Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cavitation Monitoring of Hydroturbines: Tests in A Francis Turbine Model
Cavitation Monitoring of Hydroturbines: Tests in A Francis Turbine Model
Cavitation Monitoring of Hydroturbines: Tests in A Francis Turbine Model
1
and P2, were mounted at 90º in the guide vane channels believed to be forced by the main hydrodynamic behavior
upstream the runner. And finally, two more dynamic of the flow. As a result, the vibration and pressure signals
pressure sensors, P3 and P4, were mounted at 180º on the appear to be amplitude modulated by these characteristic
draft tube. The location of the sensors is outlined in frequencies in the high frequency range.
Figure 1. To detect these symptoms, the signals are analyzed
on the frequency domain to identify the most sensitive
frequency bands. The presence of some form of cavitation
A2 is usually pointed out by an increase of their amplitudes.
A1 P1-2 Then, the raw time signals are filtered in such bands and
an amplitude demodulation processing technique is
applied to identify the main modulating frequency peaks.
The finding of synchronous peaks at the rotating
frequency, the blade passing frequency and/or the guide
vane passing frequency and their harmonics can be a clear
P3 P4 sign of the type of cavitation. The use of various sensors
located upstream and downstream the runner can help to
locate the region where that cavitation is occurring.
Abbot et al. (1991) were the first ones to apply the
amplitude demodulation technique on large hydro
Figure 1: Outline of the measuring positions. turbines for erosive cavitation detection based on the
good correlation found between erosion and high
The output signals were low pass filtered below 20 frequency acceleration levels. Bourdon et al. (1996)
kHz for anti-aliasing with a Chebyschev filter. A LeCroy continued this vibratory approach in both laboratory
6810 A/D converter was used to make simultaneous models and actual prototypes but mainly concentrated in
records with a sampling frequency of 50 kHz per channel. erosive leading edge blade cavitation. Later on, the same
author (Bourdon et al. 1996) leaded a deeper investigation
which found significant differences between the model
TESTING CONDITIONS and the corresponding prototype in terms of cavitation
A free cavitation regime and four regimes presenting erosion. It was concluded that the flow behavior of the
distinctive types of cavitation were tested. The operating model should be different than that of the prototype.
conditions were selected by visual observations through Thus, the strong influence of the particular turbine
the transparent draft tube cone with the help of an hydrodynamics was confirmed. More research work was
stroboscopic lamp. The operation regimes are designated carried out by Vizmanos et al. (1996) and Escaler et al.
by a name indicated between square brackets and they are (2002) to asses the previous findings with successful
described as follows: results. Nowadays, the use of advanced instrumentation
1. [NO CAV]: Cavitation free. for on-board measurements on rotating shafts of
2. [OUTLET]: Intermittent and weak outlet blade prototypes is being investigated (Escaler et al. 2003).
cavitation & overload rope. Nevertheless, the main research on prototype cavitation
3. [OUT_VK]: Outlet cavitation & von Kármán detection has been devoted to erosive leading edge
cavitation (intermittent) & overload rope. cavitation. So, there is a lack of experience on the use of
4. [BUBBLE]: Strong bubble cavitation & overload these techniques for other important types of cavitation
rope. such as bubble, outlet and von Kárman.
5. [INLET]: Pulsating inlet cavitation on extrados &
part load rope.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
At the top of Figure 2, the power spectra of the
METHODOLOGY vibrations measured on the bearing in radial direction
The methodology used in this work consists in (A1) are plotted for all the operating conditions. The high
analyzing the structure- and fluid-borne noise generated frequency content up to 25 kHz shows different levels of
during the final collapse of the vapor cavities in the form excitation depending on the type of cavitation. The largest
of bubbles, clouds and/or vortexes. The structure-borne amplitudes appear when strong bubble cavitation takes
noise is measured with high frequency accelerometers place. A similar behavior but with lower levels is found
mounted on the machine bearings and the fluid-borne for the bearing vibrations in axial direction as shown at
noise is measured with dynamic pressure sensors flush the bottom of Figure 2.
mounted on the wetted surfaces of the turbine. The most significant results regarding the dynamic
Due to the pulsating character of the cavity collapses pressure measurements have been found on the draft tube.
and to their high production rate, frequencies above 10 The power spectra of sensor P4 are plotted on Figure 3
kHz and up to hundreds of kHz are clearly excited when for the various regimes. In this case, the largest excitation
cavitation occurs. In a hydraulic machine, the generation, is found up to 15 kHz. As for the vibrations, the largest
shedding and collapse process of vapor cavities is amplitudes are detected for bubble cavitation but in the
2
low frequency range below 5 kHz. It is interesting to note The technique is purely digital and it is based on the
that for this condition two single peaks at the blade Hilbert transform (Escaler et al. 2006).
passing frequency and its second harmonic predominate
over the entire bandwidth. Table 2: Overall values of vibrations and pressures.
