Fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing - Revision history

Ismailalbayrak at 09:52, 10 May 2021

2021-05-10T09:52:24Z

Bendikhansen: /* Classification table */

2021-01-26T15:53:51Z

Classification table

Bendikhansen: /* Classification table */

2021-01-26T15:53:22Z

Classification table

Bendikhansen: /* Classification table */

2021-01-26T15:46:59Z

Classification table

Bendikhansen: /* During planning */

2020-12-14T10:18:33Z

During planning

Bendikhansen: /* During implementation */

2020-10-26T15:08:05Z

During implementation

Bendikhansen: Text replacement - "category:Measures" to "category:Solutions"

2020-10-26T10:03:07Z

Text replacement - "category:Measures" to "category:Solutions"

Bendikhansen at 12:22, 23 October 2020

2020-10-23T12:22:43Z

Bendikhansen at 09:48, 23 October 2020

2020-10-23T09:48:33Z

Bendikhansen: /* Introduction */

2020-10-23T09:40:58Z

Introduction

@@ Line 93: / Line 93: @@
 * Bates, D.W., Vinsonhaler, R. (1957). Use of louvers for guiding fish. Trans. American Fish Soc. 86(1):38–57.
 * Beck, C. (2019). Hydraulic and fish-biological performance of fish guidance structures with curved bars. In proc. 38th International Association for Hydro-Environmental Engineering and Research (IAHR) World Congress, Panama City, Panama, https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000371526.
-* Beck, C. (2020). Fish protection and fish guidance at water intakes using innovative curved-bar rack bypass systems. VAW-Mitteilung 257 (R.M. Boes, ed). VAW, ETH Zurich, Switzerland. https://vaw.ethz.ch/en/the-institute/publications/vaw-communications/2010-2019.html
+* Beck, C. (2020). Fish protection and fish guidance at water intakes using innovative curved-bar rack bypass systems. VAW-Mitteilung 257 (R.M. Boes, ed). VAW, ETH Zurich, Switzerland. https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/baug/vaw/vaw-dam/documents/das-institut/mitteilungen/2020-2029/257.pdf
 * Beck, C., Albayrak, I., Meister, J., Boes R.M. (2020a). Hydraulic performance of fish guidance structures with curved bars: Part 1: Head loss assessment. Journal of Hydraulic Research,58(5): 807-818, https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2019.1671515.
 * Beck, C., Albayrak, I., Meister, J., Boes R.M. (2020b). Hydraulic performance of fish guidance structures with curved bars: Part 2: Flow fields. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 58(5): 819-830, https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2019.1671516.

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 This article describes several different types of fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing. The classification table does not represent all of them for every topic. Therefore, an additional table is added to highlight where and how the types differ.
-{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:bottom;"
+{| class="wikitable" style="vertical-align:bottom;"
-|- style="font-weight:bold;"
+|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
 ! style="font-weight:normal; text-align:left;" |
 ! Louvres and angled bar rack (ABR)
@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 ! Curved-bar rack (CBR)
 |-
-| style="font-weight:bold; text-align:left;" | Fish species
+| style="font-weight:bold;" | Fish species
 | All
 | Tested on: barbel, spirlin, European grayling, European eel, brown trout
 | Tested on: spirlin, barbel, brown trout, nase, European eel, salmon parr
 |-
-| style="font-weight:bold; text-align:left;" | Power losses
+| style="font-weight:bold;" | Power losses
 | Significant head losses and strong assymetric turbine admission flow   (compared to MBR and CBR)
 | High head loss and mild assymetric turbine admission flow (compared to   CBR)
 | Low head loss and quasi-symmetrical turbine admission flow
 |-
-| style="font-weight:bold; text-align:left;" | Certainty of effect
+| style="font-weight:bold;" | Certainty of effect
 | Very uncertain
 | Moderately certain
 | Moderately certain
-|-
+|- style="text-align:center;"
 | style="font-weight:bold; text-align:left;" | TLR
 | 9
@@ Line 86: / Line 86: @@
 | 4
 |}
 {{Fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing}}

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 This article describes several different types of fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing. The classification table does not represent all of them for every topic. Therefore, an additional table is added to highlight where and how the types differ.
+{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:bottom;"
 {{Fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:46, 26 January 2021
Line 57:		Line 57:

	=Classification table=		=Classification table=
		+	This article describes several different types of fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing. The classification table does not represent all of them for every topic. Therefore, an additional table is added to highlight where and how the types differ.
		+
		+
		+
	{{Fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing}}		{{Fish guidance structures with wide bar spacing}}

