons. 350 Comment

13 Project design standard utility = 1, industrial = 2. 1 Comment14

DATA INPUT SHEET - HYDROHELP 2 FOR FRANCIS TURBINED SURFACE POWERPLANTS

BAKER

The end result is a comprehensive pre-feasibility cost assessment with a 3-page detailed cost estimate listing quantities, unit prices and costs. Typical input data would be length of pipeline, whether buried or above ground, length of tunnel, crest length of dam, headwater and tailwater elevations, as shown in the following partial example from the input sheet for the Francis program -

14

15 Turbine characteristics. Comment 55.99

16 Rated head in m. Iterate to equal Cell F15 56.00 Gross head = 58.35

17 Rated PLANT flow in cubic meters per second 60.00 Plant MW = 29.45

18 Required number of units. 2 Unit flow= 30.00

19 Normal tailwater elevation in meters = 290.00 Comment

20 Tailwater temperature in degrees celcius = 10 Comment

21 Required runner submergence "S" meters = 4.00 Comment

22 Specified runner cavitation coefficient "k" = 0.006 Comment

23 Manual # runner blades (13, 15, 17 or 19) = 13 Comment

24 Runner blade number, manual (1), or automatic, (2). ------- = 2 Comment

25 Runner manufacturing factor "R" = 5.6 Comment

26 Plant capacity factor. Iterate to equal Cell F26. 0.596 Comment 0.595

27 Rated load servomotor stroke (0.9 to 0.97) = 0.97 Comment

28

29 Generator characteristics.

30 Utility (1), industrial (2) quality generator. = 1 Comment Comment

31 Generator power factor (0.85 to 0.95) = 0.90 Freq. Hz = 60

32 Generator inertia ratio "J", calc. "H" value in F32 2.050 Comment 3.57

33

34 Project hydraulics. Comment

35 Normal +ve waterhammer design for penstock % 47.5 Comment

36 Allowable negative waterhammer on penstock % 40.0 Comment 40

37 Design for turbine-induced runaway waterhammer - yes (1), no (2). 2

38

Note -

submergence is

positive below

tailwater, negative above.

Comment cells provide instructions for the user. The following is an example of the comment cell on line 21 describing preferences on unit submergence –

3

Submergence is positive below tailwater, and negative above tailwater. See Cells G21 and M21 for runner diameter and shaft alignment. Optimum submergence for horizontal units:- Runner diameter less than 1.8m. = about -2.5m. that is shaft center well above tailwater. Runner diameter over 1.8m. = about 0.5 runner diameter, (below tailwater) - both measured to one half runner radius above shaft centerline. Optimum submergence for vertical units;- About one runner diameter below tailwater. Usual range is from 0.7 to 1.5 runner diameters. Do NOT submerge unit more than about 2 runner diameters below tailwater. Deep submergence may require use of compressed air to mitigate any rough operation, and this is very expensive.

The programs calculate all basic structure dimensions, from reservoir wave heights and the

corresponding average rip-rap size on the dam, to the capacity of the powerhouse crane. All hydraulic computations are undertaken, such as governor open-close times, surge tank design, relief valve size, conduit friction losses, and provide a chart on suitability for isolated operation. Schematics are provided for surge and waterhammer levels. Sufficient dimensions are shown on typical generic sections of the required structures, to allow a draftsman to produce general drawings for the project. Charts are provided for turbine efficiency and for overall project efficiency, including conduit losses. Water to wire costs for the generating equipment are developed, along with cost of all ancillary electromechanical equipment, from intake gates to spillway gates and powerplant elevators. The following illustrates the program output data, all copied from the HydroHelp 2 program –

Surge tank module – calculates all tank parameters.

8485 Surge tank size and cost calculation. ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

86 Surge tank used, (1), not used (0). 187 Surge tank in steel =1, in rock exc. = 2 2

88 If in rock, conc lining (1), no lining, (0) 0

89 Elevation rock at top of tank, if in rock, m. 340 Comment90 Elevation at surge tank tee, meters . 335 Comment

91 Tank diameter based on min for stability (1), or larger, (2) 292 Tank min. diam for stability, m. 7.9 Tank cost $M 0.166

93 If tank diameter is larger, select diameter, m. 9 Comment

94 Turbine rated head, m. 56.095 Upstream conduit length, meters. 305

96 Acceleration head loss to tank, m. 2.47

97 Retardation head loss to tank, m. 1.84 Surge in tank as a % of98 Elevation of top of tank, meters. 359.4 turbine head 15.1

99 Elevation of bottom of tank, meters. 338.7 Should be less than 15%.100 Tank height, top to bottom, meters. 20.8

101 Surge tank height from T to roof, m= 24.4 Should not > 112m.

102 Page 9

Schematic of conduit hydraulics as developed by the program. Note that program will select less expensive HDPE pipe if suitable for pipe diameter and head. For large diameter pipes, the program can select Wheholite pipe if the pressure and diameter is within the range of such pipe. The programs include instructions to eliminate the HDPE and Wheholite pipe options if desired.

