Irrigation 4&5 - Surge Analysis Report

Project : Al-Fayhaa Irrigation Network
Phase 4,5
Water Hammer Analysis THE RED SEA
COASTAL VILLAGE
INFRASTRUCTURE
PROJECT (applicable to
all the places)
THE RED SEA

COASTAL VILLAGE
INFRASTRUCTURE
PROJECT
Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Project : Al-Fayhaa Irrigation Network Phase
4,5
Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 1

info@waterhammeres.com www.waterhammeres.com
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction and objective of study .................................................................... 3
2.0 Modeling Software ................................................................................................... 4
3.0 Description of Network system ............................................................................ 6
4.0 Input Data ................................................................................................................... 7
5.0 Steady State Analysis ........................................................................................... 10
6.0 Surge Analysis ........................................................................................................ 13
7.0 Summary and conclusion: ................................................................................... 33
8.0 References ............................................................................................................... 28

4,5

1.0 Introduction and objective of study
A transient modeling study was conducted for the irrigation pump stations along
with the pipeline network to deliver the target flow to network 4,5 only. The
Network comprises 90, 130.8, & 204.6 mm diameter HDPE pipes. There are
three working pumps inside the pump room which in turn can direct flow into the
network. The primary objective of the study is to ensure the necessitate of surge
suppression devices, and design the suitable surge protection system if required,
based on potential operating scenarios. Additionally, the study was aimed at
identifying the transient pressures along the pipeline under different scenarios
and comparing them with respective design pressure.
Describe the scenarios

4,5

2.0 Hydraulic Software

4,5

The used software is Bentley HAMMER V8i Edition. HAMMER uses the Method of
Characteristics - the benchmark standard and unquestionably the most rigorous and robust
algorithm for hydraulic transient flow analysis. Algorithms like the Wave Plan Method (a.k.a.
the Wave Characteristic Method) compromise the accuracy of solutions by only computing
results at junctions. The Method of Characteristics computes results along the pipeline,
accurately capturing critical changes that could otherwise be missed – note, extreme pressures
don’t always occur at system junctions or local high and low points.
HAMMER contains the most comprehensive suite of surge control devices. It is available to
select from more than 20 devices and perform an unlimited number of operating scenarios to
develop the most appropriate strategy for surge mitigation. Protective devices include surge
tank (open, spilling, one-way, orifice, variable area, differential), hydro-pneumatic tank with
or without bladder, check valve, air release/vacuum breaker valves, surge anticipator valve,
surge relief valve, rupture disc, and more.
Control strategies include increased pump/turbine inertia, realignment of pipe route and
profile, pump/turbine operating schedules, valve operation strategy, placement of protection
equipment, and more. HAMMER contains all the commonly used hydraulic elements found in
pipeline systems, such as pipes, pumps, tanks, reservoirs and valves.
HAMMER is capable of accurately simulating a full range of transient phenomena including
some of the most computationally demanding situations like cavitation and column separation.
It incorporates a sophisticated algorithm for calculating the formation of vapor cavities and
tracking their movement and collapse, and its robust numerical engine seamlessly switches
between rigid column mass oscillation and elastic theory.

4,5

3.0 Description of Pipeline system
Pipeline system includes main pumping stations along with pipeline network to
deliver the target flow, Water is discharging through the network of total length
about 6,664 m. Figure 1a. shows schematic representation of the system
arrangement.
Indicate the surge vessel

Point A and air release valve
location
Pump Station
Point B
Figure 1a. Schematic representation of the system arrangement.

4,5

4.0 Input Data
4.1 Fluid Properties
 Density: 1000 kg/m3
 Bulk Modulus: 0.2290E+10 N/m2
 Kinematic Viscosity: 0.605E-06 m2/s
4.2 Main Pumps
 Rated flow: 18.52 l/s.
 Rated head: 66 m.
 Number of working pumps: Three pumps
Pump Head Calculations.

Calculating the total pump head uses the following equation.
Hp = Hs + Hm + Hf
Where;
Hp: Total pump head [m]
Hs: Total static head (The difference in elevation between the
pumping source and the point of delivery) [m]
Hm: Minor loss for fittings and valves [m].
Hf: Friction loss [m] .
Minor loss calculation:
Hm = K V2/2g
Where;
K: Minor loss coefficient
V: Flow velocity [m/sec]
g: Acceleration due to gravity [m/ sec2]
4.3 Main Pipeline Data
 Diameter: 90, 130.8, & 204.6 mm.
 Total pipe line length: 6,664 m.
 Material: HDPE
 Hazen William Factor: 130

