Ham test case - Revision history

Bendikhansen: /* Gallery */

2020-06-18T11:06:22Z

Gallery

Bendikhansen: /* Results */

2020-06-18T11:05:45Z

Results

Bendikhansen: /* Results */

2020-06-18T11:05:06Z

Results

Laurent: /* References */

2020-05-30T13:57:12Z

References

Laurent: /* References */

2020-05-30T13:41:40Z

References

Laurent at 12:56, 30 May 2020

2020-05-30T12:56:58Z

Laurent at 17:22, 27 May 2020

2020-05-27T17:22:24Z

Laurent: /* Gallery */

2020-05-27T11:56:10Z

Gallery

Laurent: /* Gallery */

2020-05-27T11:55:20Z

Gallery

Laurent: /* Results */

2020-05-27T11:09:31Z

Results

@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 ham<sup>3</sup>_cDe-Vlaamse-Waterweg.jpg|Archimedes screw turbines at the Ham complex. The three on the left are reversible, while the closed screw on the right is for pumping and upstream fish passage only.
 ham4_Ship_lock_complex_cDe-Vlaamse-Waterweg.jpg|Ship lock complex at Ham.
 </gallery>

@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 eel_injury.png|Figure 2: External (a) and internal (b) impact of a contusion of an eel that died and got injured during Archimedes screw passage in Kwaadmechelen (Ham, Belgium).
 crushed_bds_tube.jpg|Figure 3: Crushed BDS sensor tube after Archimedes screw passage in Kwaadmechelen (Ham, Belgium).
-<gallery>
+</gallery>
 =Gallery=

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 =Results=
 In this study the impact on fish of worlds’ largest Archimedes screws (10 m head, 22 m length) was assessed. The screws are installed in a pumping and hydropower installation that is situated in a side channel of the shipping lock complex of Kwaadmechelen (Ham, Belgium) on the Albert canal. On the one hand, the percentage of downstream migrating eels and salmons that passed the sluice complex via the hydropower installation was assessed by one- and two-dimensional tracking with acoustic telemetry. On the other hand, the direct impact of the screws on passing bream, eel and roach was evaluated by forced passage of fish and barotrauma sensors.
-The telemetric study indicated that 65% of 86 tracked eels that reached the sluice complex during downstream migration tried to pass the sluice complex. 14 % of those (14% of 56 eels or 9% of 86 eels) finally passed the sluice complex via the by-pass channel and hydropower installation. In contrast, none of the 44 smolts (out of 72 smolts tracked) that tried to pass the sluice complex entered the by-pass channel and passed the hydropower installation. The swim tracks of the eels that passed the sluice complex via the hydropower installation have been followed.
-The life fish experiments with forced passage indicated a chance to die or get severely injured of up to 55% (range 43-64%), 17% (range 11-24%) and 34% (range 30-36%) for bream, eel and roach, respectively. Most severely injured fish were observed to have a contusion. Accordingly, crushing and grinding were the main source of damage to the BDSs as could be observed at the surface of the BDS units. The BDS sensor values subscribe the results of previous studies, which show that barotrauma or pressure related injuries remain unlikely at Archimedes screw turbines. Interestingly, the sensors and accompanying statistical tests indicated that not two of all sensor passage events performed, were similar. So, the passage of sensors was a chaotic event. Consequently, the operational discharge had no effect on the sensor data, neither on the observed crushes (and scratches) of (on) the sensors. Small effects of this were found on the tested fish, however the effect was not found for every tested species and was not similar for those where an effect was found for. We therefore conclude that operational discharge is not influencing the harmfulness of the screws to passing fish and we do not recommend it as a mitigation measure. Interestingly, the next question rising from the observations made in this study is how the uniqueness of the data is related to the observations on life fish. Anyway, the injuries that were observed the most were scale loss for less than 25% of the fish body and contusions. The observation of contusions on fish and crushes of sensors indicate that fish and sensors were squeezed between the blades and the screw housing. However, it was not possible to investigate where this happens and if it exclusively happens in the beginning at the first blade upon screw entrance. Further research could be dedicated to finding the exact origin of these types of severe injuries to further adapt screw design and improve fish friendliness.
+The telemetric study indicated that 65% of 86 tracked eels that reached the sluice complex during downstream migration tried to pass the sluice complex. 14 % of those (14% of 56 eels or 9% of 86 eels) finally passed the sluice complex via the by-pass channel and hydropower installation. In contrast, none of the 44 smolts (out of 72 smolts tracked) that tried to pass the sluice complex entered the by-pass channel and passed the hydropower installation. Figure 1 shows the swim track of one of the eels that passed the sluice complex via the hydropower installation.
-−
 =Gallery=

