Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

For

2X100 MW PLTU SEBALANG POWER PLANT

Client

PT. PERUSAHAAN LISTRIK NEGARA

(PERSERO)

Reviewed By: SNS

Prepared and Verified By: GRV Approved By : RSB

Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Page 1 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

CONTENTS

Section-I- Text of the Report-------------------------------------------------------3

I-A: Introduction--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

I-B: CFD Analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7

I-C: Combination of Test Cases-----------------------------------------------------------------------9
I-D: CFD Results of sump geometry with proposed location of ACW pumps--------10
I-E: Conclusion -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11

Section-II- Geometry & Mesh-----------------------------------------------------13

II-A: Geometry
II-A.1: Proposed sump geometry-------------------------------------------------------------------14
II-B: Mesh
II-B.1: Proposed sump geometry-------------------------------------------------------------------17

Section-III - CFD Results of sump geometry--------------------------------19

III-A: Test Case 1: Original proposal P1, P2, P4, P5 & P6 Working-------------------20
III-B: Test Case 2: Original proposal P2, P3, P4, P5 & P6 Working ------------------23
III-C: Test Case 3: Original proposal P1, P3, P4, P5 & P6 Working ------------------26
III-D: Test Case 4: Original proposal P3, P4, P5 & P6 Working ------------------------29
III-E: Test Case 5: Original proposal P3, P5 & P6 Working -------------------------------32
III-F: Test Case 6: Original proposal P4, P5 & P6 Working -------------------------------35

Section-IV – Proposed location of ACW pumps----------------------------38

Appendix ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------40

Page 2 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

SECTION – I

TEXT OF THE REPORT

Page 3 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

I-A: Introduction
The fluid flow in sumps is rather complex involving expansions, turns together with fluid structure
interaction. It is essential to ensure that pumps operating in such sumps get smooth swirl free flow
at its entry. Traditional approach was to carry out sump model studies experimentally with a reduced
scale model and applying Froude Similarity rules. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has come up
as an alternative approach to investigate the complex fluid flow phenomenon in sumps. It is rapidly
becoming an important tool for analysis and design in hydraulic engineering. Hydraulic engineering
encompasses a broad range of activity from flow in a river to design of structures to control and
distribute/divert water for various purposes. These flow problems have features that are not
commonly found in other applications. In the case of pump industry applications, CFD tools are
important in view of analysis of the hydraulic passage of the sumps. For impeller inlet, CFD can help
to improve the inlet flow distribution by proper designing/ checking the quality of flow in pump
sump. In case of sumps, CFD analysis is used to investigate flow quality entering into the pump at
various combinations of pumps in operation. The analysis is done at minimum
water level with pumps running at duty point.

The proposed sump for the project “2X100MW Pekerjaan Pengadaan Instalasi RO PLTU Sebalang”
has been implemented by PT. Perusahaan Listrik Negara (Persero). There are total 6 number of
pumps in which 4 are CW pumps and 2 are Backwash pumps. Present proposal is to allocate 2 ACW
pumps in channel 3 & 4 at a specified location proposed by customer (Please refer Figure 1(b) for
nomenclature of channel locations). Duty point of each pump is given in table1. CFD analysis of the
sump includes Intake tunnel, Forebay, Channels (individual pump chambers), pump bell mouth
strainer, pipes representing the bell mouth and column pipe. Pump Bell mouth and column pipe of
each type pump are considered as per the given diameter and
extended further for analysis purpose.

In the present geometry, water is entering into the forebay from intake tunnel which is located at
higher elevation relative to the ground level of forebay. Flow from the intake tunnel is entering into

Page 4 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

the forebay and then into the respective channel of the CW pump. Backwash pumps are already
present in the channel 2 & 4 with scarcely in operation. 2 ACW pumps are placed in the channel 3 &
4 as per the customer’s proposal (Please refer Fig. 24 for details). Due to the lower flow rates of the
ACW
pumps and backwash pumps relative to the CW pumps, all available ACW and

backwash are considered as working in the present analysis. The flow study is carried out for pumps
running at duty point at minimum water level (Please refer Fig.1 for nomenclature of pumps).