4,5

 Friction Loss Calculation :
The head losses along the pipeline is calculated based on Hazen-Williams
equation.
Where;
Q : Flow rate in (mᶟ/s)
C : Hazen-Williams Coefficient
D : Diameter (m)
L : Pipe length (m)
Wave Speed:
C=
- Where Ef and Ec are the elastic modulus of the fluid and conduit, D is the pipe
diameter, t1 is the pipe thickness and Kr is the coefficient of restraint for
longitudinal pipe movement, ρ is the mass density

4,5

 Wave speed
Pipe Diameter (mm) Material Wave Speed (m/s)
90 HDPE 449.10
130.8 HDPE 447.80
204.6 HDPE 558.70

4,5

5.0 Steady State Analysis
A baseline hydraulic model was created by using technical information and the
network data into HAMMER program. Steady state analysis was performed
considering pipeline network information and pump characteristic data under
section 4 and from the provided steady state model. Any change in the given data
may cause deviation in the analysis results.
Figure 2a. shows the schematic profile for the pipeline from the pump station to
point A. Figure 2b. shows the schematic profile for the pipeline from the pump
station to point B (point A and Point B are shown in the schematic drawing figure
1a.). Figure 2c & 2d showing the steady state hydraulic grade line (HGL), and
pressure distribution for the pipeline, when all the operating pumps are working at
their rated speed, from the pump station to point A. Figure 2e & 2f showing the
steady state hydraulic grade line (HGL), and pressure distribution for the pipeline,
when all the operating pumps are working at their rated speed, from the pump
station to point B. As evident from these figures the maximum steady state
pressure in the network was about 6.57 bars, and the minimum steady state
pressure was 0.11 bars.
Here’s the pump flow rate and head obtained from the analysis, when all the
pumps are operating at their rated speed.
PUMP
NAME FLOWRATE HEAD
LPS m
-------------------------------
Pump-1 18.52 66.00
Pump-2 18.52 66.00
Pump-3 18.52 66.00

4,5

Figure 2a. Schematic profile for the main pipeline from pump station to point A.
Figure 2b. Schematic profile for the main pipeline from pump station to point B.
4,5

Figure 2c. HGL along the main pipeline from pump station to point A.
Figure 2d. Steady state pressure distribution along the main pipeline from pump station
to point A.
4,5

Figure 2e. HGL along the main pipeline from pump station to point B.
Figure 2f. Steady state pressure distribution along the main pipeline from pump station
to point B.
4,5

6.0 Surge Analysis:
Introduction
Rapidly Varying Pressure and flow conditions in pipe systems are characterized by
variations which are both position (X) and time (t) dependent. These conditions are
described by the continuity equation
And the momentum equation
Here H is the pressure head (pressure/ρg), Q is the volumetric flowrate, c is the sonic
wave speed in the pipe, is the cross sectional area, g is the gravitational
acceleration, ρ is the mass density and represents a pipe resistance term which
is a function of flowrate. Equations 1 and 2 have been simplified by considering only
changes along the pipe axis (one dimensional flow) and discarding terms which can
be shown to be of minor significance. A transient flow solution is obtained by solving
equations 1 and 2 along with the appropriate initial and boundary conditions. However,
except for every simple applications which neglect or greatly simplify the pipe
resistance term, it is not possible to obtain a direct solution. When pipe junctions,
pumps, surge tanks, air vessels and other components which routinely need to be
considered are included, the basic equations are further complicated and it is
necessary to utilize numerical techniques.
Graphical and algebraic methods for solving the basic transient flow (water
hammer) equations have been developed. These procedures are generally based on
the method of characteristics and require numerous steps or calculations to solve a
typical transient pipe flow problem. As the complexity of the pipe system increases,
the number of required calculations increases and for practical applications a
computer program is required. Various computer programs have been developed
based on these methods and procedures for handling pipe junctions, pumps, surge
tanks and cavitation have been included in some of these programs.

4,5

The method and computer program for carrying out transient flow analysis in piping
systems based on an alternate procedure for transient pipe flow analysis, this
procedure, referred to
as the “wave plan method”. This yields solutions identical to those obtained from
exact solutions or those based on the method of characteristics, but has the
advantage of using a simple physical model as the basis for its developments.
Because of this, the engineer will gain a better understanding of the mechanics of
transient pipe flow, Also, relationships for the inclusion of various components such
as pipe junctions, pumps, surge tanks, air vessel, check valves, pressure relief valves
and other components can be developed in a straightforward fashion for general
applications.
The wave plan method is based on the concept that the transient pipe flow results
from the generation and propagation of pressure waves which occur as a result of
disturbance in the pipe system (valve closure, pump trip, etc.). A pressure wave
which represents a rapid pressure and associated flow change. travels at sonic
velocity for the liquid-pipe medium, and the wave is partially transmitted and reflected
at all discontinuities in the pipe system (pipe junctions, pumps, open or closed ends,
surge tanks, etc.). A pressure wave can also be modified by pipe wall resistance. This
description is an accepted one which closely represents the actual mechanism of
transient pipe flow.

4,5

6.1. Transient simulation without surge protection device
Transient analysis for the network system was carried out without any surge
protection device, to assess the potential for high and low transient pressures
following a pump trip event. It was assumed that the worst case scenario would
be the power failure situation resulting in tripping all the operating pumps, in case
of operating all the three pumps at their rated speed. Figure 3a. shows the
pressure envelope, for the pipeline path from the pump station to point A,
following pump trip during a 600 seconds transient simulation, without surge
protection devices. The solid green line represents the maximum pressure, and
the solid red line for minimum pressure. The solid blue line represents the
pipeline profile. The same results is shown in figure 3b, in bar units. Figure 3c.
shows the pressure envelope, for the pipeline path from the pump station to point
B, following pump trip during a 600 seconds transient simulation, without surge
protection devices. The same results is shown in figure 3d, in bar units. A very
low pressure were generated in the system, the minimum pressure was about
-9.80 m, while the maximum surge pressure was about 6.57 bar. Therefore, a
pump trip event is expected to generate very low pressure, that calls for a
suitable and effective surge protection system.

4,5

Figure 3a. Max.& Min HGL along the pipeline path from pump station to point A -pump trip,
without protection.
Figure 3b. Max.& Min pressure envelope along the pipeline path from pump station to
point A - pump trip, without protection
4,5

Figure 3c. Max.& Min HGL along the pipeline path from pump station to point B -pump trip,
without protection.
Figure 3d. Max.& Min pressure envelope along the pipeline path from pump station to
point B - pump trip, without protection.
4,5

6.2 Transient simulation with surge protection device
Trials were attempted using different volumes of surge vessels to suppress the
surge pressures, and found out using 2 m3 Surge vessel adjacent to the pump
station. In addition of changing one of the existing air valves to be anti-slam air
valve. The combination of the surge vessel and the air valve is able to limit the
transient pressures to acceptable values. Figure 4a. shows the maximum and
minimum Hydraulic Grade Line along the pipeline path from the pump station to
point A, as a result of the transient analysis in presence of the surge vessel based
protection. Figure 4b shows the Max.& Min. pressure envelope along the pipeline
path from the pump station to point A but in bar units. Figure 4c. shows the
maximum and minimum Hydraulic Grade Line along the pipeline path from the
pump station to point B. Figure 4d shows Max& Min pressure envelope along the
pipeline path from the pump station to point B but in bar units. As evident from
these figures, the maximum surge pressure within the pipeline sections is about
6.57 bars. Also the minimum surge pressure is about - 0.33 m in the main
pipeline. Figure 4e shows the variation of the gas pressure inside the surge
vessel during 600 sec of transient analysis. Figure 4f. shows the variation of the
gas volume inside the surge vessel for the same case.
The Non-Return Valves-NRVs at pump discharge should be a quick dynamic
response, and should close in a controlled manner using the hydraulic damping
unit, or equivalent. The NRVs should be adjusted on site to have slower closure
rate for the stroke end, about 10%, to avoid slamming action maybe occurred.

4,5

Figure 4a. Max& Min HGL along the pipeline path from pump station to point A - pump trip-
with protection.
Figure 4b. Max& Min pressure envelope along the pipeline path from pump station to point A
-pump trip-with protection
4,5

Figure 4c. Max& Min HGL along the pipeline path from pump station to point B- pump trip-
with protection.
Figure 4d. Max& Min pressure envelope along the pipeline path from pump station to point B
-pump trip-with protection.

4,5

Figure 4e. Variation of pressure inside the surge vessel.
Figure 4f. Variation of gas volume inside the surge vessel.

4,5

6.3 Additional Transient Scenarios with surge vessel based protection
This section discusses additional operating scenarios to assess the adequacy of the
proposed 2.00 m3 Surge vessel for any other expected operating conditions.
Section 6.2 discussed the tripping of all the operating pumps. Also, other expected
operating scenario was simulated and find out that is safe in terms of surge
pressures. Here is the simulated scenarios:
Pump Shutdown followed by Startup: This transient simulation was considered normal
pump shutdown followed by startup one after one with delay time of 180 sec. Figure
5a shows the maximum and minimum hydraulic grade line along the pipeline path
from the pump station to point A. Figure 5b shows the maximum and minimum
hydraulic grade line along the pipeline path from the pump station to point B. as
shown no undue pressure created. The maximum and minimum pressure are 6.58
bar and – 0.22 m respectively. Figure 5c shows the pressure variation at the pump
manifold for this case. Figure 5d. shows the variation of gas volume inside the surge
vessel.

4,5

Figure 5a. Maximum and minimum HGL along pipeline from PS to Point A-Pump shutdown
and startup
Figure 5b. Maximum and minimum HGL along pipeline from PS to Point B-Pump shutdown
and startup
4,5

Figure 5c. Pressure variation at the common header- Pump shutdown and startup
Figure 5d. Variation of gas volume inside the surge vessel- Pump shutdown and startup
4,5

7.0 Summary and conclusion:
Transient modeling study was conducted for pump station along with the
associated pipeline to design a suitable surge protection system, In absence of
surge protection device. The maximum surge pressure was about 6.57 bar, and
the minimum generated pressure was about -9.80 m, Hence the system needs to
be protected against the low pressures. Trials were attempted with different
capacities of surge vessels to limit the surge pressures within the permissible
values.
2 m3 Surge vessel, in addition of changing one of the existing air valves to be
anti-slam air valve. are adequate to protect the piping system against undesirable
surge pressures. The maximum created pressure is about 6.57 bar, and the
minimum surge pressure is - 0.33 m in the main pipeline in present of the surge
vessel based protection. Table 1, includes the technical data of the surge vessel.
Table 2, includes the technical data of the air valves.

4,5

Table 1: Surge Vessel Data
# Description
Vessel capacity 2.00 m3

Qty 1
Vessel connection size 200 mm
Medium Irrigation water
Design Pressure 16 bar
External Design Pressure Full Cavity
Orientation Vertical
Vessel Type Compressor type
Initial gas volume 0.25 m3
Maximum expanding gas volume 1.30 m3
Table 2: Air Valve Data
# Air Valve #1
Elevation 4.64 m
X 299,439.07 m
Y 2,821,306.70 m
Qty 1
Diameter 40 mm
Medium Irrigation Water
Design Pressure 16 bar
Anti-Chock Air
Air Valve type
Valve

4,5

8.0 References
[1] Funk, J.E., Wood, D.J., Lingireddy, S. and D.C. Denger, Pressure Surges due to Rapid
Expulsion of Air, International Conference on Unsteady Flow and Fluid Transients,
Sept-Oct 1992, Durham, England.
[2] Lingireddy, S., Wood, D.J., and Zloczower, N. (2004) Pressure Surges in Pipeline
Systems Due to Air Release. Jl. American Water Works Association, 96 (7), 88-94
[3] Wood, D.J., Lingireddy, S., and Boulos, P.F., Pressure Wave Analysis of Transient
Flow in Pipe Networks by MWH Press, 2005 (this text book is used at many US
Universities to teach transient modeling for post-graduate students)
[4] Boulos, P.F., Karney, B.W., Wood, D.J., and Lingireddy, S. Hydraulic Transient
Guidelines for Design, Operation and Protection of Water Distribution Systems, Jl.
American Water Works Association. May 2005.
[5] Stephenson, D. Effects of Air Valves and Pipework on Water Hammer Pressures.
ASCE Jl. of Transportation Engineering, 1997.
[6] Lauhlan, C.S., Escarameia, M., May, R.W.P., Burrows, R., and Gahan, C. Air in
Pipelines, a literature review, Report SR 649, Rev 2.0, April 2005, HR Walllinford.
[7] Antoine, C. (1888), "Tensions des vapeurs; nouvelle relation entre les tensions et les
températures" [Vapor Pressure: a new relationship between pressure and temperature],
Comptes Rendus des Séances de l'Académie des Sciences (in French), 107: 681–684,
778–780, 836–837
[8] U.S. Standard Atmosphere, 1976, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
1976.

4,5

4,5


Irrigation 4&amp;5 - Surge Analysis Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Irrigation 4&amp;5 - Surge Analysis Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Irrigation 4&amp;5 - Surge Analysis Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project : Al-Fayhaa Irrigation Network

THE RED SEA

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 1

1.0 Introduction and objective of study .................................................................... 3

2.0 Modeling Software ................................................................................................... 4

3.0 Description of Network system ............................................................................ 6

4.0 Input Data ................................................................................................................... 7

5.0 Steady State Analysis ........................................................................................... 10

6.0 Surge Analysis ........................................................................................................ 13

7.0 Summary and conclusion: ................................................................................... 33

8.0 References ............................................................................................................... 28

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 2

Describe the scenarios

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 3

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 4

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 5

Indicate the surge vessel

Figure 1a. Schematic representation of the system arrangement.

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 6

Pump Head Calculations.

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 7

Q : Flow rate in (mᶟ/s)

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 8

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 9

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 10

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 11

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 12

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 13

And the momentum equation

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 14

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 15

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 16

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 17

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 18

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 19

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 20

Project : Al-Fayhaa Irrigation Network Phase

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 21

Figure 4f. Variation of gas volume inside the surge vessel.

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 22

Document No.: R03-I24B01-CCE-CAL-IR-000

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 23

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 24

Report – Revision 00 Date: 14.02.2022 25

Irrigation 4&5 - Surge Analysis Report

Irrigation 4&5 - Surge Analysis Report

Irrigation 4&5 - Surge Analysis Report