MASTER THESIS

EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS AND IDENTIFICATION POTENTIAL OF

OPTIMAZATION FOR EXISTING HYDROPOWER PLANTS IN LAO PDR

Proposed by: Phengxiong TONGNAMAVONG (Mr.)

Advisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Khamfeuane SIOUDOM (NUoL)
Co-Advisor: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Jürgen STAMM (TU Dresden)

Faculty of Engineering, 19 Dec, 2018

 Presentation Outline
1. Location of study
2. Research objective
3. Research questions
4. Literature review
5. Research Methodology
6. Results and Discussion
7. Conclusion and Recommendation
8. Future study 1
 Annual Energy Production 1,025 GWh
Location of study Dam Type
Catchment area
Gravity dam
8,460 Sq. Km
NNG2 HPP
Installed Capacity 615MW
Location of HPP 90 km, North of Vientiane, about 35km from
existing of NNG1 HPP
Number of Unit 3 Units (3 x 205 MW), Vertical Shaft-Francis
Turbine
Annual Energy Production 2,220 GWh
Dam Type Concreate faced-Rock fill Dam (CFRD)
Catchment area 5,640 sq. Km
Storage FSL 4,886 MCM
NL HPP
Installed Capacity 60MW
Location of HPP Longxan District, Xaysomboun Province, 142km
from Vientiane Capital
Number of Unit 2 Units (2 x 30 MW), Vertical Shaft-Francis
Turbine
Annual Energy Production 215 GWh
Dam Type Earth Core Fill Dam
Catchment area 12.8 sq. Km
Xeset2 HPP
Installed Capacity 76MW
Location of HPP Lao Ngam District, Saravan Province, 100Km
east to Pakse
Number of Unit 2 Units (2 x 38 MW), Vertical Shaft-Francis
Turbine
Annual Energy Production 309 GWh
source: https://www.google.com/search Dam Type Concrete Over Weir 2
Objective of study

1. To compare actual efficiency of the hydropower plants (from

feasibility study and current plant operational)
2. To identify factors causing the differences between the actual
efficiency conventional of operation model and feasibility study
(if any)
1. To propose a solution/optimization potential for the studied
hydropower plant(s) with lower efficiency

3
Research questions

1. What are the differences between the actual efficiency of the

hydropower plants (from feasibility study and current plant
operational)?
2. What are the factors causing the differences between the actual
efficiency for each hydropower plant?
3. What are the best efficiency points (BEP) to support the
generation scheduling planning for each hydropower plant?

4
LITERATUER REVIEW

5
 Hydropower Advancement Project (HAP)

- Unit Characteristics

Where:
 is the unit efficiency (%),
𝑷 P is the turbine power (W),
ɳ=  is the density of water (1,000 kg/m3),
𝝆𝒈𝑯𝑸
g is the acceleration of gravity (m2/s),
Q is the water flow rate through the unit (m3/s, referred
to as cms), and
H is the head (m) for the unit (headwater elevation
minus tail water elevation);
(Giles et al., 2003; March and Wolff, 2004) 6
 Hydropower Advancement Project (HAP)

- Unit Characteristics

Hypothetical unit efficiency

curve for a Francis
hydropower turbine at 55 m
head.

(Source: Boualem Hadjerioua, Adam Witt, Paul Wolff, Jamie Kern, 2016) 7
 Unit Optimization - Single Unit Efficiency

Optimization requires accurate unit

characteristics determined through
measurements or prototype turbine
units characteristics.

Source: HAP-Performance Assessment Manual 8

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Overall Process of
Data for Performance Analyses – Unit Characteristic Data research
Primary data needs Initial

• Unit characteristic data Data Collection

Step 1 • Facility operational data

1) Timestamp
2) Headwater Level
3) Tailwater Level
4) Unit Power
Data Analyses 5) Unit Characteristics