Pump Duty conditions for this sump is given in Table-1:

Table –1

Description CW pumps ACW pumps Backwash pumps

Pump Model P38M(WPIL) BHR 28-18o -

Rated Flow m3/hr

11262 250 175
Rated Head (m)
19.3 30 40
Speed (rpm)
595 1446 2900

Total number of
4 2 2
pumps
Working and stand by 3 working + 1 1 working + 1
-
stand by stand by

Page 5 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

About Computational fluid dynamics (CFD):

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is the science of predicting fluid flow, heat transfer, mass
transfer, chemical reactions, and related phenomena by solving the mathematical equations which
govern these processes using a numerical process. The result of CFD analyses can be used in
Conceptual studies of new designs, detailed product development and redesign. In CFD, analysis
begins with a mathematical model of a physical problem. Conservation of mass, momentum, and
energy must be satisfied throughout the region of interest. Simplifying assumptions are made in
order to make the problem tractable (e.g., steady-state, incompressible, inviscid, and two-
dimensional looking to applicability of the problem). It is also required to provide appropriate initial
guess and boundary conditions for the problem. CFD applies numerical methods (called
discretization) to develop approximations of the governing equations of fluid mechanics in the fluid
region of interest. System of equations is solved simultaneously to provide solution for the domain.
The solution is again post-
processed to extract quantities of interest based on the problem.

Use of CFD:

The development of computational tools has helped in resolving some of the issues in design of
suction piping, delivery piping and Sump Model studies. The experimental study calls for enormous
time and there are some inherent limitations of experimental activity as the exact modelling of
Reynolds Number, Froude Number is not possible on geometrically similar smaller models. As the
CFD analysis is carried out on prototype, the issues related to in-accurate prediction of prototype
flows from model studies using smaller size experimental models do not come into picture. CFD tools
avoid physical modelling and testing every time. Better and faster design of sump and its analysis
leads to shorter design cycles. Due to various constraints the model piping system/sump has to
destroy after the model study and again will have to make it, if required in future for solving piping

Page 6 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

system/sump problem. But the data generated in the CFD analysis of the piping system/sump can
be kept for future reference.

CFD gives a means of visualizing and enhanced understanding of the fluid flow and hence better
insight of the flow in the domain (Piping system/sump). The CFD tools are well validated against the
huge data collected based on the experience of having
conducted more than 100 experimental sump model studies.

I-B: CFD Analysis

CFD tools are currently used worldwide to get advance information on hydraulic performance of
systems. We are using a commercial package, ANSYS CFX (Ver. 18.0) for CFD analysis.
The surface model of the geometry is created using well-known solid modeller ProEngineer (Creo-2)
and ANSYS ICEM-CFD. The geometry is taken into ICEM-CFD
software for good quality grid generation in the form of MSH file. This grid file is further taken into
CFX-Pre for applying the suitable boundary conditions to the geometry in order to solve the flow
equations in the domains. CFX – solver and CFX
– post is used to solve and analyse the results respectively.

Assumptions:
(1) The quality of water considered in the analysis is clear, free from debris and air.

(2) The free surface is considered as a plane at channel top surface level.

(3) Analysis is done with water as incompressible and at steady state conditions.

(4) Any fluctuations or wave effect is not considered in the analysis.

(5) The water flow is turbulent over entire domain.

Page 7 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

Computational Geometry and Grid:

The sump geometry is prepared using drawing provided to us. The details of the
drawings are given below.
Table 2: Details of input drawings
Sr.No. Title Drg. No.

1. General arrangement drawing of Circulating water 1056-00-M-55-

PA-0013-01-A
pump
2. General arrangement drawing of BHR 28-18o pump TL53816612-0

3. Pump pit Pile cap & Piling layout arrangement 1056-00-C-52-

UQ-0019-00-A

4. Pump pit foundation plan 1056-00-C-74-

UQ-0020-00-A

5. Pump pit MSL=+950 plan 1056-00-C-52-

UP0015-00-A

6. Pump pit MSL=+0.200 plan 1056-00-C-52-

UP0016-00-A

7. Pump pit section 1 & 1A 1056-00-C-52-

UP0017-00-A

8. Pump pit section and detail 1056-00-C-52-

UP0018-00-A

9. Pump pit section 2-5 1056-00-C-52-

UP0019-00-A

10. General arrangement of Backwash pump for PLG-203-DW-MC-

0102 Sheet 1 of 1
travelling screen
11. Minimum water level data Mail dated
19/04/2018

Page 8 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

The generated grid is an unstructured tetrahedral grid in the total sump passage. Numbers of nodes
are approximately 0.8 million in sump. The geometry and mesh are shown for sump in the section II
(Fig1 to Fig.5). Fine tetra elements were used near
the wall pump chambers to achieve good computational results.