4

Total length of steel pipe which can be

substituted with HDPE pipe, m. 335

Maximum diameter for Sclairpipe, m. 1.475 Waterhammer at end of penstock, m. 372.1

Waterhammer % = 32.2

Maximum diameter for Weholite pipe, m. 3.2

Max theoretical length of HDPE penstock pipe, m. --- > 85.0

Selected maximum length of HDPE penstock pipe, minimum = 50m. = 85

Type of pipe selected --- > Weholite

Waterhammer level at end of pipeline, m. ---- > 355.1

Static head at end of steel or HDPE pipe, m. ---------- > 15.2

Intake 351.0 Flood level, m. 86.5

Head at beginning of pipe, m

16.0

11.4 Max head on HDPE pipe, m.

Elev, pipe center, m. 30.0

339.6

Max head on HDPE pipe, m. 30.0 65.4

Steel or HDPE pipe length, m. -------------- > 255

Max theoretical length of HDPE pipe, m. --- > 255.0 335.0

Type of pipe selected --- > Weholite

Selected maximum length of HDPE pipeline pipe, minimum = 100m. = 250 48.9

Total length from intake to surge tank or end of conduit, m. ---------- > 305.0 200 300.0 Penstock length, m.

Pipe diameter in meters ------------------------ > 2.685 Steel or HDPE pipe length, m. Powerhouse

Penstock diameter in meters ----------------- > 2.500

Elevation of end of penstock = turbine casing centerline, m.

285.6

Static head at end of

steel or HDPE pipe,

m.

Elevation at surge tank tee

or end of pipeline.

Static head at end of pipeline

and start of penstock, m.

Schematic for calculation of HDPE pipe length - for pipeline and penstock.

Note - static head

condition governs, since

waterhammer always

less than 100%.

Static head at end of penstock,

at turbine, m.

Programs will provide dimensioned generic drawings for all structures suitable for using in a report, as shown in the following example of a Francis- turbined powerhouse section, and a table of unit efficiency along with an efficiency chart.

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

Chart 2. Francis turbine efficiency versus power

80

84

88

92

96

50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Turbine power ratio to rated power %

Eff

icie

ncy %

.

At constant rated head

5

7273 Figure 2. Vertical section through small Francis unit.74 Runner diameter less than about 2.2m, and only one 17.0075 draft tube gate per unit. Crane span= 15.46 300.8076 5.18 292.6377 Crane rail level, m. 296.9478 289.947980 290.94818283 6.0084 2.8985 287.948687 294.7288 290.08990 286.47919293 290.00949596 2.48979899 6.56 9.04 1.32

100 284.23 Draft tube access level.101 280.36 281.26 DT gate sill El.102 Turbine inlet valve (not shown) distance between flanges= 5.09 meters.103 Page 15

Powerhouse width and crane span will increase to cover valve if needed.

155

156

157 Chart for speed regulation assessment.

158 Twater/Te Tmech/Tg Tm/Tg Tm/Tg

159 0.0 0.563 0.818 1.115

160 0.4 0.775 1.145 1.535

161 0.39 2.08 <<Project numbers, close, with valve.

162 0.26 0.85 <<Project numbers, open, with valve.

163 actual, close > 0.32 1.01

164 actual, open. 0.26 0.85

165 0.32 1.01 <<Project numbers, close, no valve.

166 0.26 0.85 <<Project numbers, open, no valve.

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183 Chart showing project speed regulation capability. Comment

Chart 3. Project speed regulation capability.

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Mechanical start time / Total governor time.

Wa

ter

sta

rt t

ime

/ E

ffe

cti

ve

go

ve

rno

r ti

me

.

Projects in this area

will not provide any

speed regulation.

Projects in

this area will

provide speed

regulation

on isolated

systems for

small

commercial

loads.

Projects in

this area will

provide speed

regulation on isolated

systems for industrial

loads, such as mine

hoists and electric

shovels, but NOT for

large electric arc

furnace loads.

Projects

in this

area

will only

provide

speed

regulation

on large

systems.

6

In the cost sheet, the associated program-calculated quantities are shown, along with a suggested unit cost (for North American projects) so that the user can input an appropriate unit cost. The suggested unit cost is based on work quantity, use of union or non-union labor and the site frost days. More frost days and smaller quantity produce higher suggested unit costs. The user has the option of entering other unit costs. For projects outside North America, the user can enter a fractional inflation factor of about 0.65, assuming use of Chinese electromechanical equipment, and then enter construction unit costs as a fraction of the suggested unit cost. The fraction would be based on running the program for a recently constructed nearby hydro project where costs are known, and iterating the cost fraction until a match is obtained with the project cost. The following is a partial example of the unit price costing sheet –

Work item. Unit cost.

Earthwork and clearing. Comment

10 Clearing, per hectare, $/H $17,100.00 7.6 $17,089.0611 Unit cost of overburden excavation, m3. $18.50 5,954 $18.4512 Unit cost of rock excavation, $/m3. $74.00 41,865 $73.7813 Unit cost of found excav in sand or gravel for cutoff, $/m3. $0.00 0 $0.0014 Rock excavation in tunnels, $/m3. $508.00 4,167 $508.4515 Impervious fill in cofferdams, $/m3. $70.00 2,866 $69.7916 Rock fill in cofferdams, $/m3. $96.00 6,688 $95.9117 Impervious fill in dams, $/m3. $55.00 27,885 $55.09

18 Filter material in dams, $/m3. $84.00 21,688 $83.7119 Rock or embankment material in dams, $/m3. $73.00 105,342 $73.2420 Rock rip-rap, $/m3. d50 size, m. = 0.28 $361.00 1,698 $360.8021 Sidehill rock excavation for pipeline, $/m3. $61.00 34,409 $60.7022 Sidehill overburden excavation for pipeline, $/m3. $0.00 0 $0.00

23 Side creek crossing, cost per crossing. $823,000 1 $823,18624

Estimated

quantity.