• Unit Efficiency and Flow versus Power analyses by using

Data
Preparation

Hydroplant Performance Calculator-HPC Plant Builders Function

• Optimization Plant Efficiency and Optimization flow by using Data Process

Step 2 Hydroplant Performance Calculator-HPC Plant Builder Function

HPC Plant Builder

Data Analyses Identify the factor

causing and data
Calibration HPC Plant Analyzer

• Actual Plant Efficiency and Optimization Plant Efficiency by

Step 3 using HPC Analyzer Function Evaluate

• Scheduling Efficiency Analyses by using HPC Analyzer Function

If which plant the
Compare to FS of
Efficiency Lower
HPPs
than FS & Plan

• Comparison to the FS by Maximum, Normal, and Minimum of

Final Head If which plant the
Efficiency great
than FS

Final
9
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

10
# Nam Leuk Hydropower Plant

Comparison between actual efficiency conventional model and feasibility study,

Actual efficiency of operation
Consideration for the Maximum, Normal, and Minimum of head
Nam Leuk Diff.
Hydropower Actual efficiency Diff. between
Actual efficiency
Plant Feasibility study of conventional between Model/act
of operation
model Model/FS ual

Head Power Flow Eff., (%) Flow Eff., (%) Flow Eff., (%)
(m) (MW) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (%)

194 32 18.15 93.10 18.27 93.57 18 94.00 0.9 0.43

184 32 19.24 92.60 18.92 93.08 19 93.60 1.0 0.52
174 29.60 18.82 92.60 19.40 93.08 18 93.70 1.1 0.62 11
Unit Characteristic Data
The best efficiency point of the unit characteristics is 94.16%
with the power of 30.30MW and the flow of 17.84m3/s

Unit efficiency curve with a head of 184 m

12
Optimized Plant Efficiency and Flow o Optimized plant efficiency curves at
184m show the best efficiency point at
94.09% and optimized plant flow of
17m3/s
o Unit operated the power output of
29MW
o combined generated with two units
operating the power output was shown
of 59 MW and optimized plant flow
about 35m3/s.

o The sequence of
operating was requires
that a single unit be
operated until the plant
load exceeds 35MW
(Maximum unit Load) 13
 Facility Operational Data Actual & Optimized Plant Efficiency
Timestamp HW TW Power 1 Power2
01/01/16 01:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 02:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 03:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 04:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 05:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 06:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 07:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 08:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 09:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 10:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 11:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 12:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 13:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 14:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 15:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 16:00 402.85
01/01/16 17:00 402.85
212.18
212.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o Actual and Optimized plant efficiency and qualified plant
01/01/16 18:00 402.85
01/01/16 19:00 402.85
212.18
212.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
output power typically varied 30 and 58.53 MW.
01/01/16 20:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00 o A consistent pattern for the actual dispatch is that units 1
01/01/16 21:00 402.85 212.18 0.00 0.00
01/01/16 22:00 402.85 212.17 0.00 0.00 and 2 are operated at the same load average of 30 MW
01/01/16 23:00 402.85 212.17 0.00 0.00
01/02/16 00:00 402.86 212.17 0.00 0.00 The optimized plant potential power able to produce
01/02/16 01:00 402.86 212.17 0.00 0.00
01/02/16 02:00 402.86 212.17 0.00 0.00 28.24 to 63.79 MW with the optimized plant efficiency in
01/02/16 03:00 402.86
01/02/16 04:00 402.86
212.17
212.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
varied between ranges of 78.66% to 94.09% Maximum
01/02/16 05:00 402.86 212.17 0.00 0.00 14
01/02/16 06:00 402.86 212.17 0.00 0.00
 Performance and Optimized of Nam Leuk Hydropower Plant

Scheduling Efficiency Analysis

efficiency curve is relatively flat
between 27 to 30 MW and when
operating two units the peak efficiency
consistent of 94.04% with the power
output between 54 to 57 MW.

scheduling results for a gross head of 174 m for 2016

15
# Nam Ngum 2 Hydropower Plant

Comparison between actual efficiency conventional model and feasibility study,

Actual efficiency of operation

Consideration for the Maximum, Normal, and Minimum of head

Nam Ngum 2 Diff.