I-C: Combination of Test Cases

CFD analysis has been carried out for the following combinations as a preliminary study. Though the

backwash pumps are considered in the analysis, it is not mentioned in the combinations due to
scarcely operation of pumps. (Please refer Fig.1 for nomenclature of pumps)

Table 3: Combination of test cases

CW pumps ACW pumps

Test
cases OPTIONS
No:
P1 P2 P3 P4
P5 P6
Test case 1*
1   X   

Test case 2
2 X     

Test case 3
3  X    

Test case 4
4 X X    

Test case 5
5 X X  X  

Test case 6
6 X X X   

 - Working X - Stand-By, * - Base case

Page 9 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

I-D: CFD Results of sump geometry with proposed location of ACW pumps:
The qualitative results of CFD analysis are presented here in terms of streamline plots (Refer Fig.6
to 23) for the original geometry with proposed location of ACW pumps. The proposed location of
ACW pumps is in channel 3 and channel 4 at a certain location as mentioned by the customer
(Please refer Fig. 24 for location of ACW pumps). The analysis has been carried out to check the
suitability of the proposed location of ACW pumps in the sump geometry for efficient operation of
pumps.

CFD analysis has been carried out for the original geometry by keeping 3 CW pumps as working
(P1, P2, & P4) and 2 ACW pumps (P5 & P6) as working. (Please refer Fig 1 (b), Plan view for
nomenclature). Though the available backwash pumps are operated scarcely, these pumps are also
considered as working due to its lower flow rates. In the present sump, water is entering into the
forebay from a connected intake tunnel at one end. The intake tunnel is also located at an elevation
from the ground wall of the forebay (Refer Fig. 2(a)). Water from the intake tunnel is entering as a
jet into the forebay due to higher velocities at minimum water level and the elevation difference
present near intake tunnel and forebay junction (Refer Fig. 6 (a)). The high velocity flow from intake
tunnel is striking the partition wall of the pump chamber and causing flow recirculation near the
side walls of the forebay. (Refer Fig. 6 (a)). The resulting flow is entering into the respective working
backwash pumps, ACW pumps in the channel 3 & Channel 4 and CW pumps. The flow is entering
into the ACW pumps bell mouth after passing through the strainer uniformly in the proposed
location.

The quantitative results are given in the form of swirl angles in table 4. Swirl angles are measured at
the appropriate location near pump impeller eye of ACW pumps. The maximum swirl angle is found
to be 0.3o in pump P5 which is below 5o , limit specified by HIS. Swirl angles were also measured for
CW pumps near impeller eye location of respective working pump. Maximum swirl angle observed
is 5.3o in pump P4. This is due to the non-uniformity created near the corner pumps due to the

Page 10 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

upstream flow conditions. The swirl intensity is found to be in limit in ACW pumps and also the
quality of the flow at the entrance of these pumps is found to be satisfactory in the present
combination. CFD analysis also conducted for other combinations (Test cases 2 to 6). In all the cases
the flow quality is satisfactory in the ACW pumps with the proposed location. The maximum swirl
intensity observed in these cases is 0.4o in test case 5, which is below the limit specified by HIS.

Hence the sump geometry with the proposed location of ACW pumps shall ensure efficient and safe
operation of pumps.

I-E: Conclusion

The Computational Fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of the sump is carried out to confirm/check the
suitability of the sump for satisfactory operation of pumps. From the CFD results of proposed sump
geometry, it is observed that the swirl intensity in the pumps is found to be in limit, the flow quality
is satisfactory in the ACW pumps. Swirl angle is checked at the region approximately at the impeller
eye location and it is given in table below. The swirl angles in working ACW pumps are found within
acceptable limit of 5.00 as per Hydraulic Institute Standards (HIS).

From the analysis results it is found that the proposed location of ACW pumps in channel 3&4
does not have any adverse effect on existing working CW pumps. Hence sump geometry is
recommended with the proposed location of ACW pumps in
channel 3 & 4.