Suggested

unit cost,

based on

quantity of

work.

Finally there is a detailed 3-page cost estimate with unit prices and quantities. Construction time and required operating hours are all calculated, producing an estimate of annual operating costs. The last page includes a preliminary screening, indicating whether the site is attractive. The following is a partial example of the civil work cost output -

70

71 Powerhouse.

72 Overburden excavation, m3. 18.50 1,107 20

73 Rock excavation, m3. 74.00 1,441 107

74 Concrete, m3. (Excluding forms, re-bar) 1,060.00 3,403 3,607

75 Formwork, m2. 174.00 4,934 858

76 Reinforcing, kg. 9.00 480,415 4,324

77 Powerhouse superstructure steel weight, tonnes. 9,140.00 120 1,098

78 Wall area, m2. 214.00 909 195

79 Roof area, m2. 285.00 627 179

80 Total powerhouse civil work cost. ---------------------------------------------------------- > 10.388

81

82 Tailrace.

83 Tailrace overburden excavation cost. (m3). 18.50 362 0.007

84 Tailrace rock excavation cost. (m3). 74.00 446 0.033

85 Sub-total tailrace excavation work. ------------------------------------------------------- > 0.040

86

7

The cost for all the equipment is also determined as shown in the following –

88

89 Cost of major mechanical equipment, summary.90 Total cost of spillway stoplog equipment. 0.51991 Total cost of spillway gate equipment. 2.178

92 Total cost low level outlet stoplog or bulkhead gate equipment. 0.000

93 Total cost of low level outlet radial gate equipment. 0.000

94 Total cost of low level outlet downstream stoplog equipment. 0.000

95 Total cost of trashrack equipment. 0.069

96 Total cost of intake stoplog and/or bulkhead gate equipment. 0.705

97 Total cost of intake gate guides and hoist equipment. 1.183

98 Total cost of draft tube gate guide and hoist equipment. 0.462

99 Total cost of powerhouse crane. 0.675

100 Total cost elevators. 0.000

101 Total powerhouse ancilliary mechanical systems. 0.909

102 Sub-total cost of major mechanical equipment, except units and valves. 6.699

103

104 Page 35.105 BAKER106

107 Ballpark cost by quantities in millions $. -- Continued

108 Generating equipment and valves.109 Cost of turbine inlet valve(s), type. Butterfly 2.848

110 Cost of relief valve(s). 0.000

111 Powerhouse station service. 0.060

112 35.249

113 Sub-total cost of W/W equipment, including valve(s). 38.156114

115 Total electromechanical work cost, millions $ ---------------------------------- > $44.855

116

W/W cost of generating equipment, switchgear and controls.

The programs contain design options for use by utilities or entrepreneurs. For utilities, the quantities for the concrete structures are larger, since utilities prefer to provide more space for repair bays and around equipment. Also, equipment costs are higher to allow for the more rigorous standards for testing, inspection and installation demanded by utilities. Other options are also available, such as whether to use a surge tank or a relief valve on a long conduit, and program or manual optimization of the conduit size from intake to turbine. The following shows the conduit optimization options –

135

136 Conduit from reservoir to powerhouse. Comment

137 Number of conduits intake to powerhouse. 1 L/H ratio = 10.8

138 Automatic (1) or manual (2) optimization. 1 Comment

139 Select pipe diam (m) for manual optimization. 3.50 Comment. <<< NOTE

140 Select penstock diam (m) for manual optimiz. 3.20 Comment

141 Penstock steel ultimate & yield strength, Mpa. 482.5 Yield, Mpa. 344.7

142 Manual conduit optimization is assisted by an index of energy cost shown on the same screen,

allowing the user to find the optimum pipe and penstock diameters. Experience with program use has indicated that the automatic conduit optimization results in conduit sizes very close to the optimum. Optimization of unit size and number of units is easily attained, again assisted by an energy cost index where the user can immediately see the effect of increasing or decreasing conduit size or number of units.

8

All generating equipment data is calculated, as shown in the following screen from HydroHelp 2.