BEARING RADIAL VIBRATION (A1) Position/unit A1 m/s2 RMS P4 bar RMS
0,30 Band (kHz) 1-19 10-15 1-19 10-15
NO CAV NO CAV 3.1 0.6 0.0003 0.00006
OUTLET
OUTLET 5.5 1.0 0.0030 0.00043
Acceleration (m/s RMS)
OUT_VK
0,20 BUBBLE OUT_VK 2.6 1.2 0.0079 0.00287
2
INLET
BUBBLE 4.1 1.9 0.0223 0.00368
INLET 1.3 0.6 0.0023 0.00080
0,10
In Figure 4 the modulation spectrum obtained with
the cavitation free regime is compared with analogous
0,00 results obtained with outlet and outlet & Kámarn
0 5000 10000 15000
Frequency (Hz)
20000 25000 cavitation regimes for the bearing vibrations in radial
direction (A1). In Figure 5 the same is done for bubble
BEARING AXIAL VIBRATION (A2) and inlet cavitation regimes. Note that the reduced
0,30
frequency is used on the x-axis which is calculated as the
NO CAV
OUTLET ratio between the corresponding frequency and the
Acceleration (m/s RMS)
INLET
draft tube pressure pulsation (P4) corresponding to outlet
and outlet & Kámarn cavitation are plotted compared
0,10 with the free cavitation one. In Figure 6 the same is done
for the rest of cavitation types.
0,00
MODULATION 10-15 KHZ BEARING RADIAL VIBRATION (A1)
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Frequency (Hz) 0,07
NO CAV
Figure 2: Power spectra of bearing vibrations in radial direction. 0,06
OUTLET
Acceleration (m/s RMS)
0,05
2
BUBBLE
INLET 0,01
0,004 0,00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Reduced Frequency (-)
0,002
MODULATION 10-15 KHZ BEARING RADIAL VIBRATION (A1)
0,07
0,000 NO CAV
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0,06
OUT_VK
Acceleration (m/s RMS)
Frequency (Hz)
0,05
Figure 3: Power spectra of draft tube dynamic pressures.
2
0,04
3
MODULATION 10-15 KHZ BEARING RADIAL VIBRATION (A1) happens in both vibration and pressure measurements.
0,07 The less significant results are found for inlet cavitation
NO CAV and particularly on the bearing measurements. It is clear
0,06 BUBBLE
that no distinctive frequencies are found to be modulating
Acceleration (m/s RMS)
0,05 the high frequency band in this case. On the contrary, for
2
0,04 signatures have only been identified for outlet & Kárman
0,03 and for bubble cavitation conditions which were observed
0,02
to have strong intensity. On the contrary, the other two
types, outlet and inlet, were considered as weak forms of
0,01 cavitation by the visual observations. Consequently, it is
0,00 not surprising that the detection of the latter ones appears
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Reduced Frequency (-)
to be very difficult.
Figure 5: Comparison of free cavitation modulation with bubble
(top) and inlet (bottom) cavitation for A1. MODULATION 10-15 KHZ DRAFT TUBE PRESSURE (P4)
4E-04
NO CAV
MODULATION 10-15 KHZ DRAFT TUBE PRESSURE (P4) BUBBLE
4E-05 3E-04
Pressure (bar RMS)
NO CAV
OUTLET
3E-05 2E-04
Pressure (bar RMS)
2E-05 1E-04
1E-05 0E+00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Reduced Frequency (-)
0E+00
MODULATION 10-15 KHZ DRAFT TUBE PRESSURE (P4)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Reduced Frequency (-) 6E-05
NO CAV
MODULATION 10-15 KHZ DRAFT TUBE PRESSURE (P4) INLET
3E-04
Pressure (bar RMS)
NO CAV 4E-05
OUT_VK
Pressure (bar RMS)
2E-04
2E-05
1E-04
0E+00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Reduced Frequency (-)
4
cavitation. It can be seen that the cavitation modulation is REFERENCES
induced by the main pressure pulsations dominating the Abbot, P.A., Morton D.W. & Shanahan, T.B.,
machine draft tube. This seems to be logical since these “Hydroturbine Cavitation Detection Using Advanced
type of cavitation take place at the blade outlets and Acoustic Emissions Techniques”, ASME Hydroacoustic
downstream of the trailing edges. For outlet & Kármán Facilities, Instrumentation and Experimental Techniques,
cavitation, peaks at fb and at fb+ff are detected as well as 1991.
ff. For bubble cavitation, two peaks at fb and at 2fb are P. Bourdon, R. Simoneau & F. Avellan, “Erosion
detected which in turn appear with sideband peaks at the Vibratory Fingerprint of Leading Edge Cavitation of a
precession rotation frequency of the partial load vortex Naca Profile and of a Francis Model and Prototype
rope. Finally, it must be noted that with no cavitation, the Hydroturbine”, ASME Bubble Noise and Cavitation
fb peak is also clearly observed. Erosion in Fluid Systems FED-Vol. 176, 51-67, 1993.
Bourdon, P., Farhat, M., Simoneau, R., Pereira, F.,
DRAFT TUBE PRESSURE (P3) Dupont, Ph., Avellan, F. & Dorey, J.M., “Cavitation
4E-04 Erosion Prediction on Francis Turbines Part 1:
NO CAV Measurements on the Prototype”, Proceedings of the 18th
OUT_VK
IAHR Symposium, Valencia, 1996.
3E-04 BUBBLE
Pressure (bar RMS)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Scientific members and technical staff of the EPFL
Laboratory for Hydraulic Machines are thanked for their
help during the measuring campaign.