Hydropower Actual efficiency Diff. between
Actual efficiency
Plant Feasibility study of conventional between Model/act
of operation
model Model/FS ual

Head Power Flow Eff., (%) Flow Eff., (%) Flow Eff., (%)
(m) (MW) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (%)

160 218 146.16 95.55 150.25 95.5 108 94.77 0.008 0.007
155 209.2 144.65 95.52 147.80 95.6 149 93.09 0.025 0.026
130 159.5 134.84 92.85 132.50 94.5 146 86.60 0.067 0.08316
Unit Characteristic Data

The best efficiency point of the unit characteristics is 95.06%

with the power of 168.67MW and the flow of 114m3/s

Unit efficiency curve with a head of 160 m

17
Optimized Plant Efficiency and Flow o Optimized plant efficiency curves at
160m show the best efficiency point at
94.95% and optimized plant flow of
118m3/s
o Unit operated the power output of
175MW
o combined generated with three units
operating the power output was shown
of 527 MW and optimized plant flow
about 355m3/s.

o The sequence of
operating was requires
that a single unit be
operated until the plant
load exceeds 223MW
(Maximum unit Load) 18
Facility Operational Data Actual & Optimized Plant Efficiency

o Actual and Optimized plant efficiency and qualified plant

output power typically varied 19.42 and 604.02 MW.
o A consistent pattern for the actual dispatch is that units 1,
2, and 3 are operated at the same load average of 207
MW The optimized plant potential power able to produce
40.20 to 643.94 MW with the optimized plant efficiency
in varied between ranges of 48.09% to 95.07% Maximum
19
 Performance and Optimized of Nam Ngum 2 Hydropower Plant

Scheduling Efficiency Analysis

efficiency curve is relatively flat
between 125 to 155 MW and combined
operating three units the peak efficiency
consistent of 94.87% with the power
output between 133 to 447 MW.

scheduling results for a gross head of 135 m for 2014

20
CONCLUSSION

o Actual efficiency conventional of operation model of Nam Leuk Hydropower

Plant greater than the feasibility study (FS);
o The optimized plant efficiency consistent in the range of 78.66 to 94.09%
Maximum; The consistent pattern for actual dispatch for Units 1&2 should
operated in the same load of 30MW;
o The optimized plant potential power that the plant could produce between the
range of 28.24 to 63.79MW maximum.
o Kept the scheduling efficiency the plant could improvement in generation
efficiency of 0.07% and energy generation of 301,793.86MWh per 2 years

o Actual efficiency conventional of operation model of Nam Ngum 2 Hydropower

Plant shown a little bit different from the feasibility study (FS)
o The optimized plant efficiency consistent in the range of 51.24% to 95.12%
Maximum; The consistent pattern for actual dispatch for Units 1, 2 and 3 should
operated in the same load of 207MW;
21
CONCLUSSION

o The optimized plant potential power that the plant could produce between the
range of 40.20 to 643.94 MW;
o Kept the scheduling efficiency the plant could improvement in generation
efficiency of 0.78% and energy generation of 6,432,006 MWh per 3 years.

RECOMANDATION

o The plants should be measurement the unit characteristics for all units/turbine
o The should follow the plant generation efficiency;
o The frequency of the timestamp of Nam Leuk should be need to improve by 5-
15 minute at least

22
Future Study
1) To improving performance from Existing Hydropower

o Improving Performance of Generating equipment (e.g. Turbines); the option

that the similar researchers should upgrade modernize to increase energy
and capacity.
o Power House extra units by construction extra unit in available bay to
increase energy and capacity
o Intake conduits the researchers should consider the pressure tunnels,
penstocks and gate control structures
o Civil structures-the researcher should raise reservoir levels in permanent to
increase storage volume and hydraulic head
o Lower tailwater Levels by excavate tailrace to increase hydraulic head for
generation
Source: International Energy Agency Hydropower 23
Future Study
2) The similar research should carry out with the following tasks:

o analysis the lost energy opportunity LEO

o Lost Revenue Opportunity LRO
o Lost Conservation Opportunity WCO
o To sustainable hydropower development sector in Lao PDR the future
researcher should be consider the eco-hydraulic system, to improve the
water quality of the stream flow

Source: International Energy Agency Hydropower 24

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTIONS

25