Advertisement

Journal of Seismology

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 1039–1053 | Cite as

New seismic array solution for earthquake observations and hydropower plant health monitoring

  • Galina N. Antonovskaya
  • Natalya K. Kapustian
  • Alexander I. Moshkunov
  • Alexey V. Danilov
  • Konstantin A. Moshkunov
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

We present the novel fusion of seismic safety monitoring data of the hydropower plant in Chirkey (Caucasus Mountains, Russia). This includes new hardware solutions and observation methods, along with technical limitations for three types of applications: (a) seismic monitoring of the Chirkey reservoir area, (b) structure monitoring of the dam, and (c) monitoring of turbine vibrations. Previous observations and data processing for health monitoring do not include complex data analysis, while the new system is more rational and less expensive. The key new feature of the new system is remote monitoring of turbine vibration. A comparison of the data obtained at the test facilities and by hydropower plant inspection with remote sensors enables early detection of hazardous hydrodynamic phenomena.

Keywords

Seismic network Remote sensors Structural health monitoring Hydropower station Turbine Vibration control 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Science (project no. 15-10-5-7).

Authors’ contributions

Galina N. Antonovskaya and Natalya K. Kapustyan designed the experiments and processed the data, and wrote the manuscript. Alexander I. Moshkunov developed physical layer of Chirkey hydropower plant network and data processing software. Alexey V. Danilov took part in data processing and observations.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abelev AS, Solovyova АG (1983) Hydraulic conditions of water discharge pass through buildings of under construction of hydropower stations. Izv VNIIG 168:71–78 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  2. Agafonov V, Neeshpapa A, Shabalina A (2015) Electrochemical seismometers of linear and angular motion. In: Encyclopedia of earthquake engineering. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 1–19. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-36197-5_403-1 Google Scholar
  3. Allen RV (1978) Automatic earthquake recognition and timing from single traces. Bull Seismol Soc Am 68(5):1521–1532Google Scholar
  4. Antonovskaya G, Kapustian N, Ngo L (2014) The seismic engineering investigation of hydropower station dams. Second European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istambul, pp 25–29 August 2014: 223–233Google Scholar
  5. Antonovskaya GN, Kapustian NK, Rogozhin EA (2016) Seismic monitoring of industrial objects: problems and solutions. Seismic Instruments 52(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beloglazov AV, Glazyrin GV (2009) Automatic system of control and diagnostic of hydropower machinery. Naychnye problemy transporta Sibiri I Dalnego Vostoka. 1. Pp 127–130 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  7. Bondarenko VB, Volshanik VV, Ivanova TA, Roeva LA, Fedorov AB (1984) Swirling fluid flow in curved conduits. MISI 187:107–113 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  8. Bryzgalov, V.I. (1998) From the experience of creation and mastering of Krasnoharsjaya and Sayano-Shushinskaya Hydropower Plant http://03-ts.ru/index.php?nma=downloads&fla=stat&idd=826 (in Russian)
  9. Bykov YA, Orehov GV, Churin PS (2014) The calculation of the flow in the flow path of the high-pressure Francis hydro turbine with locked wheel. Internet-journal “Naukovedenie” 2(21):1–15 http://naukovedenie.ru 178TVN214 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  10. Casoli P, Vacca A, Franzioni G (2005) A numerical model for the simulation of external gear pumps. The six JFPS international symposium on fluid power, Tsukuba, pp 151–160Google Scholar
  11. Chuhan Z, Jianwen P, Jinting W (2009) Influence of seismic input mechanisms and radiation damping on arch dam response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29(9):1282–1293. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daniell WE, Taylor CA (1999) Effective ambient vibration testing for validating numerical models of concrete dams. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(11):1327–1344. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199911)28:11<1327:AID-EQE869>3.0.CO;2-V CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Danilov AV, Antonovskaya GN, Konechnaya YV (2014) Specific features of seismic station installation in the Arctic region of Russia. Seismic Instruments 50(3):206–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Darbre GR, Proulx J (2002) Continuous ambient-vibration monitoring of the arch dam of Mauvoisin. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 31(2):475–480. doi: 10.1002/eqe.118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dekterev AA, Minakov AV, Platonov DV, Zakharov AV, Pylev IM (2015) Mathematical modeling of low-frequency pressure fluctuations in hydroturbine ducts. Fluid Dynamics 50(5):601–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fenves GL, Mojtahedi S, Reimer RB (1992) Effect of contraction joints on earthquake response of an arch dam. J Struct Eng 18(4):1039–1055. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:4(1039) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gupta HK (2002) A review of recent studies of triggered earthquakes by artificial water reservoirs with special emphasis on earthquakes in Koyna, India. Earth Sci Rev 58:279–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gupta HK, Rastogi BK (2013) Dams and earthquakes. In developments in geotechnical engineering 11. Elsevier, 246 p. ISBN 0444600558, 9780444600554Google Scholar