@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 [[file:velocity_fields_bannwil.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Exemplary depth-averaged velocity fields [cm/s] upstream of HPP Bannwil measured with boat-mounted ADCP at a discharge of 402 m3/s ]][[file:numerical_modelling_bannwil.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Exemplary variant study for HPP Bannwil using numerical modelling. Normal (left) and tangential (right) flow velocities at potential FGS positions upstream of the turbine inlets for scenario 1a for FGS angled at 37°]]
-To design a FGS with wide bar spacing and its corresponding bypass system (BS) at a given HPP, detailed site-specific information is needed. The information can be obtained from construction plans and measurements on site. It is recommended to (I) identify and utilize fish migration corridors using [[Radio telemetry|radio]] or [[Acoustic telemetry|acoustic]] telemetry technique; (II) consider behaviour and biomechanical properties of target fish species; and (III) match the hydraulic conditions of a FGS-BS to (I) and (II). In order to assess the hydraulics of a FGS-BS, velocity and bathymetry measurements using e.g. an [[Acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP)]] should be conducted (exemplary velocity data from the test case HPP Bannwil, Figure 3). Based on such data, a physical or numerical model of the HPP (Feigenwinter et al., 2019) can be constructed. With either model, positioning and geometric optimization of FGS-BS can be done (numerical model results for [[Bannwil test case|HPP Bannwil]], Figure 4, see FIThydro deliverable 2.2). Finally, it is recommended to integrate the HPP’s operating conditions and the hydrological boundary conditions of the studied site.
+To design a FGS with wide bar spacing and its corresponding bypass system (BS) at a given HPP, detailed site-specific information is needed. The information can be obtained from construction plans and measurements on site. It is recommended to (I) identify and utilize fish migration corridors using [[Radio telemetry|radio]] or [[Acoustic telemetry|acoustic]] telemetry technique; (II) consider behaviour and biomechanical properties of target fish species; and (III) match the hydraulic conditions of a FGS-BS to (I) and (II). In order to assess the hydraulics of a FGS-BS, velocity and bathymetry measurements using e.g. an [[Acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP)]] should be conducted (exemplary velocity data from the test case HPP Bannwil, Figure 3). Based on such data, a physical or numerical model of the HPP (Feigenwinter et al., 2019) can be constructed. With either model, positioning and geometric optimization of FGS-BS can be done (numerical model results for [[Bannwil test case|HPP Bannwil]], Figure 4, see [https://www.fithydro.eu/deliverables-tech/ FIThydro deliverable] 2.2). Finally, it is recommended to integrate the HPP’s operating conditions and the hydrological boundary conditions of the studied site.
 The construction of a FGS-BS at an existing HPP will in most cases lead to a temporary interruption of the HPP operation and thus to production losses. The construction of the rack itself is comparable to the construction of a conventional HPP trash rack. An additional bridge carrying the rack cleaning machine, which in most cases is analogue to conventional machines used at classical intake trashracks (Beck, 2020), should be installed above the FGS-BS.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:08, 26 October 2020
Line 48:		Line 48:

	==During implementation==		==During implementation==
		+	Construction of fish guidance structures with wide bar opening requires heavy lifting equipment and both fixing and placing of the structure needs to be done when the hydropower plant is brought to full stop. Installation of racks, cleaning machine and a bypass system requires a suite of skilled labor on civil works.

	==During operation==		==During operation==

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:03, 26 October 2020
Line 75:		Line 75:
	* USBR (2006). Fish protection at water diversions – A guide for planning and designing fish exclusion facilities. Technical Report. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation.		* USBR (2006). Fish protection at water diversions – A guide for planning and designing fish exclusion facilities. Technical Report. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation.

−	[[category:Downstream fish migration measures]][[category:~~Measures~~]] [[Category:developed in FIThydro]]	+	[[category:Downstream fish migration measures]][[category:Solutions]] [[Category:developed in FIThydro]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[file:icon_downstream.png|right|150px|link=[[Downstream fish migration]]]]
 {{Note|This technology has been developed in the FIThydro project! See [[Innovative technologies from FIThydro]] for a complete list.|reminder}}
 =Introduction=
 [[file:FGS_layouts.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Different FGS layouts (a) Louver, (b) Angled Bar Rack (ABR), (c) Modified angled Bar Rack (MBR) and Curved-Bar Racks (CBRs) with upstream tip angle of (d) 90° and (e) 45°]]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 =Introduction=
 [[file:FGS_layouts.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Different FGS layouts (a) Louver, (b) Angled Bar Rack (ABR), (c) Modified angled Bar Rack (MBR) and Curved-Bar Racks (CBRs) with upstream tip angle of (d) 90° and (e) 45°]]
-[[file:CBR_schematic.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Top view of a schematic CBR arrangement with indicated rack angle α, power canal and bypass. The fish are guided along the rack towards the bypass, where they pass downstream]][[file:velocity_fields_bannwil.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Exemplary depth-averaged velocity fields [cm/s] upstream of HPP Bannwil measured with boat-mounted ADCP at a discharge of 402 m3/s ]][[file:numerical_modelling_bannwil.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Exemplary variant study for HPP Bannwil using numerical modelling. Normal (left) and tangential (right) flow velocities at potential FGS positions upstream of the turbine inlets for scenario 1a for FGS angled at 37°]]
+[[file:CBR_schematic.jpg|thumb|250px|Figure 1: Top view of a schematic CBR arrangement with indicated rack angle α, power canal and bypass. The fish are guided along the rack towards the bypass, where they pass downstream]]
 The revised Swiss Waters Protection Act (WPA) of 2011 demands the restoration of water bodies and the elimination of negative impacts of hydropower plants (HPPs) regarding fish migration until 2030. Similar demands are stated by the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) of 2000.
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 ==During planning==
 To design a FGS with wide bar spacing and its corresponding bypass system (BS) at a given HPP, detailed site-specific information is needed. The information can be obtained from construction plans and measurements on site. It is recommended to (I) identify and utilize fish migration corridors using [[Radio telemetry|radio]] or [[Acoustic telemetry|acoustic]] telemetry technique; (II) consider behaviour and biomechanical properties of target fish species; and (III) match the hydraulic conditions of a FGS-BS to (I) and (II). In order to assess the hydraulics of a FGS-BS, velocity and bathymetry measurements using e.g. an [[Acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP)]] should be conducted (exemplary velocity data from the test case HPP Bannwil, Figure 3). Based on such data, a physical or numerical model of the HPP (Feigenwinter et al., 2019) can be constructed. With either model, positioning and geometric optimization of FGS-BS can be done (numerical model results for [[Bannwil test case|HPP Bannwil]], Figure 4, see FIThydro deliverable 2.2). Finally, it is recommended to integrate the HPP’s operating conditions and the hydrological boundary conditions of the studied site.