118 Turbine and governor characteristics. Select vertical axis.

119 Turbine draft tube rope frequency, Hz. 1.389 Comment

120 Draft tube rope frequency NOT close to conduit L/a frequency --- OK OK

121 Turbine runaway speed at maximum head, rpm. 579 Nruna/rpm 1.93

122 Turbine runaway speed at rated head, rpm. 566 Nruna/rpm 1.89

123 Turbine runaway flow, m3/s. 26.29

124 Time to reach runaway flow, secs. 20.98

125 Turbine casing inlet diameter, m. 2.263 Comment

126 Turbine inlet/runner diameter ratio. 1.21

127 Max. runner diam, m. & weight in tonnes. D, m = 2.052 Wt. Tons = 4.58

128 Runner GD2, tonnes-m2. 15.6 WR2 (lbs-ft) 92,596

129 Effective Gov. close time, without relief valve, secs. 8.7 Comment

130 Total governor close time, no relief valve, secs. 10.3

131 Speed rise on full load rejection, no relief valve, %. 57.1 Comment

132 Effective Gov. open time, with/without relief val, secs. 9.2 Tg (open) 10.8

133 Speed rise on load rejection too high, add inertia/relief valve/surge tank. Comment

134 Relief valve open time and turbine close time, secs. Not applicable.

135 Waterham. on relief valve/turbine opening/closing %. Not applicable. Comment

136 Relief valve close time with same waterham, secs. Not applicable. Comment

137 Turb. rpm rise, full load rejection, with relief valve, % Not applicable. Comment

138 Generator characteristics. Approximate rotor diam, m.= 4.46

139 Generator inertia GD2 in tonnes-meters squared. 474.0 WR2 (lbs-ft) 2,811,707

140 Generator inertia factor H in kWsecs/kva. 3.57 Comment

141 Generator natural frequency, Hz. 99 Pole height, m 0.97

142 Range of generator rotor weight, tonnes. = 72.3 Comment 54.2

143 Generator casing diameter and height (Ch), m. 6.37 Ch = 2.04

144 Unit mechanical start time, secs. (Includes runner) 8.20 Comment Comment

145 Suggested min. vertical axis unit spacing, m. 8.310

The programs include several safety overrides such as preventing the use of too small pipelines. All programs require some iteration of data, but this task is easily accomplished by following the adjacent instructions. For example, the programs calculate the head loss in the conduit and corresponding net head on the turbine at full load. The user has to change the assumed net head until it matches the calculated head. Another example would be the design of a sand settling basin, where the user has to increase the basin volume until a match is obtained with the program calculated required volume. For expert users on HydroHelp 2, 3, and 6 the programs show how to use the Excel iteration in the “Options” + “Calculations” screen. Automatic iteration does not work on HydroHelp 4 due to the numerous types of powerplant layouts analyzed by the program.

The programs all have cost summaries suitable for transfer to a report, as illustrated in the

following examples, again obtained from HydroHelp 2 – Summary of principal civil work quantities.

Total length of conduit from intake to powerhouse, m. 605

Overburden excavation, cubic meters. 5,954

Rock excavation, cubic meters. 41,865

Rock tunnel excavation, cubic meters. 4,167

Concrete, cubic meters. 20,580

Steel penstock and tunnel liners, tonnes. 565

Dam fill materials, cubic meters. 166,168

Total overheads as % of total cost. 20.6

9

BAKER Estimate date 5-Jan-09

Estimated cost, in millions of dollars. $ CAN.

Site access. 2.32

Clearing at structure sites. 0.13Diversion works. 1.64

Embankment dam, and weir spillway. 11.78Concrete dam and gated crest spillway. 27.91

Intake. 2.34

Tunnels and vertical bore. 2.95Surge tank cost, if required. 0.14

Steel pipelines and penstocks. 7.68Powerhouse. 10.39

Tailrace. 0.04

Total civil work cost, millions $ ------------------------------------------------------- > 67.32

Transmission and substation. 0.89

Cost of ancilliary mechanical equipment. 6.70

Generating equipment, valves, switchgear and controls. 38.16

Total electromechanical work cost, millions $ ---------------------------------- > 45.75

Feasibility studies and site investigations. 1.37Environmental work. 1.40

Detailed designs and contract documents. 2.85Site supervision work. 4.44

Contingencies on civil and overheads. 15.69

Contingencies on electromechanical work. 3.59Interest during construction. 8.06

Sub-total indirect costs. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > 37.39

150.5 $ CAN.Total project cost, including interest during construction, $M.

With HydroHelp it is very simple to analyze alternatives such as tunnels or pipes, number and capacity of units, spillway options, dam crest elevations, conduit diameters and so forth to quickly arrive at the preferred development, a task requiring many months of intense calculations without the use of the programs. Once the preferred layout has been determined, it is possible to further refine the project layout to arrive at:-

• The optimum number and capacity of units. • The optimum pipe and penstock diameters. • The optimum dam height and storage volume, in combination with hydrology programs

not included with the HydroHelp series. • The optimum combination of spillway gates – crest gates, weirs with or without rubber

dam crest control, or low level outlet gates. • The optimum powerhouse location on a river profile which flattens downstream.

The programs have been successfully tested on several projects of varying capacity and head, from small hydro sites, to very large mega-projects. Experience has indicated that data input for programs requires about 2 to 3 hours per development, and several more hours if optimization is undertaken. A full project pre-feasibility report can be completed within 8 to 16 hours, excluding any time spent inspecting the site. Since the programs crash on accidental generation of a negative quantity, experience has indicated that it is preferable to first prepare a sketch of the project arrangement before entering data.

Program descriptions follow, with typical illustrations only for HydroHelp 3 and 4 since

examples have already been shown for HydroHelp 2.

10

1. HydroHelp 2 Francis. For projects with Francis turbines in surface powerplants. Size 56.2Mb with 235 inputs.

The program produces 36 pages of detailed data on the project. All inputs have been grouped

together on a 7-page input sheet. The program produces charts of; (1) turbine efficiency-flow and (2) efficiency-power, (3) overall efficiency-flow, (4) generator power-flow, (5) suitability for “off-grid” or isolated operation, and (6) turbine-conduit efficiency to flow at constant head. There are options for single or multiple conduits. The program optimizes the conduit diameter, while offering the user a manual conduit optimization option, with an index of cost/kWh to assist optimization. Conduit losses (through above-ground or buried pipelines/penstocks, tunnels and shafts) are calculated, and included in the estimate of energy. There are options for the inclusion of a surge tank, and/or a relief valve, and their sizes are calculated. Such details as turbine governor open-close times, powerhouse crane span, and wave run-up on the dam, (concrete, rock or homogeneous) are all determined. For the dam, there are three diversion options, by tunnel, by pipe through the cofferdams and dam, and by flow through spillway bays where the ogee is left out. Harmonic interactions between the sound wave travel times for the penstock and draft tube surge frequency are calculated. 27 generic drawings are provided with dimensions for all structures, especially the powerhouse, shown in plan and section for both vertical and horizontal axis units.

2. HydroHelp 3 Impulse. For projects with impulse turbines. Size 6.4Mb with 186 inputs.

The program follows the same format as HydroHelp Francis, with an output of 23 pages. All

inputs have been grouped together on a 6-page input sheet. However, in this case, the program selects the optimum impulse turbine from a list of 13 different types, ranging from small horizontal single jet

25

26

27

28

29 Turbine type Suitability Comment Cost $M30 Horiz. axis, 1 jet, 1 runner impulse turbine. ----YES ---- 1 9.419

31 Horiz. axis, 2 jet, 1runner impulse turbine. ----YES ---- 1 6.114

32 Horiz. axis, 1 jet, 2 runner impulse turbine. ----YES ---- 1 7.404

33 Horiz. axis, 2 jet/r, 2 run. impulse turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

34 Vert. axis, 1 jet, 1 runner impulse turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

35 Vert. axis, 2 jet, 1 runner impulse turbine. ----YES ---- 1 7.657

36 Vert. axis, 3 jet, 1 runner impulse turbine. ----YES ---- 1 7.799

37 Vert. axis, 4 jet, 1 runner impulse turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

38 Vert. axis, 5 jet, 1 run. impulse turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

39 Vert. axis, 6 jet, 1 run. impulse turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

40 Horiz. axis, 1 jet, 1 turgo runer turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

41 Horiz. axis, 2 jet, 1 turgo runner turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

42 Horiz. axis BANKI (Ossberger) turbine. -------------- 1 0.000

43

Horizontal axis, 2 jet, 1runner impulse

turbine.RECOMMENDED TURBINE TYPE

units to large vertical axis 6-jet turbines. Turgo and Banki (cross-flow) turbines are also included. The program-selected turbine can be de-selected, if the choice is not suitable for other reasons. Charts are provided for overall efficiency-flow for the program or user-selected turbine, and the isolated speed operating characteristic. Spillway options include weirs, with and without rubber dam crest control, Tainter or flat spillway gates, and Tainter low level outlet gates. The program provides efficiency-flow and efficiency-power charts for all turbine types. There are options for weir spillways and low level outlets. The conduit size can be optimized either by the program or manually, and there is an index of cost per kWh to assist in the manual optimization. There is an option for the inclusion of a surge tank, and size

11

is calculated. 15 dimensioned generic drawings for all structures are provided. The previous chart illustrates the turbine options. A dimensioned section through the powerhouse as generated by the program, with the following being an example for a large unit for a large impulse unit powerhouse –

149150 Powerhouse plan dimensions.151 Total length, m. 26.82152 Full width including piping and control rooms, m. 23.26153 Length of repair bay, m. 5.16154 Distance between unit centerlines, m. 10.33155 Powerhouse height, above repair bay floor, m. 20.21156 Vertical axis unit Crane span. 9.26 10.26157 Crane capacity in tonnes. 80.2158159 3.35160 346.70161 El.162 9.36163164 5.96 330.43165166 El. 4.61167168 9.16169 Repair170 bay floor171 8.16 El. 326.49172173 4.83174 El. 324.33175176 Flood TWL177 elevation178 322.00179 323.01180 TWL. El, m.181 317.00182183 318.67184 1.098185 7.33186187188 Runner removal passage width, m. 2.33189190191

BAKER CREEK

Note - Impulse units MUST be set above flood level. They cannot operate submerged, unless tailwater depressed by compressed air, and this is expensive due to high demand for air. Air

demand is high due to loss from enrtainment as water falls off runner.

Unit shaft alignment isVertical

As selected by program.

oTop of generator

Valve diameter, m.

A different drawing showing a horizontal axis impulse or Turgo unit powerhouse would have been generated if the program had selected such a unit.

The following shows a typical project summary sheet as generated by the program and available

in all programs –

12

BAKER CREEK Date -- 5-Jan-09

6 Project parameters determined by program.7 Turbine output at rated head and flow, MW. 39.848 Powerplant output at rated head and flow, MW. 77.319 Turbine rated net head, m. 451.30

10 Conduit average diameter, m. 1.983

11 Powerplant average annual generation, GWh. 334.3

12 Estimated cost, in millions of dollars. $100.2 CAN $1314 Summary of input data for project.15 Number of turbines and flow in m3. 2 Flow, m3 20.0016 Access road and transmission lengths, km. 1.217 Headpond full supply level, m. (FSL) 847.30 LSL = 844.0018 Normal tailwater level at powerhouse, m. 317.00 Trans. km. 119 Number of water conduits to powerhouse. 1 Length to head20 Conduit length, intake to powerhouse, m. 4,823 ratio ------ > 10.72122 Summary of program output for some parameters. Powerplant utilization

23 Overburden excavation, cubic meters. 110,477 factor, % 46.024 Rock tunnel excavation, cubic meters. 0 Rock Ex. m3. 21,82125 Steel penstock and tunnel liner weight, tonnes. 2,381 Turbine runner outside

26 Total concrete volume, cubic meters. 7,327 diameter, m. 2.12

27 Turbine type selected by program.28

29Turbine type eliminated from consideration during

operation of program.30 Powerhouse footprint, width and length, m. 23.3 Length, m 26.8

31 Overall turbine + generator + transformer + conduit efficiency at full load, %. 72.6732 Average overall project efficiency, excluding transmission, for energy calc. % 81.0433 Head loss in conduit as a % of rated net head on turbine --------- > 15.63 Comment34 Speed regulation on an isolated system. Absolutely no speed regulation capability.35 Estimated time required for construction, months. -------------------------------------- > 31

3637 Data input and options selected during data input, may vary for each alternative.38 Surge tank on conduit. No Diam., m. 0.0039 Turbine equipped with inlet valve. Yes Diam., m. 1.09840 Conduit optimization option. By program4142 Fixed options for design of all alternatives of powerplant and conduit.43 Currency, Canadian $ = 1, USA $ = 2. -------------------------------- 144 Industrial design (1) or Utility design (2) -------------------------------- 1 Comment

45 Industrial generator (1) or utility generator (2). ---------------------- 1

46 De-sander required at intake, yes = 1, no = 0. --------------------- 047 Dam design for extreme flood, no = 1, yes = 2. ------------------- 1

Page 1.

None.

An EXCEL program for optimizing hydro powerhouse capacity and conduit size.

Executive summary

HydroHelp 3 Impulse

Vertical axis, 6 jet, 1 runner impulse

turbine.

13

3. HydroHelp 4 Kaplan. For projects with Kaplan turbines. Size 18.0Mb with 204 inputs.

The program follows the same format as HydroHelp Francis, with an output of 26 pages. However, in this case, the program selects the optimum Kaplan turbine from a list of 8 different types of turbines ranging from horizontal axis bulb units and inclined axis SAXO units to large vertical axis concrete semi-spiral cased turbines. The selected turbine can be de-selected, if the choice is not suitable for other reasons. The program includes charts for; (1) turbine efficiency-flow for the selected unit, and (2) the speed regulation characteristic. The program provides efficiency-flow and efficiency-power charts for all turbine types. 40 generic drawings are provided with dimensions for all structures, especially the different types of powerplants, shown in plan and section for both vertical and horizontal axis units. Diversion options are provided, similar to those for the Francis program. The following shows the turbine options covered by the program –

38

39

40

41

42 Turbine de-selection, see relative cost/MW of suitable W/W equipment plus PH in column F.

43 Inclined axis very low head Pit Kaplan gear turb. ------------------ 1 0.00

44 Horizontal axis mini bulb Kaplan turbine. ------------------ 1 0.00

45 Horizontal axis "S" type Kaplan turbine. ------------------ 1 0.00

46 Horizontal axis Bulb Kaplan turbine. ------------------ 1 0.00

47 Vert axis small Kaplan turbine, elbow draft tube. ------------------ 1 0.00

48 Vert or incl. axis "Saxo" axial flow Kaplan turb. ---- YES ---- 1 1.96

49 Vertical axis Kaplan turbine, concrete casing. ------------------ 1 0.00

50 Vertical axis Kaplan turbine, steel casing. ---- YES ---- 1 2.13

51 Input page 1

Recommended type of reaction turbine, including effect of powerhouse cost.

Vertical or inclined axis "Saxo" axial flow Kaplan turbine.

The program will calculate the added cost of draft tube gates capable of closing against the flow without input from the user, if such is required by the project layout – based on the selected type of turbine, and the draft tube type is defined as shown in the following figure -

52BAKER RAPIDS

53

54 Draft tube gates. Width, = 6.04 Height, = 6.01

55 Number of openings. 1 W^2Hh = 748

56 Head to sill, m. 6.4

57 Sets of gates. 1

58 Monorail hoists. 1

59 Gantries. 0

60 Hoist capacity. 7.8

61 Supply. Install.

62 Gates. 0.278 0.013

63 Guides. 0.000 0.000

64 Hoist and lifting beam. 0.095 0.009

65 Total. 0.373 0.022

66 Total cost of draft tube gate guide and hoist equipment. 0.395

67

Mechanical equipment.

Standard bulkhead draft tube

gates are used.

As mentioned, there are generic dimensioned drawings for all structures, and the following is an example of some drawings for a large spillway –

14

105 Spillways - drawings. BAKER RAPIDS106107 Gate hoist108 SPILLWAY tower floor109 CREST GATES level, m.110 317.46111112 Max flood El, m.113 Monorail hoist 296.00114 for stoplogs.115 Minimum elev, m. FSL El, m.116 305.71 300.00117118119 Service road 120 deck level, m. Spillway gate121 302.06 sill elevation, m.122 286.59123 LSL El, m.124 295.00125 Profile suitable126 Gate height, m. for a spillway127 13.4 chute in rock.128129 Average found.130 level, m.131 283.91132133134 Hoisthouse135 access stairs.136137 Emergency 6.95138 exit ladders139 Stoplog storage140 area.141 Number of Gate width, m.142 spillway gates. 4.95143 2144 Pier width, m.145 2.15146 Total height 147 of structure, m. Total width of148 36.85 spillway, m.149 16.34150151152153154155156 Page 12

Section B - Bthrough gatecenterline.