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 =References=
-Baeyens R, Pauwels I, Buysse D, Mouton A, Vergeynst J, Papadopoulos I, Demaerteleire N, Pieters S, Gelaude E, Robberechts K, Verhelst P, Vermeersch S, Vandamme L, Coeck J (2019) Monitoring van de effecten van de pompinstallatie en waterkrachtcentrale te Ham op het visbestand in het Albertkanaal. Reports from the Research Institute for Nature and Forest Brussels, Belgium https://doi.org/10.21436/inbor.15830647.
+* Baeyens R, Pauwels I, Buysse D, Mouton A, Vergeynst J, Papadopoulos I, Demaerteleire N, Pieters S, Gelaude E, Robberechts K, Verhelst P, Vermeersch S, Vandamme L, Coeck J (2019) Monitoring van de effecten van de pompinstallatie en waterkrachtcentrale te Ham op het visbestand in het Albertkanaal. Reports from the Research Institute for Nature and Forest Brussels, Belgium https://doi.org/10.21436/inbor.15830647.
-Vergeynst J (2020) Downstream eel and salmon migration through a shipping canal : challenges on the road . Ghent University (UGhent) and Research Institute for Nature and Forets (INBO).
+* Vergeynst J (2020) Downstream eel and salmon migration through a shipping canal : challenges on the road . Ghent University (UGhent) and Research Institute for Nature and Forets (INBO).

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 =References=
-Baeyens R, Pauwels I, Buysse D, Mouton A, Vergeynst J, Papadopoulos I, Demaerteleire N, Pieters S, Gelaude E, Robberechts K, Verhelst P, Vermeersch S, Vandamme L, Coeck J (2019) Monitoring van de effecten van de pompinstallatie en waterkrachtcentrale te Ham op het visbestand in het Albertkanaal. Reports from the Research Institute for Nature and Forest Brussels, Belgium https://doi.org/doi.org/10.21436/inbor.15830647.
+Baeyens R, Pauwels I, Buysse D, Mouton A, Vergeynst J, Papadopoulos I, Demaerteleire N, Pieters S, Gelaude E, Robberechts K, Verhelst P, Vermeersch S, Vandamme L, Coeck J (2019) Monitoring van de effecten van de pompinstallatie en waterkrachtcentrale te Ham op het visbestand in het Albertkanaal. Reports from the Research Institute for Nature and Forest Brussels, Belgium https://doi.org/10.21436/inbor.15830647.
 Vergeynst J (2020) Downstream eel and salmon migration through a shipping canal : challenges on the road . Ghent University (UGhent) and Research Institute for Nature and Forets (INBO).

