Effect of modeling range on structural analysis for powerhouse of hydroelectric power plant by FEM

Abstract

In this paper, three different modeling ranges were selected in the structural analysis for a hydropower house. The analysis was carried out using ABAQUS 6.6. The modeling range has a remarkable effect on finite element method (FEM) calculation result at the middle position of typical cross-sections where the concrete is relatively thin, and at the region close to turbine floor. If the ventilation barrel, floor slabs and columns above turbine floor are excluded from FEM model, the maximum rise difference of pedestal structure increases by about 24% compared with that of the whole model. It is indicated that different modeling ranges indeed affect FEM calculation result, and the structure above turbine floor in the FEM model should be included.

Keywords

hydraulic structures / hydroelectric power plants / powerhouse / modeling range / FEM / structural analysis

References

[1] Owen D. R. J., Hinton E. Finite Elements in Plasticity: Theory and Practice[M]. 1980, Swansea, UK: Pineridge Press Limited.

[2] Wu H., Jiang K., Shen Y., et al. Threedimensional nonlinear finite element static calculation of complete bearing spiral case[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2006, 37(11): 1323-1328.

[3] Jiang K. Structural Study on Complete Bearing Spiral Case in Three Gorges Hydropower Station [D]. 2007, Wuhan: College of Water Resources and Hydroelectric Engineering, Wuhan University.

[4] Zhang C., Zhang Y., Ma Z. Damage analysis of reinforced concrete surrounding the spiral case under the action of repeated water pressure[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2008, 39(11): 1262-1266.

[5] Chen Q., Lin S., Su H. Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis on directly embedded spiral case of large-scale turbine unit with various measures of restricting cracks[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 2008, 25(6): 101-105.

[6] Chen Q., Su H., Cui J., et al. Crack analysis on spiral case structure of large-scale turbine units with different embedded manners[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 2009, 26(4): 40-43.

[7] Jiang K., Wu H., Shen Y. Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis of complete bearing spiral case without cushion[J]. Journal of Hydroelectric Engineering, 2007, 26(1): 71-76.

[8] Wu H., Shen Y., Jiang K. Structural research on embedment of a bare deflated spiral case[J]. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences, 2007, 12(2): 311-316.

[9] Kang J., Sun S. 3-D nonlinear analysis on the spiral casing structure of Xilongchi Pumped-Storage Hydropower Station[J]. Journal of Hydroelectric Engineering, 2007, 26(5): 42-46.

[10] Shen Y., Wu H., Jiang K. Research on preloading filling spiral case structure in large pumped storage power station[J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Natural Science), 2008, 36(5): 97-99.

[11] Zhang Q., Wu H., Jiang K. Comparison of embedding types used in sheet-metal spiral case using damage theory[J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Natural Science), 2008, 36(6): 122-124.

[12] Wu H., Huang X., Zhang Q., et al. Mechanical characteristics and bearing capacity of complete bearing spiral case in hydropower station[J]. Journal of Tianjin University, 2008, 41(7): 777-782.

[13] Lubliner J., Oliver J., Oller S., et al. A plastic-damage model for concrete[J]. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 1989, 25(3): 299-326.

[14] Lee J., Fenves G. L. Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete structures[J]. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1998, 124(8): 892-900.

[15] Northwest Hydroelectric InvestigationDesign Institute. SL/T 191-96 Design Code for Hydraulic Concrete Structures[S]. 1997, Beijing: China Water Conservancy and Hydropower Press.