Page 11 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

Table 4
Swirl Angles in degrees

Swirl Angle (in Degrees)

Test
cases OPTIONS
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
No: P6
Test case 1* 1.80 0.20 X 5.30 0.30 -0.10
1

Test case 2 X -2.20 -0.50 3.40 0.10 -0.10

2

Test case 3 -5.70 X -0.60 1.00 0.10 -0.10

3

Test case 4 X X -0.60 1.00 0.10 -0.20

4

Test case 5 X X 0.20 X 0.10 0.40

5

Test case 6 X X X 2.50 -0.10 -0.10

6

 -Working , X - Stand-By, * base case

Note 1 : Negative sign of swirl indicates clock wise rotation when viewed normal to the flow in
pipe.

Page 12 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

SECTION – II

GEOMETRY & MESH

Page 13 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

II-A: Geometry
II-A.1: Proposed sump geometry

Forebay

Intake tunnel

(a)

P4 Channel 4
P6

4250 mm

P3 Channel 3
P5

Proposed location of ACW pumps (P5 &P6)

P2 Channel 2

P1 Channel 1

(b)

Fig.1: Original geometry – (a) Plan view (b) in pump chamber

Page 14 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

Intake tunnel
Forebay ground level

(a)

Backwash pumps

ACW pumps (BHR 28-18o)

CW pumps

Travelling screen Trash Rake

(b)

Fig.2: Original geometry – (a) Elevation view (b) in pump chamber

Page 15 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig.3: Original geometry – (a) Isometric view (b) in pump chamber

Page 16 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

II-B: Mesh
II-B.1: Proposed sump Geometry

(a)

(b)

Fig.4: Original geometry Mesh – (a) Plan view (b) in pump chamber

Page 17 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig.5: Original geometry Mesh – (a)Isometric view (b) in pump chamber

Page 18 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

SECTION – III

CFD RESULTS OF SUMP GEOMETRY

Page 19 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

III-A: Test case 1: (Original Proposal- P1, P2, P4, P5 & P6 Working)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 6: Stream line plots Plan view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 20 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 7: Stream line plots elevation (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 21 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 8: Stream line plots isometric view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 22 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

III-B: Test case 2: (Original proposal P2, P3, P4, P5 & P6 Working)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 9: Stream line plots Plan view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 23 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 10: Stream line plots elevation (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 24 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 11: Stream line plots Isometric view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 25 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

III-C: Test case 3: (Original proposal- P1, P3, P4, P5 & P6 Working)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 12: Stream line plots Plan view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 26 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 13: Stream line plots elevation (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 27 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 14: Stream line plots Isometric view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber
Page 28 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

III-D: Test case 4: (Original proposal- P3, P4, P5 & P6 Working)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 15: Stream line plots Plan view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 29 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 16: Stream line plots elevation (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 30 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 17: Stream line plots Isometric view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 31 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

III-E: Test case 5: (Original proposal- P3, P5 & P6 Working)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 18: Stream line plots Plan view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 32 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 19: Stream line plots elevation (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 33 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 20: Stream line plots Isometric view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 34 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

III-F: Test case 6: (Original proposal- P4, P5 & P6 Working)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 21: Stream line plots Plan view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 35 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 22: Stream line plots elevation (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 36 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

(a)

(b)

Fig. 23: Stream line plots Isometric view (a) Sump geometry (b) In pump chamber

Page 37 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

SECTION – IV

PROPOSED LOCATION OF ACW PUMPS

Page 38 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

ACW

CW

4250 mm

(a)

Channel 4

4250 mm

Channel 3

CW ACW

(b)
Fig. 24: Location of ACW pumps in the sump (a) Elevation (b) Plan view

Page 39 of 39
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

APPENDIX

Subsequent to CFD analysis report submission, client has reviewed the report and requested for
review and confirmation for the below working condition.

“The suitability of sump in which pumps CWP 4 units, Backwash pumps 2 unit, WILO pump 1 unit
and ACW pump (SPP pump) 1 unit all run simultaneously at a water level of -1.3 meter”.

Any adverse effect on pump performance is not foreseen in above operating condition.

Page 40 of 41
 Report Number: SPP-UK-2018-CFD-12-01

Revision Number: 01 Revised On: 26/10/18

Revision History

Rev.
Revision Details Revised By Revised on
No.
00 First Issue GRV

01 Second Issue GRV

Page 41 of 41