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 {{Relevant SMTDs for Ham}}
 =Introduction=
 The shipping lock complex and accompanying HPP studied here is located in the Albert canal in the municipality of Ham (Kwaadmechelen, Belgium). The Albert canal is one of the most important shipping routes of Flanders as it connects the River Scheldt via the Port of Antwerp, with the River Meuse and the Juliana Canal. It was dug in the 1930’s.
@@ Line 14: / Line 13: @@
 The ship lock complex of Ham, as well as the ones of Olen and Hasselt, is by-passed by a small channel that runs through the hydropower station. The hydropower station contains the largest Archimedes screw in the world, which cannot only pump, but also turbinate water (two operational modes for one and the same screw).
-The hydropower station in Ham has one closed Archimedes screw. This screw has its housing attached to the blades, preventing fish from being squeezed between the blades and the housing. This screw, which is supposed to be fish-friendly, can only pump water and cannot serve as a turbine. It has a length of 22 m, a diameter of 4.3 m, an inclination angle of 38° and a weight of 85 tons. The highly efficient Archimedean screw is able to generate electricity 24 hours a day, whilst maintaining the natural flow of a river. It has an installed capacity of 1.2 MW
+The hydropower station in Ham has one closed Archimedes screw. This screw has its housing attached to the blades, preventing fish from being squeezed between the blades and the housing. It has a length of 22 m, a diameter of 4.3 m, an inclination angle of 38° and a weight of 85 tons. The highly efficient Archimedean screw is able to generate electricity 24 hours a day, whilst maintaining the natural flow of a river. It has an installed capacity of 1.2 MW
 ===Layout===
 The area around the HPP is highly artificial.  The hydropower station, which also serves as pumping station, is located in a by-pass channel ( 380 x 6 meters) bridging the ship lock complex of Ham. This by-pass channel is a concrete channel. Fish can freely swim from the Albert canal to the by-pass channel. The Albert canal itself is a large concrete shipping canal. It is 130 km long and runs nearly straight from the river Meuse in the East of Belgium to the river Scheldt in the West. The height difference between the rivers Meuse and Scheldt is bridged by 6 shipping lock complexes. Each ship lock complex has two ship locks of 136 by 16 m and one push-convoy lock of 200 by 24 m. The banks of the canal over its 130 km length are concrete and straight and thus not even semi-natural.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:22, 27 May 2020
Line 63:		Line 63:
	Ham6_CrushedBDS sensor.jpg\|Crushed BDS sensor tube after Archimedes screw passage in Kwaadmechelen (Ham, Belgium)(Picture and BDS unit: Jeffrey Tuthan, Tallin University of Technology).		Ham6_CrushedBDS sensor.jpg\|Crushed BDS sensor tube after Archimedes screw passage in Kwaadmechelen (Ham, Belgium)(Picture and BDS unit: Jeffrey Tuthan, Tallin University of Technology).
	</gallery>		</gallery>
		+
		+	=References=
		+	Baeyens R, Pauwels I, Buysse D, Mouton A, Vergeynst J, Papadopoulos I, Demaerteleire N, Pieters S, Gelaude E, Robberechts K, Verhelst P, Vermeersch S, Vandamme L, Coeck J (2019) Monitoring van de effecten van de pompinstallatie en waterkrachtcentrale te Ham op het visbestand in het Albertkanaal. Reports from the Research Institute for Nature and Forest Brussels, Belgium https://doi.org/doi.org/10.21436/inbor.15830647.
		+
		+	Vergeynst J (2020) Downstream eel and salmon migration through a shipping canal : challenges on the road . Ghent University (UGhent) and Research Institute for Nature and Forets (INBO).

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 ham<sup>3</sup>_cDe-Vlaamse-Waterweg.jpg|Archimedes screw turbines at the Ham complex. The three on the left are reversible, while the closed screw on the right is for pumping and upstream fish passage only.
 ham4_Ship_lock_complex_cDe-Vlaamse-Waterweg.jpg|Ship lock complex at Ham.
-Ham5_2Dtrack.jpg|2-D track of a downstream migrating tagged eel passing the sluice complex via the side-channel and hydropower installation (HPP not in the picture). Colours indicate the precision of each detected and calculated fish position (dots) on a scale of 1 (minimally 5 m precise) to 0 (maximally 5 m precise)(Vergeynst 2020).
+Ham5_2Dtrack.jpg|2-D track of a downstream migrating tagged eel passing the sluice complex via the side-channel and hydropower installation.
 Ham6_CrushedBDS sensor.jpg|Crushed BDS sensor tube after Archimedes screw passage in Kwaadmechelen (Ham, Belgium)(Picture and BDS unit: Jeffrey Tuthan, Tallin University of Technology).
 </gallery>