Conclusions
-
1.
The presently used form of taking into account losses in a transition and velocity head correspond only to the initial conditions of the transient. It is recommended to determine the losses on the basis of experimental data with consideration of the actual ratio of discharges in the diversion conduit and surge tank.
-
2.
The calculations show that the refined consideration of hydraulic losses in the transition leads to a greater range of fluctuations of the level. Refinement is especially important for small lengths of the pressure conduits and small values of the additional resistance coefficient of the surge tank.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature cited
G. I. Krivchenko (ed.), Fluid-Mechanical Transients [in Russian], Énergiya, Moscow (1975).
V. A. Orlov, Surge Tanks of Hydroelectric Stations [in Russian], Énergiya, Moscow (1968).
N. N. Arshevskii, V. V. Berlin, and O. A. Murav'ev, “Mathematical modeling of hydraulic regimes at the junction of a surge tank and conduits,” Gidrotekh. Stroit., No. 3, 10–14 (1984).
P. G. Kiselev (ed.), Handbook of Hydraulic Calculations [in Russian], Énergiya, Moscow (1972).
G. I. Krivchenko, I. S. Ivanov, and A. P. Mordasov, Pressure Conduits of Hydroelectric and Pumping Stations [in Russian], Énergiya, Moscow (1969).
A. Anderson and T. F. Robbie, “Effect of equation formulation on the prediction of mass oscillations in closed conduits and surge tanks,” Third International Conference on Pressure Surges, Paper G4, Canterbury (1980).
Additional information
Translated from Gidrotekhnicheskoe Stroitel'stvo, No. 9, pp. 39–42, September, 1985.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zakachurin, S.V. Characteristics of the calculation of surge tanks of hydroelectric stations. Hydrotechnical Construction 19, 498–503 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01439466
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01439466