LONGITUDINAL ELEVATION

15

Dimensioned drawings of the powerhouse are developed as shown in the following two examples, for a large powerhouse, and for a small “SAXO” equipped powerhouse –

364 PAGATO RAPIDS365 VERTICAL AXIS, LARGE KAPLAN TURBINE - CONCRETE CASE GENERATING UNIT.366 Headpond flood level, m. 221.75 Tailwater flood level, m. 212.00367 Headpond lowest level, m. 221.65 Normal tailwater level, m. 210.00368 Powerhouse roof level, m. ----- > 235.85 may not coincide with top of dam.369 Combination of capacity, head and flow IS suitable for this type of turbine.370 PH roof 371 level, m.372 235.85 373 Dam crest Crane span, m374 elev, m. 16.70375 222.15376 Crane hook377 Elevation top over floor, min.378 of racks, 9.60 379 m. 219.25380 PH floor level381 4.88 220.68382383 215.81 DT crane hook384 8.08 level, min, m.385 Intake gate 221.05386 sill level, m.387 206.92 7.06388 Rack sill, Elev. Center389 m. 208.14 runner hub, m.390 Runner diam 204.77 391 m. 5.387392 DT gate height393 13.47 10.05394395 Draft tube sill396 193.08397398 197.94399400 Vertical section through unit centerline.401 Elevation, bottom of draft tube, m. 191.30 Draft tube gate width, m. 7.61402 Elevation of bottom of runner hub, m. 202.07 Number of draft tube piers = 2403 Total width of draft tube, EXCLUDING end piers, m. 16.70 20.47404 Elevation of bottom of generator lower bracket. 216.16405 Elevation of draft tube access gallery 197.94 Number of intake piers = 2406 Elevator travel distance, m. 25.01407 Distance unit centerline to upstream crane rail, m. 6.67408 Distance unit centerline to downstream crane rail, m. 10.03409 Elevation draft tube gantry hook, m. -----------> 221.05410 Approximate generator rotor diameter, m. ---- > 10.33411 Width of PH, upstream wall to end draft tube, m. 37.38412413414415 Page 5H

Note - powerhouse and draft tube dimensions apply to both

concrete and steel cased units.

Source - Hydro Quebec

16

260 BAKER RAPIDS261 Vertical or inclined axis "SAXO" Kaplan turbine. Runner diam, m. 3.198262263264265266267268269270271272273 Roof top El.274 292.07275 Generator276 top El.277 286.59278 Combination of capacity, head and flow IS suitable for this type of turbine.279 Roof hatch Approximate280 square, m. generator/gear281 5.46 height, m.282 El. 287.59 5.83283 Penstock inlet 275.50284 diameter, m. Turbine floor285 4.48 elev, m.286 Butterfly valve 270.27287 optional. Flood TWL288 8.89 275.00289 Normal TWL290 274.60291 Runner hub Cl.292 El. 271.87 Min. Submerg293 0.4294 8.00 Gate sill El.295 Runner diam 268.19296 m. 3.198297 Draft tube Draft tube gate298 length, m. height, m299 14.20 6.01300301 Unit spacing Draft tube gate302 m. 7.04 width, m.303 6.04304 Powerhouse305 width, m. Turbine floor306 13.43 6.48307 Powerhouse Powerhouse308 length, m. floor El, m.309 14.08 275.50310 incl. repair bay311 Page 5F

Note - normally this

type of powerplant

does not have a crane.

Equipment installed with mobile crane.

Alternative arrangements

Source - VATech brochure e21.60.30 CH 2000 ZB-01

Arrangement forvertical unit.

Source - Bofors Nohab brochure

OptionalNormal end DT liner

DT accessmanhole

17

There are numerous sub-routines within the programs, for example, the following is the data generated for the dam rip-rap, obtained from HydroHelp 4 –

17

18 Rip-rap design.

19 Effective fetch, km. 5 Comment

20 Design wind speed, km/hour. 100 or m/sec = 27.8

21 Max. wave height, m. And period, secs. 2.4 Secs = 4.1

22 Wave length, m. And slope a/l 26.5 a/l = 0.09

23 Wave run-up on dam. 1.27

24 Minimum freeboard, m. 3.39

25 Weight D50kg rip-rap and average size, Dm. D50kg = 1494 Dm = 0.83

26 Rip-rap thickness (m). 1.4

27

4. HydroHelp 6 Francis. For projects with underground powerplants.

HydroHelp 6 is based on HydroHelp 2, with the only change being in the powerhouse sheet, which has been revised to include an underground powerplant. In addition, the Google Earth sheet has been revised to plot the shape of the underground excavations on the Google Earth profile, thus allowing the user to verify structure locations and conduit lengths. Two profiles are plotted, one at a large scale, suitable for printing on paper about 11x17 inch, and a small-scale profile suitable for inclusion in a report, as shown in the following illustration. All hydraulic losses and waterhammer-surge calculations are included in the program, as well as generic dimensioned drawings of all structures.

1 = Intake and channel. 5 = Powerplant with elevator shafts to surface.

2 = Low pressure tunnel. 6 = Transformer and draft tube gate gallery

3 = Surge tank. 7 = Access tunnel to powerhouse and adjacent galleries.

4 = Shaft or bore. 8 = Tailrace tunnel. 9 = Tailrace outlet and channel.

Section through underground works - free flow tailrace tunnel alternative

100

150

200

250

300

300 400 500 600 700 800Length, meters

Ele

vati

on

, m

ete

rs.

1

2

6

57

84

9

Steel lined section

The program includes options for either a pressure tailrace tunnel, or a free-flowing tailrace

tunnel. The difference between the two options is illustrated in the following schematics –

209

210 Tailrace tunnel.

211 Tunnel length, m. 170 # of tunnels. 1

212 Tunnel - free flow (1) or full pressure flow (2) 1 Comment

213 Design water velocity for tunnel, m/s. 2.4 Comment

214

18

717273747576777879808182838485 Surge air vent shaft86 diameter, m. 0.0878889909192939495969798 Rock between galleries99 13.0 m. Thick.

100101102103 Page 16

Figure 3. Schematic of underground powerhouse with pressure tunnel and

surge chamber, with transformer gallery

upstream of powerhouse.

Figure 2. Schematic of underground PH with free-flow tailrace tunnel, and transformer

gallery downstream

of PH.

Transformer and draft tubehoist gallery.

Tailwaterlevel.

Tailwaterlevel.

Cable and vent shaft

In all programs, there are drawings for the dams, and where the dam is high, the sideslopes are steepened to reduce quantities, and this reduction is shown in a schematic –

High rockfill dams, Type 1. Schematic. Height over 40m, (1), not (0). --- > 1

1.57

Slopes x:1 x = 2.02

x = 1.83

H/2

x = 2.52 H 79.7

Rockfill reduction with steeper upper slopes in dam over 40m high, m3.

Reduction, m3. = 1,061,833

Upstream reduction, m3. 642,592 642,592

Downstream reduction, m3. 419,241 419,241

Generic drawings for the dam are included as follows –

19

52 BAKER MAIN DAM5354 Crest elevation, m. 247.66 Width, m. 11.055 Upstream and downstream slopes Height, m. 79.756 2.52 2.02 Wall top El 176.0057 240.05 11.0 Wall bot El 50.005859606162636465666768697071727374 Slurry wall option Cut-off depth, m. 1.075 Cut-off slope, x:1 = 1.776 40.3 <--Width at impervious contact, m.77

Upstream cofferdam - option.Dam type 1 - rock fill with central core.

5. Program printing options and output.

For printing the output, there are several options as follows:- (1) Print a one-page executive

summary and the cost summary, (2) Print the executive summary and the detailed 3 page cost estimate, or (3) Print a complete input-output.

All programs have an un-numbered cover sheet, indicating the estimated project cost, generation

and power output. The next (first) page is a summary of principal data, suitable for inclusion in an executive summary of the project. The program output pages include all pertinent input data, as defined by blue cells, calculated structure and equipment dimensions, quantities, charts, structure drawings with dimensions, and conclude with a detailed estimate of quantities, unit costs, cost extensions and cost of all electro-mechanical equipment, substations and transmission lines. Overheads for site surveys, engineering, and interest based on an estimate of construction time, are also included. Calculations are not protected and can be seen. Changes to the formulae and logic can be made by the user, but are not recommended due to the program complexity.

_________________________

Experience has indicated that users have their own programs for undertaking a financial analysis. However, to assist the optimization processes within the HydroHelp programs, a simple cost per kWh index is included along with an estimated time for capital recovery. With the latter, a final comment on development prospects is shown, ranging from “Too optimistic - check input data” to “Not worth further investigation”.

Finally, all programs have a smorgasbord of instructions, data, design warnings and approvals at

the side of the data entry cells on the input sheet. The following is a sample from HydroHelp 6.

20

Head iteration is correct in auto pipe/penstock optimization mode.

Go to lines 55, 147 and 148 to enter upstream water levels.

4.58 Runner diameter, m. and shaft alignment is ----- > Vertical

7.78 <-- Recommended submergence, m.

12.04

1% Turbine runaway-induced emergency waterhammer, %.

2 Design for turbine-induced runaway waterhammer - yes (1), no (2).

163% Runaway emergency waterhammer will affect thickness if over this %.

Steel surge tank cannot be used - ground level too high at tank site.

Surge tank height, m. if required.

Surge tank not required - governor time acceptable.

247.6 Top surge level, m if tank used.

239.8 Bottom surge level, m if tank used.

Tank min. diam for stability, m.

3.8 Upsurge in tank as % of turbine head.

Turbine speed rise, %.

Not applicable. Calculated % penstock waterhammer

598.770 Total direct cost dam, spillways and intake.

5,300 Calculated total spill capacity, m3/s.

0.0 51.4 m.

0.20 Rubber dam diameter, m.

Note - Top of spill gate BELOW trashrack sill. OK

No comment.

186.0 Downstream water level (D80), plus half gate height, m.

226.0 Trashrack sill level, m.

203.0 Top of low level sluice, m.

0.0 Flow per gate.

Mechanical start time, seconds.

Red cells in Column G indicate either iteration or some restriction on data entry values is

required - see adjacent comment cell. ESSENTIAL FOR CORRECT PROGRAM OPERATION.

Return to these lines after data entry completion, to check if values are still correct.

It may be difficult to obtain an acceptable combination of generator inertia, turbine speed rise, suge tank and relief

valve with a very long conduit on a high head development. Lowest cost usually requires a relief valve as the first

option, followed by added inertia and lastly a surge tank, the most expensive component.

Speed rise on load rejection is acceptable.

Note - height of a steel surge tank must not exceed

about 112m. The highest steel surge tanks in the

world are ar Bay D'Espoir, where height is 111m.

Cost becomes excessive. Try not to use a surge

tank in an earthquake zone, since earthquake

reinforcement is extremely expensive. Maximum

height for a surge tank in an earthquake zone is

lower than 112m.

Review all surge tank comments

AFTER completing all input data.

Length of each inflatable

rubber dam, m. Must

be less than

Spillway capacity is OK

The author and the seller do not assume responsibility for the results, conclusions or recommendations resulting from the use or application of the HydroHelp programs, nor

for achieving the best possible compromise between competing objectives, nor for achieving the desired objective.