  19. Ibrahim SR, Mikulcik EC (1977) A method for the direct identification of vibration parameters from the free response. In the shock and vibration inform. Ctr Shock and Vibration Bull 4:183–198 (SEE N80-70092 01-31)Google Scholar
  20. Kapustian NK, Yudakhin FN (2007) Seismic investigations of technogenic impacts on the Earth’s crust and their consequences. UB RAS, Ekaterinburg 416 p. (in Russian)Google Scholar
  21. Khrapkov AA, Nikiforov AA, Skomorovskaya EYA, Garkin AS (2007) Automatic system of seismometric control of Burejskaya hydropower plant. Izvestiya VNIIG v 249 pp 32–38 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  22. Kirkegaard PH, Brincker R (1994) On the optimal location of sensors for parametric identification of linear structural systems. Mech Syst Signal Process 8(6):639–647. doi: 10.1006/mssp.1994.1045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Loh CH, Tsu-Shiu W (1996) Identification of Fei-Tsui arch dam from both ambient and seismic response data. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 15(7):465–483. doi: 10.1016/0267-7261(96)00016-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mivehchi MR, Ahmadi MT, Hajmomeni A (2003) Effective techniques for arch dam ambient vibration test: application on two Iranian dams. JSEE 5(2):23–34Google Scholar
  25. Manual on structural health monitoring by using joint seismic methods, including sites of their placement (2001) Edited by F. Yudakhin. Moscow: IPE RAS 36 pGoogle Scholar
  26. P 92-01 Manual for investigation of hydro-technical structures to evaluate their safety VNIIG. 2001. 24 pp. http://meganorm.ru/Index2/1/4293817/4293817178.htm (in Russian)
  27. Panov LV, Chirkov DV, Cherny SG, Pylev IM (2014) Numerical simulation of pulsation processes in hydraulic turbine based on 3D model of cavitating flow. Thermophysics and Aeromechanics 1(21):31–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Savich AI, Kuyundzhich BD, Koptev VI et al (1990) Complex engineering and geophysical surveys in the construction of hydro technical structures. Edited by A.I. Savich, B.D. Kuyundzhich. Moscow: Nedra, 463 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  29. Seleznev VS, Lisejkin AV, Gromyko PV (2012) Was it enormous oscillations of 2th hydromachine before the accident on Sayano-Shushenskaya HPP 17 August 2009? Hydraulic engineering 10:48–50 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  30. Simson DW, Leith WS, Scholz CH (1988) Two types of reservoir-induced seismicity. Bull Seismol Soc Am 78(6):2025–2040Google Scholar
  31. Singhal, A.K.; Vaidya, N. and Leonard, A.D. (1997) Multi-dimensional simulation of cavitating flows using a PDF model for phase change ASME Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, ASME. Paper FEDSM97–3272Google Scholar
  32. Spungin VG, Dubinya VA, Ivanchenko GN (1997) Quick diagnostics of structure and geodynamics in a rock massif based on analysis of microseismic oscillations. Volcanology and seismology 6:42–50 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  33. Standard: ANSI/ASA S2.47. American national standard vibration of building-guidelines for the measurement of vibrations and evaluation of their effects on building. Acoustical Society of America, 1990Google Scholar
  34. Technical guidance document 34.20.501-95 (1995) Rules of technical operation of electric stations and networks of the Russian Federation (in Russian)Google Scholar
  35. Trnkoczy A (2009) Understanding and parameter setting of STA/LTA trigger algorithm. In New Manual of Seismological Observatory Practice (NMSOP), edited by P. Borman. Potsdam: Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ pp 1–20. http://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/escidoc:4097 (accessed on 6 June 2016). doi: http://doi.org/10.2312/GFZ.NMSOP_r1_IS_8.1
  36. Ahuja V, Hosangadi A, Arunajatesan S (2001) Simulations of cavitating flows using hybrid unstructured meshes. J Fluids Eng 123(2):331–340. doi: 10.1115/1.1362671 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Xu Z, Miao X, Zuo H (2015) The research on pulsation of pump pressure in water mist system. Energy Procedia 66:73–76. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2015.02.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yudakhin FN, Antonovskaya GN, Kapustian NK, Egorov EV, Klimov AN (2013) Investigation of an external impact conversion into the strained rotation inside ancient boulder structures (Solovky Islands, White Sea). In Seismic behavior of irregular and complex structures. Series: Geotechnical, geological and earthquake engineering, edited by Lavan, O., de Stefano, M. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Springer, pp 3–14. ISSN: 1573-6059, ISBN: 978-94-007-5376-1Google Scholar
  39. Yudakhin FN, Kapustian NK, Antonovskaya GN, Shakhova EV (2005) Identification of low-active fractures in platforms using nanoseismic technology. Dokl Earth Sci 405(9):1356–1360 WOS:000234672700022, ISSN: 1028-334XGoogle Scholar
  40. Zaitsev D, Agafonov V, Egorov E, Antonov A, Shabalina A (2015) Molecular electronic angular motion transducer broad band self-noise. Sensors 15:29378–29392. doi: 10.3390/s151129378 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Galina N. Antonovskaya
    • 1
  • Natalya K. Kapustian
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alexander I. Moshkunov
    • 3
  • Alexey V. Danilov
    • 1
  • Konstantin A. Moshkunov
    • 4
  1. 1.Federal Center for Integrated Arctic ResearchArkhangelskRussia
  2. 2.Institute of Physics of the Earth RASMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Aleks Lab, Ltd.MoscowRussia
  4. 4.Université Catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations