A Study On The Implementation of A Hydropower Pump Energy Storage Scheme Within An Abandoned Deep Mine

A Study On
The Implementation Of
A Hydropower Pump
Energy Storage Scheme
Within An Abandoned
Deep Mine
Mr SJ Erasmus
2016
A Study On
The Implementation Of
A Hydropower Pump
Energy Storage Scheme
Within An Abandoned
Deep Mine
Mechanical Project 478

Final Report
Mr SJ Erasmus
Supervisors:
Prof TW Von Backstrm
Prof A Brent
2016
Executive Summary
Title of Project
The Implementation of a Hydropower Pump Storage Scheme In An Abandoned Deep
Mine
Objectives
To identify whether there is a use for abandoned mines in South Africa by converting them
into energy storage schemes, and thus contribute to the current energy crisis.
Which aspects of the project are new/unique?

The conversion of a mine into an energy storage scheme, as well as the adjustment of a
hydropower pump storage scheme to suit the demographics of a mine.
What are the (expected) findings?

That the implementation of a hydropower pump storage scheme in an abandoned mine is
feasible regarding the technical and economic aspects.
What value do the results have?

It has the potential to contribute to the current energy crisis as well as have an economic
impact on mining in South Africa.
If more than one student is involved, what is each ones contribution?

N.A.
Which aspects of the project will carry on after completion?
The design can be improved by using different methods to make it a better economical
option.
What are the expected advantages of continuation?

It will have a positive economic impact as well as increase the supply of electricity during
on-peak periods in South Africa.
What arrangements have been made to expedite continuation?

None as of yet.
Plagiarism declaration
I know that plagiarism is wrong.
Plagiarism is to use another's work (even if it is summarised, translated or rephrased) and pretend
that it is one's own.
This assignment is my own work.
Each contribution to and quotation (e.g. "cut and paste") in this assignment from the work(s) of
other people has been explicitly attributed, and has been cited and referenced. In addition to being
explicitly attributed, all quotations are enclosed in inverted commas, and long quotations are
additionally in indented paragraphs.
I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to use my work (in paper, graphics, electronic,
verbal or any other format) with the intention of passing it off as his/her own work.
I know that a mark of zero may be awarded to assignments with plagiarism and also that no
opportunity be given to submit an improved assignment.
I know that students involved in plagiarism will be reported to the Registrar and/or the Central
Disciplinary Committee.
Name: SJ Erasmus
Student no: 16946618
Signature:
Date: 21 October 2016
i|Page
Outcome Assessment
Outcome Section in which outcome is
addressed
ELO 1: Problem solving - Project Final Report
Demonstrate competence to identify, assess, - Chapter 3
formulate and solve convergent and - Chapter 6
divergent engineering problems creatively - Chapter 7
and innovatively.
ELO 2: Application of scientific and - Chapter 2
engineering knowledge - Chapter 3
Demonstrate competence to apply - Chapter 4
knowledge of mathematics, basic science - Appendix A
and engineering sciences from first principles - Appendix B
to solve engineering problems.
ELO 3: Engineering design - Chapter 4
Demonstrate competence to perform - Chapter 6
creative, procedural and non-procedural - Appendix E
design and synthesis of components,
systems, engineering works, products or
processes.
ELO 5: Engineering methods, skills and - Chapter 3
tools, including Information Technology - Chapter 4
Demonstrate competence to use appropriate - Chapter 6
engineering methods, skills and tools - Appendix D
including those based on information
technology.
ELO 6: Professional and technical - Project Proposal
communication - Weekly Meetings
Demonstrate competence to communicate - First Draft
effectively, both orally and in writing, with - Oral Presentation
engineering audiences and the community at - Final Report
large.
ELO 8: Individual, Team and - Chapter 2 Research
Multidisciplinary Working - Chapter 6
Demonstrate competence to work effectively - Final Report
as an individual, in teams and in multi-
disciplinary environments.
ELO 9: Independent Learning Ability - Chapter 5
Demonstrate competence to engage in - Chapter 6
independent learning through well-developed
learning skills.
ii | P a g e
Dedication
Dedicated to the authors Grandfather, Mr Nico J Smit.
iii | P a g e
Acknowledgements
Our Heavenly Father for His undivided love.
To Professor Theo Von Backstrm and Professor Alan Brent for their supervision, advice and guidance
throughout the duration of the project.
Peet Steyn Jnr for initiating the interest of the author in the project.
Professor Nielen Van Der Merwe for sharing his knowledge and expertise.
The author specially thanks Casper, Hanlie, Jeannie and Nico Erasmus, as well as their immediate family,
for their moral support and the opportunity to have studied for a Mechanical Engineering Degree.
iv | P a g e
Table of Contents
Plagiarism declaration ................................................................................................................................ i
Outcome Assessment ............................................................................................................................... ii
Dedication................................................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ viii
1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Motivation .................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Literature Study .................................................................................................................................. 2
2.1. Post-mining Development Opportunities ................................................................................ 2
2.1.1. Subterranean hydropower generation ............................................................................ 3
2.2. Hydro Power Storage Scheme................................................................................................. 4
2.3. Turbines ....................................................................................................................................... 4
2.3.1. Radial Flow Turbine (Francis) .......................................................................................... 5
2.3.2. Axial Flow Turbine (Kaplan).............................................................................................. 6
2.4. Pumps .......................................................................................................................................... 7
2.4.1. Centrifugal Pump ................................................................................................................ 8
2.4.2. Axial Flow Pump ................................................................................................................. 8
2.5. Acid Mine Drainage .................................................................................................................... 9
2.6. Energy Consumption of South Africa .................................................................................... 10
3. Feasibility Study Technical Analysis .......................................................................................... 11
3.1.1. Francis Turbine ................................................................................................................. 11
3.1.2. Kaplan Turbine ................................................................................................................. 13
3.1.3. Specific Speed Analysis .................................................................................................. 14
3.1.4. Results ............................................................................................................................... 15
4. Design ................................................................................................................................................ 15
4.1. Intake.......................................................................................................................................... 17
4.2. Pipeline ...................................................................................................................................... 17
4.2.1. Pipe Materials ................................................................................................................... 18
4.3. Filtration Plant ........................................................................................................................... 19
4.4. Powerhouse .............................................................................................................................. 19
v|Page
4.5. Induction Motor ......................................................................................................................... 19
4.6. Turbine ....................................................................................................................................... 19
4.7. Final Design .............................................................................................................................. 20
5. Economic Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 21
5.1.1. Levelised Cost of Electricity ............................................................................................ 23
6. Simulations ........................................................................................................................................ 24
6.1. Turbine ....................................................................................................................................... 24
6.1.1. Results ............................................................................................................................... 26
6.2. Pump .......................................................................................................................................... 27
6.2.1. Results ............................................................................................................................... 28
7. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 29
8. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 30
References ................................................................................................................................................ 31
Appendix A: Turbine Calculations ........................................................................................................... A
Appendix B: Design Calculations............................................................................................................. F
Appendix C: LCOE Calculations ............................................................................................................... I
Appendix D: Tariff Catalogue ................................................................................................................... K
Appendix E: Simulations ........................................................................................................................... L
E1: Turbine Inputs .................................................................................................................................. L
E1.1: Turbine Results ............................................................................................................................ P
E2: Pump Inputs ..................................................................................................................................... S
E2.1: Pump Results ............................................................................................................................... V
Appendix F: Techno-Economic Analysis ................................................................................................ Y
Appendix G: Gantt Chart ........................................................................................................................ AA
vi | P a g e
List of Figures
Figure 1: Hydro Power storage scheme (Wikipedia, 2016) ................................................................. 4
Figure 2:Francis Turbine (Basheer, 2015) ............................................................................................. 5
Figure 3: Francis turbine application range (Voith, 2013) .................................................................... 6
Figure 4: Kaplan turbine (Khan, 2016) .................................................................................................... 7
Figure 5: Application range for a Kaplan turbines (Ossberger, 2007) ............................................... 7
Figure 6: Centrifugal pump (Machinery Spaces, 2016) ........................................................................ 8
Figure 7: Axial flow pump (Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2015) ......................................... 9
Figure 8: Acid Mine Drainage in Johannesburg (City of Johannesburg, 2011) .............................. 10
Figure 9: Electricity produced and consumed in South Africa (StatsSA, 2015) ............................. 10
Figure 10: Energy line of a Francis turbine (Sayers, 1990) ............................................................... 12
Figure 11: Velocity triangles for a Francis turbine (Sayers, 1990) ................................................... 13
Figure 12: Velocity triangles of a Kaplan turbine (Sayers, 1990) ..................................................... 14
Figure 13: System Energy Line .............................................................................................................. 16
Figure 14: Capital cost as a function of plant capacity for new sites (Hall, et al., 2003) ............... 22
Figure 15: Electrical and mechanical equipment as a function of installed capacity (Kumar, et
al., 2015) .................................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 16: Turbine Simulation Setup..................................................................................................... 25
Figure 17: Pump Simulation Setup ........................................................................................................ 27
Figure 18: Boundary Conditions - 1 and 0.............................................................................................. L
Figure 19: Valve Conditions ..................................................................................................................... L
Figure 20: Bend Conditions - 4 and 8 ....................................................................................................M
Figure 21: Pipe Conditions - 2 and 6...................................................................................................... N
Figure 22: Pipe Conditions - 10 and Turbine Conditions - 12 ............................................................ O
Figure 23: Boundary Conditions - 16 and 17 ......................................................................................... S
Figure 24: Bend Conditions - 4 and 8 ..................................................................................................... S
Figure 25: Pipe Conditions - 2 and 6....................................................................................................... T
Figure 26: Pipe Conditions - 10 and Pump Conditions - 1 ................................................................. U
Figure 27: Gantt Chart ............................................................................................................................ AA
vii | P a g e
List of Tables
Table 1: Post-mining Development Opportunities ................................................................................ 2
Table 2: Advantages and disadvantages of an axial flow pump (IEEE, 2016) ................................. 8
Table 3: Calculation Results ................................................................................................................... 15
Table 4: Design Parameters ................................................................................................................... 16
Table 5: Advantages of HDPE and GRP (Marley Pipe Systems, 2013) (HOBAS, 2016) ............. 18
Table 6: LCOE Results............................................................................................................................ 24
Table 7: Turbine Simulation Component List ....................................................................................... 25
Table 8: Turbine Simulation Results ..................................................................................................... 26
Table 9: Pump Simulation Component List .......................................................................................... 27
Table 10: Pump Simulation Results ...................................................................................................... 28
Table 11: Full Results of Simulation 1 Bends ........................................................................................ P
Table 12: Full Results of Simulation 1 Pipes ........................................................................................ Q
Table 13: Full Results of Francis Turbine Simulation ........................................................................... R
Table 14: Full Results of Simulation 2 Bends ........................................................................................ V
Table 15: Full Results of Simulation 2 Pipes ....................................................................................... W
Table 16: Full Results of Pump Simulation ............................................................................................ X
Table 17: Proposed Budget ...................................................................................................................... Y
Table 18: Actual Budget ............................................................................................................................ Y
viii | P a g e
1. Introduction
Electricity is a basic need in everyday life. However, insufficient electricity is generated exactly
when required to satisfy the needs of all South Africans. It is thus crucial to find new and innovative
ways of electricity generation in South Africa. A project to study the feasibility of hydropower pump
storage schemes in abandoned mines was proposed by Mr SJ Erasmus, and was undertaken in
conjunction with the Department of Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering Department at
Stellenbosch University. The aim of this project is to provide a potential solution to the current
energy crisis in South Africa, as well as remove the threat of Acid Mine Drainage posed by
abandoned deep mines. This will be discussed in detail in the sections that follow.
This document is divided into the following sections: a project motivation with objectives, literature
about post-closure mines, hydropower storage schemes, acid drainage, water tables and pumps
and turbines. The energy consumption of South Africa is also discussed. Further, it also includes
a feasibility study, design, simulation and conclusion.
1.1. Motivation
The current electricity generation capacity in South Africa is insufficient (Larson, 2015). This has
caused Eskom, the major supplier of electricity in South Africa, to implement a protocol known as
load shedding. In order to try and fulfil electricity demands Eskom is currently building a power
station, Medupi, which will only be fully online by the end of 2017 (Eskom, 2016). Unfortunately,
Medupi was designed to meet the electricity demand based on 2007 statistics. However, by the
time Medupi is fully functional ten years later the demand would have increased drastically, and
once again not be met. Some very old power stations will also have to be decommissioned in the
near future.
Another growing problem in South Africa is abandoned and closed down deep mines. South Africa
accounted for 15% of the worlds gold in 2004 and 12% in 2005, and was thus one of the leading
countries regarding gold production (Amey, 2002). Gold mines are slowly being exhausted of their
reserves and according to StatsSA (2015), gold reserves will be depleted in a mere 33 years.
Therefore, closures of all gold mines in South Africa is imminent. Another growing threat that
these mines pose is an increase in gang activity. Illegal mining is taking place in these mines,
causing a safety problem for the surrounding areas, as well as for the illegal miners. The illegal
mining industry also poses a financial threat to the mining industry (Maylie, 2014).
The need to solve both the above-mentioned problems serves as a motivation for the project. In
achieving a solution, a positive contribution will be made towards solving these problems.
1.2. Objectives
The objectives of the study are as follows:
1. To identify whether a pumped-storage hydropower energy storage scheme can be
implemented within a deep mine. This will be determined by means of a feasibility study.
2. To prove that the hydropower energy storage scheme is economically feasible.
3. To prove that the hydropower energy storage scheme serves as a solution to the problems
identified in section 1.1.
1|Page
2. Literature Study
In order to fully understand deep mines and their components, as well as hydro electricity
generation, a literature study was conducted. This study includes literature on opportunities for
post-closure mines, hydropower pump energy storage schemes, pumps, turbines, and Acid Mine
Drainage.
2.1. Post-mining Development Opportunities

According to Winde & Stocke (2009) many mining towns in the Far West Rand fear the inevitable
impact of mine closure. An assessment was subsequently undertaken to determine the
opportunities that lie within post-mining.
During this assessment many opportunities were identified. Table 1 indicates these opportunities,
as well as each opportunitys advantages and disadvantages.
Table 1: Post-mining Development Opportunities
Opportunity Pros Cons

Will help in preventing Safety risk for researchers
worst-case scenarios Health risk for researchers
within deep mining
Research
Unique studies of various
mining fields such as karst
hydrology
Capitalization of karst These areas are scarce
areas would aid in
Karst*-related groundwater storage,
underground water
generation.
No evaporation takes Water can get polluted
Active groundwater place Water can seep into the
recharge and harvesting ground (ground absorbs
water)
Economical advantage More electricity will be
Solves energy crisis at used than generated
high demand periods Water pollution
Subterranean hydropower Main structures are in Small capacity
generation place
Longer lifetime than other
storage schemes eq.
Battery
Solves energy crisis at Still a relatively new area
Hydrothermal energy high demand periods for researchers and
generation engineers
Small capacity
This opportunity will Expensive practice
provide freshwater Sea creatures are difficult
'Aqua production' and the
shellfish, eel and other as stock to farm with.
application of the 'virtual
export commodities. Specific circumstances
water' concept
must be ensured, which
will be challenging
2|Page
Tourism opportunities Will give the country an Only for a specific market
economical boost Safety measures must be
Karst-related tourism Expose everyday people taken, thus a lot of capital
to the mining industry with no specific turnover
Mining-related tourism rate
Removal of sinkholes Expensive
Transforming the Labour intensive
wasteland into a tourist
Wasteland transformation attraction can lead to the
advantages as stated in
the previous Row
regarding tourism
activities
Extensive research can Not all sites will be eligible
lead to a nuclear industry for this opportunity
Uranium storage Will add to the value of the
current uranium industry
of South Africa
Economic gain Safety hazard
Mine voids for nuclear Health hazard for
waste storage residents in the immediate
area
Commercially viable Safety hazard
Underground carbon CO2 has a wide range of Mines and power stations
products that can be are far from one another
dioxide storage
developed from it and thus the infrastructure
needed will be expensive
*Karst Topography within the mine formed through dissolution of rocks, forming underground caves.
In a study conducted by Winde & Stoch (2009) all the above mentioned opportunities are
discussed in detail. In the next section Subterranean hydropower generation will be discussed
2.1.1. Subterranean hydropower generation

Similar to the Eskom hydro pumping scheme at the Sterkfontein Dam in the Drakensberg, the
concept is to generate electricity in peak demand times, and then pump the water back up to the
upper reservoir during off-peak periods. During peak-demand periods, electricity generated by
the scheme can be sold at a much higher price than it would cost the scheme to pump the water
back to the upper reservoir. A similar system is installed in the karst areas of Indonesia, where
underground flow drives irrigation pumps bringing the water back to the surface (Zuber-Knost,
2003).
In order to implement such a concept, the impact of deep-level gold mining on its surroundings
should be fully understood and addressed. This includes water quality treats (acid drainage),
water flow aspects, the effects of sinkholes, and the effect of rising groundwater levels (Amey,
2002). Understanding of the mechanics regarding flow systems, turbines and pumps and
simulation software is also critical.
3|Page
2.2. Hydro Power Storage Scheme
As mentioned in section 2.1.1, hydropower energy storage entails the generation of electricity
during peak demand and pumping the water back up to the upper reservoir during off-peak
periods.
As illustrated in Figure 1, as an example, water flows through a turbine by means of gravity and
in turn, the turbine generates electricity. Once the process is completed, the water is pumped
back up the gradient. This whole process will repeat itself.
Figure 1: Hydro Power storage scheme (Wikipedia, 2016)
Currently there are various energy storage schemes in South Africa. These schemes include
Ingula, Drakensberg, Palmiet and Steenbras (hydro4Africa, 2015). The aim of these schemes is
to generate electricity during on-peak periods. It is clear that these schemes are not enough, since
the import of electricity is still a necessity for South Africa (StatsSA, 2015). A total of 5% of
electricity generated in South Africa is generated by hydro power plants, including hydro energy
storage schemes (Department of Energy, 2016). South Africas energy storage schemes account
for a total generation of 2732 MW (hydro4Africa, 2015). The worlds hydropower potential
amounts to 20 billion Megawatt hours per year, with only 25% of this developed thus far (Voith,
2013).
2.3. Turbines
The hydro turbine is designed to convert hydraulic energy into rotational mechanical energy on
the turbine shaft. Usually the shaft is directly connected to an electric generator, which converts
the mechanical energy into electrical energy (Vinogg & Elstad, 2003).
Advantages of a hydro turbine include (Sayers, 1990):
1. High efficiency
4|Page
2. Low wear and tear
3. No pollution of the atmosphere
4. Renewable energy, thus no exhaustion of the source. In this case however, energy is
dissipated due to the system being a pumped storage scheme.
5. Ease of maintenance
6. Flexibility of operation
The generation of electricity is done through the combination of a generator and a turbine. In order
to fully understand the process, the various turbine options must first be evaluated. There are
three hydraulic turbines capable of generating electricity, namely the Pelton wheel, radial flow
turbine, and axial flow turbine. For the purpose of this study the Pelton wheel is not a viable option,
since it cannot act as a pump. That leaves the option of either a radial flow turbine or an axial flow
turbine.
2.3.1. Radial Flow Turbine (Francis)

The radial flow turbine, better known as a Francis turbine, is classified as a reaction turbine due
to its function of reacting to the fluid that enters its region of flow (area in which the blades
operate). This entails that the turbine needs a casing to prevent deviation of the fluid around the
turbines region of flow. A Francis turbine is designed for use in hydro systems with medium heads
(30-500 m) and high pressures. The highest head utilized by a Francis turbine in Norway is 610m
with an output of 154MW. The turbines speed ranges between 83 and a 1000 rpm, with the runner
diameter ranging between 1 and 10m (Vinogg & Elstad, 2003).
Water enters the turbine by means of a scroll casing. The scroll casing maintains a uniform water
velocity (Mesa Associates; Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2012). Water then passes through
guide vanes that are in a fixed position, inside which adjustable guide vanes are situated for the
control of the flow rate through the turbine. Next, the water enters the rotor where it flows radially
through the rotor vanes and exits the rotor blades at a 90 angle to the radial direction, thus in the
axial direction, into the draft tube. The draft tube has an important function in bringing the water
pressure back to the pressure of the tailrace; in effect, most of the remaining kinetic energy is
removed. In the event of electricity generation, the main shaft of the turbine is connected to a
generator. Figure 2 shows a cross section of a typical Francis turbine (Sayers, 1990).
Figure 2: Francis Turbine (Basheer, 2015)
5|Page
The application range for a Francis turbine is illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Francis turbine application range (Voith, 2013)
2.3.2. Axial Flow Turbine (Kaplan)

The Kaplan turbine is based on the principles of a Francis turbine and was developed by the
Austrian engineer, Victor Kaplan (Ossberger, 2007). Like the Francis turbine, a Kaplan turbine
also forms part of reaction type turbines, but typically operates at lower heads (Sayers, 1990).
The velocity triangles, as well as the workings of the turbine, differ from that of a radial flow turbine.
Turbines of this nature are for use in the case of low heads (30-400 m) and high flow rates. The
inlet guide vanes are fixed at a higher offset than the runner blades. This forces the fluid to turn
90 into the axial direction into the runner blades. The runner blades are adjustable to account for
any load changes within the turbine. Axial flow turbines typically consist of 4 to 6 blades to be
strong enough to transmit high torques that arise. Figure 4 illustrates a Kaplan turbine. The draft
tube in a Kaplan turbine serves the same purpose as the draft tube within a Francis turbine.
(Sayers, 1990)
Kaplan turbines are well suited for a run-of-the-river hydropower plant due to their adjustable
blades that offer a high efficiency over wide variations of head and flow. High specific speed and
the large discharge capacity of a Kaplan turbine make the turbine relatively compact, which
assists in an easier installation procedure within powerhouses and dam walls. The turbine speed
ranges between 79 and 429 rpm, with a runner diameter between 2 and 8 m (Vinogg & Elstad,
2003).
6|Page
Figure 4: Kaplan turbine (Khan, 2016)
Figure 5 shows the application range for a Kaplan turbine.
Figure 5: Application range for a Kaplan turbine (Ossberger, 2007)
Both the Francis and Kaplan turbines can function as reversible pump-turbines, and therefore are
ideal options to use in the generation electricity in deep mines (Voith, 2013).
2.4. Pumps
Pumps are used to convert mechanical energy to hydraulic energy. This is done when the pump
mechanically generates a tangential acceleration to the water as it flows through the pump. Two
types of pumps are commonly used, namely centrifugal and axial flow pumps. These pumps
derive their names from the nature of the fluid flow within the pump (Sayers, 1990).
Both the centrifugal and axial flow pumps have the same general system in which they operate,
but the way in which each pump reaches its outcome differs. The aim of the general system is to
7|Page
pump water from a low altitude to a high altitude. To achieve this, the pump must overcome
various losses in the system. These losses are mainly due to, but not limited to, pipe friction.
2.4.1. Centrifugal Pump

A Centrifugal pump is in principle a Francis turbine in reverse. Please refer to Figure 6 as an
explanation. Its purpose is to covert energy from a prime mover, such as a generator, into kinetic
energy and then into pressure energy (Sahdev, 2015). The water is sucked through the draft tube
into the impeller region, where the water flows through the fixed impellers, through the diffusers
and then discharged 90 to the intake. The pump is covered by a volute casing, which collects all
the water discharged by the pump. The pump is driven through the shaft by means of an electric
motor or generator (Sayers, 1990).
Figure 6: Centrifugal pump (Machinery Spaces, 2016)
2.4.2. Axial Flow Pump

In an axial flow pump, the impeller pushes the water out parallel to the pump shaft (Technology
Transfer Services, 2016). As the centrifugal pump is a reverse of the Francis turbine, the axial
flow pump is the reverse of a Kaplan turbine. Water is sucked through the draft tube into the
impeller region, from where it is discharged into the intake region. In the intake region the casing
collects all the discharged water and guides it through the guide vanes, through the pipes, where
it is then discharged back into the upper reservoir. Once again, the pump is driven through a shaft
by means of an electric motor or generator. Table 2 lists both the advantages and disadvantages
of an axial flow pump as well as where it is applicable.
Table 2: Advantages and disadvantages of an axial flow pump (IEEE, 2016)
Advantages Disadvantages
High flow rates (capacity) Low head and discharge pressures
Can be adjusted for best efficiency at varying
Not suitable for suction lift
conditions
8|Page
Figure 7 illustrates the cross section of an axial flow pump.
Figure 7: Axial flow pump (Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2015)
Now that the pump options have been discussed, it is important to take a closer look at the deep
mine water itself.
2.5. Acid Mine Drainage

In 2010, a thorough investigation was done on Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) in the Witwatersrand
Gold Fields (Expert Team of the Inter-Ministerial Committee, 2010). Acid Mine Drainage occurs
when water flows over sulphur-bearing minerals, causing a reaction between the water and
sulphur, producing acid. Water leaks into the mines due to the groundwater tables. Groundwater
tables are defined as the upper surface of the soil or rocks permanently saturated with water. This
water leaks into the mine voids, at which point the acid contaminates the water, and then the
water drains out of the mine back into underground and eventually surface water systems. As a
result of the leakage various risks have been identified in regards to the flooding of mines and the
decant of AMD to the environment. These risks are (Expert Team of the Inter-Ministerial
Committee, 2010):
Contamination of shallow groundwater resources that are required for agricultural use and
human consumption.
Geotechnical impacts, such as the flooding of underground infrastructure in areas where
water rises close to urban areas.
Increased seismic activity, which could have a moderate localized effect on property and
infrastructure.
Serious negative ecological impacts.
Regional impacts on major river systems.
Localized flooding in low-lying areas.
As can be concluded from the above risks, AMD has a serious effect on various components, for
both the industry and the environment. These risks forced the mining industry to implement a
protocol, which entails that all closed mines must maintain the water level at or below the relevant
Environmental Critical Levels (ECL), by pumping the water out of the mine into a reservoir on
ground level. The ECL is defined as the highest water level within the mine void where no AMD
9|Page
flows out of the mine workings into surrounding ground or surface water (Expert Team of the Inter-
Ministerial Committee, 2010).
Figure 8 illustrates AMD at a Johannesburg gold mine. This water, if left untreated, will seep back
into the ground and contaminate underground water reservoirs.
Figure 8: Acid Mine Drainage in Johannesburg (City of Johannesburg, 2011)
2.6. Energy Consumption of South Africa

According to StatsSA (2015), less electrical energy was generated in 2014 than in 2013. Recent
data confirms that energy production peaked in 2011 and has since been declining. Figure 9
shows the electricity generated from 2005 to 2014.
Figure 9: Electricity produced and consumed in South Africa (StatsSA, 2015)
10 | P a g e
Noticeable in the above figure is an increase of 18,6% in imported electricity. Eskom exports
electricity to neighbouring countries, such as Lesotho and Swaziland. The reason for the export
of electricity is that once electricity is generated, it has to be consumed immediately. During the
summer months as well as off-peak periods, the supply tends to be more than the demand and
this forces Eskom to supply South Africas neighbouring countries. During on-peak periods and
winter months, the demand increases rapidly and thus as a result electricity is imported to meet
the demand.
3. Feasibility Study Technical Analysis

A feasibility study can be defined as the analysis of the viability of an idea (Hofstrand & Holz-
Clause, 2009). In the sections that follow a feasibility study on the technical aspects of the project
is discussed.
As described in the literature study, Francis and Kaplan turbines are reversible and act as pumps
when in the reversible state. It is therefore paramount to determine whether it is feasible for these
turbines to act as pumps within the hydropower storage scheme, and which turbine will be more
suitable within the specific setup. As previously stated a Pelton wheel is a non-reversible turbine
and is thus not considered a suitable option in the setup.
In this section each turbine will be discussed regarding their technical capabilities, after which
calculations will be done to determine the most suitable turbine for the application.
3.1.1. Francis Turbine

When determining the efficiency of a Francis turbine, certain assumptions are made. These
assumptions are (Sayers, 1990):
1. The impeller blades are infinitely thin, thus allowing the pressure difference across them,
which creates torque, to be replaced by tangential forces that act on the fluid.
2. The variation in velocity across the width and depth of the impeller is zero.
3. The analysis will be confined to conditions at the impeller inlet and outlet, and to the
angular momentum change between these two points. No account is taken of the condition
of the fluid between the inlet and outlet.
4. It is assumed that at inlet the fluid is moving radially after entering the eye of the turbine.
Across all turbines there is an energy line throughout the system. The energy line represents the
various heads across the system, which includes all head losses due to friction. The energy line
is illustrated in Figure 10. Here hfg, hg, hr and hd represent head losses due to friction in the
pipeline, guide vanes, runner and draft tube respectively. As described, kinetic energy is removed
by the draft tube and is represented by the equation 32 /2 (1) in Figure 10.
11 | P a g e
Figure 10: Energy line of a Francis turbine (Sayers, 1990)
To determine the efficiency of a turbine, velocity triangles are used. Note that absolute velocity,
relative velocity and tangential velocity are represented by Ci, Wi and Ui respectively. Subscripts
1 and 2 refer to the inlet and outlet points of the turbine. Water enters through the guide vanes
and into the runner at radius r1 and angle 1. Here the water is at an absolute velocity C1 and, by
the means of using 1 and trigonometry, be translated to W 1 and U1 as shown. Angle 1 is the
angle of flow to the tangential direction. At the outlet, radius r 2, the water leaves the blades at an
angle 2 and the velocities as shown. In this case the absolute velocity (C2) is equal to the
tangential velocity (U2) due to the water exiting in the tangential direction. Cr1 and Cr2 represent
the velocity towards the axis of rotation. Figure 11 shows the velocity triangles of a Francis turbine
at the inlet and outlet respectively. (Sayers, 1990)
By means of trigonometry, the various velocities can be calculated and will then be used to
calculate the overall efficiency by using the equations that will now be discussed.
The basis of all turbine equations is the Eulers turbine equation:
(1 1 2 2 )
= = (2)

To accurately determine the efficiency of the turbine, the various head losses must be determined.
The total head across the turbine is:
(02 32 )
= (0 3 ) + + (0 3 ) (3)
2
Since p3 is at atmospheric pressure at the tailrace and Z3 is equal to zero, we have:
0 02 32
=( + + 0 ) (4)
2 2
12 | P a g e
Figure 11: Velocity triangles for a Francis turbine (Sayers, 1990)
The overall efficiency can now be determined by dividing the shaft output power by the fluid power
that is available at the inlet.

= (5)

The hydraulic efficiency:

+
= (6)

In the equation + represents the theoretical energy transfer per unit weight of fluid flow. The
maximum efficiency is determined by:
1 1
= (7)

3.1.2. Kaplan Turbine

The same assumptions can be made for a Kaplan turbine than for a Francis turbine. Although the
Kaplan turbine has the same energy line than that of the Francis turbine, the velocity triangles
differ. The velocity triangles are drawn at the mean radius. This is due to the conditions that
change from hub to tip. Figure 12 shows the velocity triangles for a Kaplan turbine.
13 | P a g e
Figure 12: Velocity triangles of a Kaplan turbine (Sayers, 1990)
Since the flow velocity at both the inlet and outlet of the turbine is axial, the absolute velocity at
the inlet and outlet will be equal to each other. This simplifies calculations in regards to
determining the rest of the velocities by means of Pythagoras. For maximum efficiency, Cx2 will
be equal to zero, as shown in Figure 12. Due to zero whirl, the Eulers turbine equation can be
reduced to:
1
= (8)

The efficiency of a Kaplan turbine makes use of the same equations discussed in the previous
section regarding Francis turbines.
3.1.3. Specific Speed Analysis

To determine the type of turbine suitable for the system, the most accurate analysis will be a
specific speed analysis. The specific speed required within the system is determined by:

= 3 (9)
()4
where N is the turbine shaft speed in rpm, H the theoretical head and Q the volume flow rate
through the turbine. The volume flow rate is determined from:

= (10)

where P is the theoretical output power of the turbine and the water density. All assumptions
made during the analysis are described in Appendix A: Turbine Calculations.
14 | P a g e
3.1.4. Results
After the technical feasibility, calculations were done determine which turbine is most suitable for
the system. Please refer to Appendix A: Turbine Calculations. Since there are numerous
hydropower pump storage schemes in operation across the world assumptions were made during
the calculations to simplify the process.
It was decided that a turbine would be installed in the range of 10MW to 30MW, with calculations
done in increments of 5MW between these limits. Since the Francis turbine is the most common
hydro turbine in the world, together with the estimated head and the fact that it can operate as a
pump, a Francis turbine would best suit the system. A head of 50meters and a 100meters were
inspected respectively. Table 3 summarises the results of the calculations. All other assumptions
are discussed in detail in Appendix A: Turbine Calculations.
It is worthy to note is the difference in shaft speeds between the two heads. It was discovered
during preliminary calculations that a shaft speed of 750 rpm at a head of 50 m would not be able
to produce an output power of 10 MW with a Francis turbine.
Table 3: Calculation Results
Shaft Pipe
Head Power Specific Speed Efficiency
Speed Diameter
[m] [MW] [Dimensionless] [%]
[rpm] [m]
10 2.94 2.27 93.0
15 3.60 2.78 91.7
50 500 20 4.16 3.21 N.A.
25 N.A. N.A. N.A.
30 N.A. N.A. N.A.
10 2.08 1.43 95.1
15 2.55 1.75 94.6
100 750 20 2.94 2.02 94.0
25 3.29 2.26 93.2
30 3.60 2.48 91.7
From the above results, it is recommended that a 20MW Francis turbine be installed at a head of
100 m. A 3 m diameter pipe is recommended for the pipe size that leads up to the turbine. Power
of 20MW and higher at a head of 50 m gives a specific speed greater than 3, which is applicable
for axial flow turbines.
4. Design
The basic principles for a hydropower plant will be used in the design of the pump storage
scheme. For this specific design the biggest challenge will be the addition of a filtration plant in
the system. The filtration system will rid the water of all acids, which will result in clean water
running through the system. Clean water will ensure that the turbine has a long lifetime, since
there are no acids causing rust. Furthermore, filtration will also rid the water of solids that have
the ability to damage the turbines blades and guide vanes.
The following components will feature in the design:
1. Intake This will receive the water from the dam on the surface.
15 | P a g e
2. Pipeline This will transport the water from the dam to the filtration plant and from the
plant to the underground powerhouse
3. Filtration Plant The plant will rid the water of its acid.
4. Powerhouse This will be situated underground, housing the turbine and generator.
5. Draft tube Water exits the turbine through the draft tube. Water will enter here during the
pumping phase.
6. Concrete sleeves To protect the water from sulphur-bearing minerals, causing AMD.
Recent technology developed by Finnish company Global EcoProcess Services Oy (EPSE),
extracts raw materials from AMD that can be used for production of several other processes
(Slater, 2016). This technology will not only help in the design of the system, but will generate an
income for the whole operation. Another added advantage from this is the possible exclusion of
concrete sleeves within the mine shaft. The reason for this is to allow the water to pick up AMD
within the mine, which in turn can be extracted by the filtration plant. A disadvantage of this,
however, will be the risk of possibly damaging the turbine, and increasing maintenance costs.
Further investigation can determine the best option.
From section 4.1.4, the results in Table 4 are taken to aid in the design.
Table 4: Design Parameters
Pipe Inside
Turbine Intake Flow Efficiency Shaft Speed
Diameter Head [m]
Power [MW] Rate [m3/s] [%] [rpm]
[m]
3 20 20.4 100 94 750
The final design is based on the above-discussed technical theory. Figure 13 illustrates the
system. Appendix B: Design Calculations contains the design calculations.
Figure 13: System Energy Line
16 | P a g e
4.1. Intake
The intake of the system is situated near the bottom of the upper reservoir, yet high enough to
not suck in any heavy debris. Heavy debris, such as rocks, is situated at the bottom of the dam,
due to its density being higher than that of water. The intake will have a trash rack to prevent any
heavy debris that do get sucked in from entering the pipeline.
4.2. Pipeline
The pipeline is divided into two sections. From the upper reservoir to the filtration plant and from
the filtration plant to the turbine. The first section losses are not applicable to the generation of
the turbine due to the water travelling through the filtration plant. The section from the plant to the
turbine will be used for the head.
Various losses occur over a pipeline. Within a pipeline friction takes place between the wall and
the water flow, resulting in a head loss, hf. The head loss is determined by the friction constant of
the specific pipe, the length of the pipe, and the flow rate. Due to the change of the magnitude as
well as direction of the water flow, there is another head loss, hv, taking place. Lastly, fittings,
valves and elbows also cause a head loss, known as minor head losses, hm.
To calculate the friction head losses within in the pipeline, the Hazen-Williams equation is used
(Lombard, 2010). It is also possible to use the Darcy-Weisbach equation (Cengel & Cimbala,
2010). However, since the Hazen-Williams equation is not a function of the Reynolds number it
is easier to use:
= 1.85 (11)
where f is known as the friction coefficient.
10.67 (12)
=
1.85 4.87
where l is the pipelines length, K the Hazen-Williams coefficient and D the pipe diameter.
Minor head losses are calculated from:
2 (13)
=
2
where KL is the sum of the loss coefficients of each component in the pipeline, such as valves,
fittings and elbows.
The diameter of the pipeline should be such that the losses do not exceed 10% of the total head,
to ensure a high efficiency.
For pipe systems with a turbine installed, the steady-flow energy equation is represented by:
1 12 2 22 (14)
+ 1 + 1 = + 2 + 2 + +
2 2
where subscripts 1 and 2 represent the top and bottom of the system respectively. P represents
the pressure, the density of the water, the kinetic energy correction factor, V the velocity of
the water z the elevation points of the water level, ht the total net head and hL the total head losses
across the system (Cengel & Cimbala, 2010).
By choosing the bottom of the draft tube is chosen as the reference point, z1 is equal to the gross
head. The starting velocity is relatively small compared to the velocity within the pipeline and as
17 | P a g e
a result V1 can be approached as equal to zero. The kinetic energy correction factor is assumed
as 1 for flow within a pipeline. Equation 14 can be reduced to:
1 2 22 (15)
+ = + + +
2
From the above equation, the total net head is determined:
1 2 22
= + ( ) (16)
2
4.2.1. Pipe Materials

Two types of materials were considered for the design, namely high-density polyethylene (HDPE),
and HOBAS Hydropower Plant Pipes.
HDPE pipes are widely recognized as the economic choice, with a good lifetime and virtually no
maintenance costs. Current installations of HDPE pipes for hydropower projects include Ontario
Power Generation (OPG) in Ontario, Canada, a 10 MW plant, transporting 40m3 of water per
second. After installation, the plant will be able to produce 15 MW, serving approximately 15 000
households (Industrial Water World, 2016). South African manufacturer Marley pipe systems,
produce a Weholite Structured Wall HDPE pipe, with inside diameters of up to 3500mm. Weholite
Structured Wall HDPE pipe provides all the technical advantages of equivalent polyethylene
Solid-Wall pipes, but with substantial savings in weight, thus combining greater ease of installation
with increased cost effectiveness when compared to traditional materials (Marley Pipe Systems,
2013). HDPE pipes have been used in industry to transport AMD for many years (Plastic Pipe,
1997).
HOBAS Hydropower Plant Pipes are pipes specially designed for the transportation of water at a
high flow rate, with minimal friction and at high pressures. The pipe is made out of glass-reinforced
plastic (GRP). The GRP pipes consist out of chopped glass fibre, thermosetting plastic, and
reinforcing agents (HOBAS, 2016). GRP is regarded as the new and revolutionary piping material
to be used for AMD. GRP pipes are resistant to galvanic and electrolytic corrosion (IWC, 2015).
Table 5 compares the two materials advantages.
Table 5: Advantages of HDPE and GRP (Marley Pipe Systems, 2013) (HOBAS, 2016)
Weholite Structured Wall HDPE HOBAS GRP

Virtually leak proof Minimal friction and pressure losses
Flexible Less water hammer than metal pipes
Weld ability UV resistant
Lightweight Low weight enabling ease of installation
Ease of installation High abrasion resistance
Corrosion resistance Corrosion resistance
Versatile Variable lengths
Dimensionally accurate outside diameter
Consistent high quality
Low O&M costs
Long service life (>50 years)
Technical service
18 | P a g e
The most important factor for the design is the friction the water experiences within the pipeline.
HOBAS GRP pipes have a Hazen-Williams coefficient of 155 (HOBAS, 2016) and a HDPE pipe
140 (Engineers Edge, 2016). Please refer to Appendix B: Design Calculations, where calculations
proved that a pipe made from GRP is the best option.
4.3. Filtration Plant

In the plant itself, the water will go through three separate processes. Firstly, the water is passed
through a boric acid reactor, followed by a pH-modifying reactor and then a clarifier to produce
insoluble precipitate and clean water (Slater, 2016). It is recommended that this plant is
outsourced as a project on its own to EPSE. The filtration of AMD is a delicate process, which
can only be done above ground.
4.4. Powerhouse
The powerhouse will be situated underground. This can be done by excavating ground in the
mineshaft to make an area for the turbine and generator. The area will be reinforced with concrete
walls as well as a roof structure to prevent any collapsing.
4.5. Induction Motor

As mentioned in die economic analysis, an induction motor will be used for electricity generation.
By making use of an induction motor, the turbine has no need for a gearbox. The turbine shaft
will rotate at a speed of 750 rpm and to achieve this the induction motor must consist of eight
poles. This is confirmed by:
120
= (17)

Where f is the frequency of supply and Ns, the synchronous speed of 750 rpm. In South Africa,
the frequency of supply is 50Hz.
The only negative aspect of an induction motor is that it requires reactive power from the grid
when operating. An induction motor typically runs at a working factor of 0.9. This can however be
negotiated with Eskom. When the turbine operates as a pump, a soft start or inverter can be used
to get the turbine shaft up to speed before pumping commences at 750 rpm.
Should cost saving not be a deciding factor, a synchronous machine is the suitable option. This
type of machine runs at a power factor of one and has the ability to give and receive reactive
power to and from the grid. This allows Eskom to ask the scheme to either give or take reactive
power, depending on what the grid needs.
An induction motor, however, will be the economic option and thus the choice to implement for
the purpose of this study.
4.6. Turbine
Through the use of a turbine losses will occur. These losses are due to the material used causing
friction.
The power losses are represented by Pi, where the subscript i varies depending on the type of
loss. Losses are at the shaft power output (s), mechanical power loss (m), runner power loss (r),
casing and draft tube loss (c) and leakage loss (l). The water power available is:
19 | P a g e
= + + + + (18)
The hydraulic power loss within the turbine is represented by + + . The loss in the runner
is due to friction. This loss is related to hr and can be determined by the following equation:
= (19)
where Qr is the flow rate through the runner.
Losses in the casing and draft tube are due to eddy, flow separation and friction losses. As with
the runner loss, the power loss is related to the head loss in the casing and draft tube:
= (20)
Lastly, the leakage loss can be prescribed to the part of the flow rate that leaks past the runner
and therefore this flow rate does not add to the total power generated by the runner:
= (21)
where hr represents the total head loss across the runner and q the flow rate that leaks past the
runner.
4.7. Final Design

There are three viable design options for the project. All these options include the main setup of
the system, which includes the upper reservoir, pipeline and turbine. The three options are
discussed below.
Design 1:
This design is the most expensive option. It includes all the viable components. The water will
flow down the pipeline and through the turbine, at which point the water will enter a shaft that is
sleeved with concrete. The sleeving will separate the water from the shaft walls, preventing AMD.
Design 1 will require a once-off filtration of all the water used in the system, after which the water
will be clean for the duration of the schemes lifetime.
Design 2:
Design 2 incorporates a permanent filtration plant within the system. The filtration plant will be
situated within the pipeline that exits the mine. For the filtration plant to be active on a regular
basis, the option of sleeving the shaft with concrete will be excluded. This will allow the water to
be contaminated by AMD, which allows the filtration plant to extract the desired elements from
the water.
The filtration plant will operate as an entity on its own, producing its own revenue. The scheme
will supply the AMD water to the filtration plant at a fee, generating an extra income for the
scheme.
Design 3:
Design 3 is the simplest option. In this design, the filtration plant and concrete sleeves are
excluded from the system, leaving only the basic elements needed for the scheme to operate.
Since the turbine/pump must be rigid enough to handle AMD, including hard rocks such as quarts,
in all three designs, Design 3 is the least expensive option.
20 | P a g e
5. Economic Analysis
To accurately determine if the project is an economically feasible one, the ratio of capital per kWh
must be compared to other power storage schemes. It is important to highlight that the main aim
of the project is to determine the feasibility of the technical aspects. The economic feasibility will
be determined in a less precise study and can be adjusted at a later stage to achieve a desirable
ratio.
The reason for capital per kWh and not capital per kW is due to the fact that a power storage
schemes capacity is dependent on the amount of kW it can generate in one cycle. The cycle will
depend on the amount of water that is available, the rate at which the water flows through the
turbine and the duration of the on-peak period in the usage of consumers.
In any hydropower project, there are two major cost groups, namely: civil construction costs, and
electromechanical equipment costs. The first mentioned is normally 70-80% of the total capital,
while the latter carries nearly the rest of the capital costs. The remaining costs are contributed to
planning, environmental impact analysis, licensing, mitigation and water quality monitoring
(Kumar, et al., 2015).
The civil construction cost is related to the country in which the project takes place. Currently
South Africa has an average price of R2 500 per m3 for concrete work, using standard construction
concrete 25 MPa (Steyn, 2016). For a concrete slab, reinforced steel (Rebar) must be added,
adding up to R1 462 per m3 extra for the rebar. Civil construction costs are always site specific,
mainly due to the inherent characteristics of the topography (Kumar, et al., 2015). In this project,
the civil construction will include the following: concrete props for blocking tunnels, excavation
work, upgrading of dam structures and the possibility of sleeving the shaft walls with concrete.
Costs of electromechanical equipment depend on the world market prices. These components
include the turbine, generator and electrical work. A study by Hall et al (2003) presents typical
capital costs for new sites. Figure 14 is based on American civil construction costs. Due to South
Africa being a labour intensive country and the site not classified as a new site, the expected
capital cost for the project will be less than illustrated in Figure 14. The figure estimates a capital
cost of approximately $30 000 000 at the lower boundary. The median and upper boundary
estimate a capital cost of $40 000 000 and $60 000 000 respectively. Worthy to note in the figure
is the linear line (bottom blue), which represents a capital cost of $1 500 per kW.
To reduce the cost of electromechanical equipment it is recommended by Kamper (2016) that an
induction motor, rather than a permanent magnet generator or synchronous machine, be used for
generation electrical energy from the turbine shaft. An induction motor is cheap and easy to
manufacture due to its simplicity in working principles.
Electrical and mechanical equipment as a function of installed capacity can be viewed in Figure
15. South Africa currently has a 2732 MW installed capacity which cost approximately $ 500 000
000. Taking Figure 15, as well as the before mentioned, into account, the approximate electrical
and mechanical cost of a 20 MW project will be approximately $15 000 000. This results in the
electrical and mechanical equipment taking 20% of the total capital cost, as was expected.
According to the Eskoms Tariff Book (2016), the current price per kWh during off-peak periods is
approximately 47 cents, depending on the size of the system. This price is taken from Eskoms
21 | P a g e
MegaFlex option, entailing a local authority that requires a high usage. Appendix D: Tariff
Catalogue contains the tariff catalogue for 2016/17.
The on-peak tariffs for the 2016/17 season is approximately 284 cents per kWh, adding up to a
difference between generation and consumption price of 237 cents per kWh. The tariff catalogue
is available in Appendix D: Tariff Catalogue.
Figure 14: Capital cost as a function of plant capacity for new sites (Hall, et al., 2003)
22 | P a g e
Figure 15: Electrical and mechanical equipment as a function of installed capacity (Kumar, et al., 2015)
Once the project is complete two main cost groups must be funded with the profit made from the
scheme. These costs are operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, as well as decommissioning
costs. Since the project will not make use of recurring fuel, O&M costs can be kept to a minimum.
According to Kumar et al (2015), a typical O&M cost is 2.5% of the total capital cost. Hydropower
projects are rarely decommissioned.
As described within chapter 4.3, the filtration of the AMD will be an operation on its own. The
water coming out of the mine will be sold to the company in charge of the filtration plant at a cost,
which in turn generates revenue for the scheme. With Designs 2 and 3, AMD water will run
through the pipes regularly, causing concern for the lifetime of the piping system and mechanical
equipment. For Design 3 it is a risk to take by choosing the cheapest design option, while the
extra revenue generated in Design 2 from selling the AMD water is expected to be enough to
cover for any extra maintenance costs on the pipeline and mechanical equipment.
5.1.1. Levelised Cost of Electricity

Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is a common measurement of cost to determine the
generation cost per kWh over the schemes life (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2012).
This value is seen as the minimum value at which generated electricity can be sold to ensure the
scheme breaks even.
LCOE is a cost that varies depending on the projects location, capital cost, O&M costs and the
efficiency of the technology. A critical part in the LCOE is the discount rate, since a renewable
energy project has no fuel costs (Black & Veatch, 2016). The formula used for LCOE calculation
is:
23 | P a g e
+
=1
(1 + )
= (22)

=1
(1 + )
where:
Ct = Capital Costs
Mt = Operation and Maintenance Costs
Et = Electricity generation in the year
r = Discount rate
n = Project life
t = Number of time periods
The LCOE enables the project to make a return on capital. The higher the project sets the
electricity cost, the higher the return will be.
Appendix C: LCOE Calculations, contains the LCOE calculations done on the project. All
assumptions made during these calculations are explained within the Appendix. The calculations
were done at each of the three lines as seen in Figure 15 and the results are tabulated in Table
6.
Table 6: LCOE Results
Capital Cost LCOE

$30 000 000 ($1.50/Watt) R0.46/kWh
$40 000 000 ($2/Watt) R0.60/kWh
$60 000 000 ($3/Watt) R0.89/kWh
These results are satisfactory. Since the extent of the site in relation to the infrastructure already
available for the project is unknown, it can be assumed that the LCOE will fall within the range of
R0.60/kWh - R0.89/kWh. This shows that the project is economically feasible.
6. Simulations
To confirm the systems design results and variables, the system is simulated using Flownex.
Flownex is a simulation program used to simulate flow through various elements such as turbines,
pumps and pipes. The program takes all possible variables into account. For the simulation both
the turbine and pump flow directions are evaluated.
6.1. Turbine
For the simulation, the turbine setup is illustrated in Figure 16. The setup compromises of a begin
node (node 0), pipes, bends, a simple turbine, and an end node (Node 14). Each of these
components are discussed in Table 7.
24 | P a g e
Figure 16: Turbine Simulation Setup
Table 7: Turbine Simulation Component List
Identifier Description
The pressure and temperature at the inlet of
Boundary Condition 16
the pipeline is defined at this position.
This node serves the purpose of simulating the
upper reservoir. At this point the water
Node 0
pressure, temperature and elevation of the
reservoir is defined.
Basic Valve 1 This is a butterfly valve, at a 100% open.
Pipe 2 is the pipe leading from the reservoir to
Pipe 2 the bend that redirects the water down the
shaft.
The bend within the pipeline leading the water
Bend 4
down the shaft is simulated here.
Pipe 6 This pipe leads straight down the shaft.
Bend 8 redirects the water to the turbine,
Bend 8 which is situated in the underground
powerhouse.
A short section of pipe that leads the water up
Pipe 10
to the turbine is simulated here.
The turbine is set up to simulate a Francis
Simple Turbine 12
turbine.
This node is simulating the conditions of the
Node 14 draft tube. The pressure and elevation is
defined at this point of the system.
Boundary Condition 17 The pressure at the outlet is defined here.
25 | P a g e
At the boundary conditions, as well as at the nodes, the elevation above sea level is defined. This
allows the program to simulate the flow accurately through the pipeline, considering the slope of
the pipeline.
All detailed inputs are in Appendix E: Simulation.
6.1.1. Results
The simulation was done to determine if the system is feasible when taking all components and
variables into account. Table 8 contains the most relevant results of the simulation. Full results
are in Appendix E1.1: Turbine Results.
Table 8: Turbine Simulation Results
Identifier Property Result

Mean Pressure 101.90 kPa
Temperature 20.02 C
Pipe 2
Pressure Drop 2.27 kPa
Velocity 1.4 m/s
Temperature 20.03 C
Pipe 6
Velocity 1.44 m/s
Temperature 20.04 C
Pipe 10
Velocity 2.89 m/s
Temperature 20.02 C
Bend 4
Velocity 1.44 m/s
Temperature 20.04 C
Bend 8
Velocity 1.44 m/s
Temperature 20.05 C
Simple Turbine 12 Pressure Drop 858.45 kPa
Volume Flow 20.43 m3/s
Power Output 14.6 MW
From the results in Table 8 the pressure drop across the pipeline is 9.38 kPa. This result is
satisfactory, compared to a rule of thumb that the pressure drop of a system must not exceed
10% of the total head (Lombard, 2010). The volume flow of 20.43 m3/s through the turbine is
within 0.03% of the desired volume flow of 20.4 m3/s.
The efficiency of the turbine system, according to the simulation, is 73%. According to
Electropaedia (2005), a hydropower plant, with a Francis turbine installed, has an efficiency of
approximately 85%. By optimizing the pipeline, the turbine efficiency of the system can be
improved. This is possible through means of trial and error in Flownex.
26 | P a g e
6.2. Pump
Figure 17 illustrates the setup for the pump flow. As with the turbine simulation, the nodes at the
beginning and end of the line each simulate the lower and upper reservoirs respectively. Table 9
describes the components of this simulation. As described in section 2.4.1, a Francis turbine is
comparable to a centrifugal pump when used in a pumping capacity and thus a centrifugal pump
is used for the pump simulation.
Figure 17: Pump Simulation Setup
Table 9: Pump Simulation Component List
Identifier Description
The pressure and temperature of the water at
Boundary Condition - 15
the top of the bottom reservoir is defined here.
This node represents the elevation of the
Node 0
lower reservoir in the system.
This component simulates the turbine when it
Centrifugal Pump 1 is reversed for pumping the water back up the
gradient.
A short section of pipe that leads the water to
Pipe 2
the bend of the gradient is simulated here.
Bend 4 This bend directs the water up the gradient.
Pipe number 6 is the pipe leading up the shaft
Pipe 6
and out of the mine.
This bend directs the water towards the upper
Bend 8
reservoir.
27 | P a g e
The pipe transports the water from the shaft to
Pipe 10 the upper reservoir, depositing the water into
the reservoir.
The end node simulates the upper reservoir
Node 13
elevation.
Here the pressure is defined at the outlet. In
Boundary Condition - 17
this case it will be atmospheric pressure.
As with the simulation of the turbine, the elevation above sea level is defined at each node and
boundary condition. Detailed inputs are in Appendix E: Simulations.
6.2.1. Results
Table 10 contains relevant results of the pump simulation. Full results can be viewed in Appendix
E2.1: Pump Results.
Table 10: Pump Simulation Results
Identifier Property Result

Mean Pressure 1294.07kPa
Temperature 20.60 C
Pipe 2
Temperature 20.62 C
Pipe 6
Temperature 20.63 C
Pipe 10
Temperature 20.62 C
Bend 4
Temperature 20.62 C
Bend 8
Temperature 20.29 C
Centrifugal Pump 1 Volume Flow 123.15 m3/s
Hydraulic Efficiency 35.85%
Efficiency at BEP 78.43%
The volume flow through all components is approximately 123 m3/s, showing that the turbine has
the ability to pump the water back up the gradient. Another indicator of the pumping ability is the
mean pressure of pipe 10. The mean pressure of 195.44 kPa at pipe 10 is higher than that of
28 | P a g e
the atmospheric pressure at the end of the pipeline, indicating that the water will exit the pipeline
back into the reservoir.
The hydraulic efficiency of the pump is 35.85%, while the efficiency of the pump at BEP (Best
Efficiency Point) is 78.43%. This shows that the pump is not near its most efficient point, causing
the pumping direction of the system to underperform by 54.29% compared to the BEP.
From these results it can be concluded that the pump design is currently effective, but inefficient.
By making use of design alterations, such as increasing the speed of the pump, the design is
expected to near the BEP. Increasing the pump speed would entail a design alteration of adding
a gearbox to the shaft. This will have a negative economic impact, but will improve the system
efficiency.
7. Conclusion
The implementation of a hydropower pump storage scheme within an abandoned deep mine is
possible. This statement, which is supported by the findings in chapter 3, 4, 5 and 6, satisfies all
the initial objectives set out for the study.
To fully understand the theory behind the motivation and components of the study and scheme,
a literature study was conducted to ensure the required knowledge was obtained to complete the
study successfully.
Chapter 4 looked at the physical design of such a scheme, considering all critical on-site
parameters, including the technical analysis of the turbine as completed in chapter 3. The design
components were discussed in detail, with the function of each component made clear. The
variations in design will have an effect on the economic feasibility, but it is concluded that the
project will stay within the LCOE range calculated.
Chapter 5 answers the objective of the study regarding the economic feasibility of implementing
a pump storage scheme within a deep mine. According to the economic analysis of the schemes
feasibility, a LCOE range of R0.46kWh R0.89/kWh confirms that this is most certainly a feasible
project.
The simulation, discussed in chapter 6, confirms that the first objective is reachable. The
simulation gave satisfactory results, although there is room for improvement on the system. A
power output of 14.6 MW gave an efficiency of 73% for the generation of electricity, while the
turbine is able to pump the water out of the mine during off-peak periods.
By the conclusion of the literature study, economic analysis, design of the system, and simulation
of the system, it was clear that the third objective of the study is satisfied. The implementation of
such a project will make a positive contribution towards the security of electricity during high
demand while addressing the dangers AMD and illegal activities that abandoned deep mines
hold.
The Department of Mineral Resources in South Africa holds a list of approximately 6000 derelict
and ownerless mines in South Africa (Olalde, 2016). Many of these mines are most likely suitable
for such a scheme to be implemented, showing that there is a huge potential for such projects in
South Africa.
29 | P a g e
8. Recommendations
Although the study successfully reached the objectives set out, there is room for improvement.
The following are thus recommended:
Firstly, a physical study should be conducted on one specific mine, taking all the
parameters of that specific mine into account. It can also include an extensive economic
analysis on every component of the system, since the physical mine will allow the study
to determine what the extent of the challenges are on an economical basis. This will insure
a pinpoint accuracy regarding the economic feasibility.
Secondly, a physical mine will provide the specific challenges the mine sets for such a
project, thus improving on the design of the system to overcome these challenges. The
pump direction of the design seeks for improvement to reach the BEP.
Thirdly, an analysis on the durability of different types of turbines will be able to improve
the lifetime of the system.
Lastly, it would be wise to get other parties involved in such an extensive study. These
parties can include fellow engineers, economic analysers, environmental impact
researchers, and business enthusiasts. An extensive study on such a project will ensure
that it will become a reality.
30 | P a g e
References
Amey, E. B., 2002. Gold. [Online]
Available at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/gold/goldmyb02.pdf
[Accessed 5 May 2016].
Basheer, N., 2015. Media To Get. [Online]
Available at: http://mediatoget.blogspot.co.za/2011_11_01_archive.html
[Accessed 10 June 2016].
Black & Veatch, 2016. http://orizzontenergia.it/. [Online]
Available at:
http://orizzontenergia.it/download/Appr/EOLICO/2014_Levelized%20Cost%20of%20Energy%20
Calculation_Wind_Solar_Black_Veatch.pdf
[Accessed 2 September 2016].
Cengel, Y. A. & Cimbala, J. M., 2010. Fluid Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications. 2nd ed.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
City of Johannesburg, 2011. Task team for acid mine drainage. [Online]
Available at: http://joburg.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6424:task-
team-for-acid-mine-drainage&catid=88&Itemid=266
Department of Energy, 2016. energy. [Online]
Available at: http://www.energy.gov.za/files/electricity_frame.html
[Accessed 25 August 2016].
Electropaedia, 2005. Battery and Energy Technologies. [Online]
Available at: http://www.mpoweruk.com/hydro_power.htm
Engineers Edge, 2016. www.engineersedge.com. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.engineersedge.com/fluid_flow/hazenwilliams_coefficients_table_13220.htm
Eskom, 2010. Eskom - Power your world. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.eskom.co.za/AboutElectricity/FactsFigures/Documents/Pumped_Storage_Schemes_
-_Palmiet__Pumped_Storage.pdf
Eskom, 2016. Eskom. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.eskom.co.za/CustomerCare/TariffsAndCharges/Documents/2016_17%20Tariff%20r
ates%20-published%20version%20v00.xlsm
Eskom, 2016. Medupi. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.eskom.co.za/Whatweredoing/NewBuild/MedupiPowerStation/Pages/Medupi_Power_
31 | P a g e
Station_Project.aspx
Eskom, 2016. Tariffs & Charges 2016/17. 1 ed. Johannesburg: Eskom.
Expert Team of the Inter-Ministerial Committee, 2010. Mine Water Management in the
Witwatersrand Gold fields with special emphasis on Acid Mine Drainage, Johannesburg:
Council for Geoscience.
Haga, I., 1992. Coordinating Hydropower and Thermal Power. 2nd ed. Trondheim: Norwegian
University of Science and Technology.
Hall, D., Hunt, R., Reeves, K. & Carroll, G., 2003. Estimation of Economical Parameters of U.S.
Hydropower Resources, Idaho Falls: Departement of Energy Idaho Operations Office.
HOBAS, 2016. HOBAS. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.hobas.fr/fileadmin/Daten/PUBLIC/Brochures_World_pdf/1408_HOBAS_Hydropower
_Pipelines_web.pdf
Hofstrand, D. & Holz-Clause, M., 2009. Ioha State University Extension and Outreach. [Online]
Available at: https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/html/c5-65.html
hydro4Africa, 2015. hydro4Africa. [Online]
Available at: http://hydro4africa.net/HP_database/country.php?country=South%20Africa
IEEE, 2016. Engineering360. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.globalspec.com/learnmore/flow_transfer_control/pumps/axial_flow_pumps
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2015. Fluid Machinery, Kanpur: Indian Institute of
Technology.
Industrial Water World, 2016. Industrial Water World. [Online]
Available at: http://www.waterworld.com/articles/iww/print/volume-11/issue-
1/columns/hydroelectric-plant-project-team-selects-hdpe-pipe.html
International Renewable Energy Agency, 2012. Renewable Energy Technologies: Cost Analysis
Series. Renewable Energy Technologies, 1(3/5).
IWC, 2015. IWC. [Online]
Available at: http://iwc.co.za/article-grp-pipes-mine-water.html
[Accessed 15 October 2016].
Kamper, P. M., 2016. Induction Motors [Interview] (10 August 2016).
32 | P a g e
Khan, O. F., 2016. SlideShare. [Online]
Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/omerfaizkhan1/7117897-pumpsturbines
Kumar, A. et al., 2015. Hydropower. In: IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources
and Climate Change Mitigation. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Larson, A., 2015. POWER. [Online]
Available at: http://www.powermag.com/power-shortages-challenge-eskom-force-load-
shedding-in-south-africa/
Lombard, A., 2010. DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A LOW COST GRID-CONNECTED
10 KW HYDRO POWER SYSTEM, Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch.
Machinery Spaces, 2016. Machinery Spaces. [Online]
Available at: http://www.machineryspaces.com/centrifugal-pump.html
Marley Pipe Systems, 2013. Marley Pipesystems. [Online]
Available at: http://www.marleypipesystems.co.za/mining-and-industrial-pipeline-
solutions/products-plastic-piping-manufacturers/weholite-hdpe-pipe
Maylie, D., 2014. The Wall Street Journal. [Online]
Available at: http://www.wsj.com/articles/dangerous-economy-thrives-in-south-africas-
abandoned-gold-mines-1408933804
Mearns, E., 2015. euanmearns.com. [Online]
Available at: http://euanmearns.com/flat-land-large-scale-electricity-storage-fles/
Mesa Associates; Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2012. Best Practice Catalog - Francis
Turbine, Chattanooga, Tennessee: US Department of Energy.
Neromylos, 2015. neromylos.com. [Online]
Available at: http://www.neromylos.com/grobritannien-
uk/wasserkraft/turbinenbau/peltonturbinen/index.html
Olalde, M., 2016. What's left in the wake of South Africa's abandoned gold mines,
Johannesburg: GreenBiz.
Ossberger, 2007. Hydropower Turbine Systems Inc. [Online]
Available at: http://hts-inc.com/images/S-160.pdf
Plastic Pipe, 1997. Plastic Pipe. [Online]
Available at:
https://plasticpipe.org/pdf/case_study_polyethylene_pipe_mitigates_mine_runoff.pdf
[Accessed 15 October 2016].
33 | P a g e
Rank Stuff, 2015. Rank Stuff. [Online]
Available at: http://en.r8lst.com/Liberally%20Dressy%20images%20of%20Francis%20Turbine
Sahdev, M., 2015. Centrifugal Pumps: Basic Concepts of Operation, Maintenance and
Troubleshooting, s.l.: The Chemical Engineers' Resource Page.
Sayers, A., 1990. Hydraulic and Compressible Flow Turbomachines. 2nd ed. s.l.:Mcgraw-Hill.
Slater, D., 2016. AMD Fix. Creamer Media's Mining Weekly, p. 17.
StatsSA, 2015. StatsSA. [Online]
Available at: http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=4045
StatsSA, 2015. statssa.gov.za. [Online]
Available at: http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=4252
Stel, H. et al., 2013. Numerical Analysis of the Fluid Flow om the First Stage of a Two-Stage
Centrifugal Pump With a Vaned Diffuser. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 135(7), p. 9.
Steyn, P., 2016. Concrete Pricing [Interview] (13 July 2016).
Technology Transfer Services, 2016. Odesie. [Online]
Available at: https://www.myodesie.com/wiki/index/returnEntry/id/2960
Vinogg, L. & Elstad, I., 2003. Mechanical Equipment. 12th ed. Trondheim: Norwegian University
of Science and Technology.
Voith, 2013. Voith - Engineered Reliability. [Online]
Available at: www.voith.com
Wikipedia, 2016. wikipedia.org. [Online]
Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity
[Accessed 19 July 2016].
Winde, F. & Stoch, E., 2009. Threats and opportunities for post-closure development in
dolomitic gold-mining areas of the West Rand and Far West Rand (South Africa) - a hydraulic
view part 2: opportunities. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S181679502010000100009
[Accessed 14 March 2016].
Wood Mackenzie, 2016. Wood Mackenzie - A Verisk Analytics Business. [Online]
Available at: https://www.woodmac.com/analysis/south-africa-power
Zuber-Knost, E., 2003. Informationsdienst Wissenschaft. [Online]
Available at: https://idw-online.de/en/
34 | P a g e
35 | P a g e
Appendix A: Turbine Calculations
A|Page
B|Page
C|Page
D|Page
E|Page
Appendix B: Design Calculations
F|Page
G|Page
H|Page
Appendix C: LCOE Calculations
I|Page
J|Page
Appendix D: Tariff Catalogue
K|Page
Appendix E: Simulations
E1: Turbine Inputs
Figure 18: Boundary Conditions - 1 and 0
Figure 19: Valve Conditions
L|Page
Figure 20: Bend Conditions - 4 and 8
M|Page
Figure 21: Pipe Conditions - 2 and 6
N|Page
Figure 22: Pipe Conditions - 10 and Turbine Conditions - 12
O|Page
E1.1: Turbine Results
Table 11: Full Results of Simulation 1 Bends
Bends
Bend Identifier: 4 8
Secondary loss factor (K) 0.15715892 0.23000906
Mean pressure (kPa) 131.568161 964.224387
Total temperature (C) 20.0232358 20.0365029
Static pressure (kPa) 130.5323 963.188968
Static temperature (C) 20.0231966 20.0354358
Quality -0.1634074 -0.3318214
Pressure drop including elevation (kPa) -51.810676 -51.776792
Pressure drop excluding elevation (kPa) 0.16287503 0.23817609
Pressure ratio (up/down) 0.67098797 0.94770617
Pressure ratio (down/up) 1.49033969 1.05517937
Total mass flow (kg/s) 20400 20400
Total volume flow (m/s) 20.4378019 20.4292201
Volume flow based on ambient conditions (m/s) 20.4373132 20.4373132
Abs val of maximum velocity (m/s) 1.44071973 1.44018404
Maximum velocity (m/s) 1.44071973 1.44018404
Total volume (m) 78.9214948 157.84299
Total mass (kg) 78775.521 157617.225
Mass flux (kg/m.s) 1438.01172 1438.01172
Critical mass flux (kg/m.s) 16058.8068 43815.43
Density (kg/m) 998.150392 998.569691
Specific volume (m/kg) 0.00100185 0.00100143
Conductivity (W/m.K) 0.59842919 0.59889656
Viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.00100633 0.00100284
Static enthalpy (kJ/kg) 84.1282523 84.9648129
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K) 4.18430324 4.18151041
Reynolds number 6073100.79 6094243.16
P|Page
Table 12: Full Results of Simulation 1 Pipes
Pipes
Pipe Identifier: 10 2 6
Mean pressure (kPa) 930.9842 101.9016 547.9047
Total temperature (C) 20.03634 20.02199 20.03093
Static pressure (kPa) 929.3252 100.8657 546.8562
Static temperature (C) 20.03628 20.02209 20.03086
Quality -0.32757 -0.14817 -0.26597
Pressure drop including elevation (kPa) 118.2571 -7.52242 -780.862
Pressure drop excluding elevation (kPa) 4.46652 2.26558 2.2435
Pressure ratio (up/down) 1.135638 0.928807 0.167822
Pressure ratio (down/up) 0.880562 1.07665 5.958691
Total mass flow (kg/s) 20400 20400 20400
Total volume flow (m/s) 20.43023 20.43805 20.43665
Volume flow based on ambient conditions (m/s) 20.43731 20.43731 20.43731
Abs val of maximum velocity (m/s) 2.890888 1.440696 1.44072
Maximum velocity (m/s) 2.890888 1.440696 1.44072
Total volume (m) 312.8571 1276.763 1134.9
Total mass (kg) 312382 1274419 1132913
Mass flux (kg/m.s) 2692.536 1438.012 1438.012
Critical mass flux (kg/m.s) 41898.55 13844.13 19015.77
Density (kg/m) 998.4668 998.1644 998.2485
Specific volume (m/kg) 0.001002 0.001002 0.001002
Conductivity (W/m.K) 0.598863 0.598418 0.598495
Viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.001009 0.001006 0.001004
Static enthalpy (kJ/kg) 84.93276 84.09731 84.54653
Reynolds number 6209880 6073793 6089940
Prandtl number 7.045131 7.035905 7.015593
Friction factor 0.008815 0.008842 0.008843
Q|Page
Table 13: Full Results of Francis Turbine Simulation
Francis Turbine
Mean pressure (kPa) 491.5778
Total temperature (C) 20.04827
Static pressure (kPa) 871.8557
Static temperature (C) 20.03747
Quality -0.32026
Pressure drop including elevation (kPa) 760.5557
Pressure drop excluding elevation (kPa) 858.4527
Pressure ratio (up/down) 7.833384
Pressure ratio (down/up) 0.127659
Total mass flow (kg/s) 20400
Total volume flow (m/s) 20.43396
Volume flow based on ambient conditions 20.43731
(m/s)
Abs val of maximum velocity (m/s) 41.47194
Maximum velocity (m/s) 41.47194
Mass flux (kg/m.s) 3206.677
Critical mass flux (kg/m.s) 41661.31
Density (kg/m) 998.3379
Specific volume (m/kg) 0.001002
Conductivity (W/m.K) 0.598564
Viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.001019
Static enthalpy (kJ/kg) 84.87793
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K) 4.182838
R|Page
E2: Pump Inputs
Figure 23: Boundary Conditions - 16 and 17
Figure 24: Bend Conditions - 4 and 8
S|Page
Figure 25: Pipe Conditions - 2 and 6
T|Page
Figure 26: Pipe Conditions - 10 and Pump Conditions - 1
U|Page
E2.1: Pump Results
Table 14: Full Results of Simulation 2 Bends
Bends
Bend Identifier: 4 8
Secondary loss factor (K) 0.221783 0.152965
Mean pressure (kPa) 1240.552 318.4427
Total temperature (C) 20.61749 20.62242
Static pressure (kPa) 1202.945 280.8283
Static temperature (C) 20.61766 20.62238
Quality -0.35829 -0.21433
Pressure drop including elevation (kPa) 60.34127 57.71753
Pressure drop excluding elevation (kPa) 8.343079 5.750172
Pressure ratio (up/down) 1.049853 1.199312
Pressure ratio (down/up) 0.952514 0.833811
Total mass flow (kg/s) 122922.4 122922.4
Total volume flow (m/s) 123.1382 123.1649
Volume flow based on ambient conditions 123.0448 123.0448
(m/s)
Abs val of maximum velocity (m/s) 8.680358 8.682147
Maximum velocity (m/s) 8.680358 8.682147
Total volume (m) 157.843 78.92149
Total mass (kg) 157566.4 78766.14
Mass flux (kg/m.s) 8664.896 8664.896
Critical mass flux (kg/m.s) 49704.69 25110.89
Density (kg/m) 998.2477 998.0315
Specific volume (m/kg) 0.001002 0.001002
Conductivity (W/m.K) 0.59962 0.599507
Viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.001013 0.000998
Static enthalpy (kJ/kg) 87.60757 86.771
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K) 4.182015 4.183863
V|Page
Table 15: Full Results of Simulation 2 Pipes
Pipes
Pipe Identifier: 10 2 6
Mean pressure (kPa) 195.442 1294.074 778.8416
Total temperature (C) 20.63049 20.60127 20.62014
Static pressure (kPa) 157.8256 1198.526 741.2222
Static temperature (C) 20.62977 20.60162 20.61949
Quality -0.1711 -0.35784 -0.29728
Pressure drop including elevation (kPa) 188.284 46.7016 863.0801
Pressure drop excluding elevation (kPa) 80.63066 160.4674 80.02334
Pressure ratio (up/down) 2.858677 1.036752 3.485103
Pressure ratio (down/up) 0.349812 0.964551 0.286936
Total mass flow (kg/s) 122922.4 122922.4 122922.4
Total volume flow (m/s) 123.1602 123.1408 123.1435
Volume flow based on ambient conditions (m/s) 123.0448 123.0448 123.0448
Abs val of maximum velocity (m/s) 8.682329 17.42091 8.682147
Maximum velocity (m/s) 8.682329 17.42091 8.682147
Total volume (m) 1276.763 312.9321 1134.9
Total mass (kg) 1274245 312385.3 1132841
Mass flux (kg/m.s) 8664.896 16000.99 8664.896
Critical mass flux (kg/m.s) 14485.87 50930.35 27467.42
Through-flow time (s) 10.36626 2.541321 9.215905
Density (kg/m) 998.0282 998.2491 998.1858
Specific volume (m/kg) 0.001002 0.001002 0.001002
Conductivity (W/m.K) 0.599529 0.599549 0.599619
Viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.000992 0.001016 0.001016
Static enthalpy (kJ/kg) 86.69103 87.53616 87.18928
Reynolds number 37116852 49279429 36228287
Prandtl number 6.923369 7.089464 7.090194
W|Page
Table 16: Full Results of Pump Simulation
Pump
Dimensionless specific speed 37.08757
Impeller diameter (m) 3.31605
Speed at BEP (rpm) 259.6649
Number of stages (equivalent) 1
Efficiency at BEP (0-1) 0.784346
Speed (operating) (rpm) 750
Pump head (m) 133.226
Power consumption (kW) 447779.3
Hydraulic/Isentropic efficiency (0-1) 0.358502
Gravitational acceleration (m/s) 9.806
Phi - Flow coeffcient 0.043001
Psi - Head coefficient 0.01926
Mean pressure (kPa) 714.3622
Total temperature (C) 20.28877
Static pressure (kPa) 111.3
Static temperature (C) 20
Quality -0.15392
Pressure drop including elevation (kPa) -1206.12
Pressure drop excluding elevation (kPa) -1304
Pressure ratio (up/down) 0.084483
Pressure ratio (down/up) 11.8367
Total mass flow (kg/s) 122922.4
Total volume flow (m/s) 123.1496
Volume flow based on ambient conditions 123.0448
(m/s)
Total power (kW) -447779
Specific volume (m/kg) 998.1552
Conductivity (W/m.K) 0.001002
Viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.598401
Static enthalpy (kJ/kg) 0.001007
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K) 84.0126
4.184398
X|Page
Appendix F: Techno-Economic Analysis
Budget:
The proposed cost was estimated at R181 700. The final cost: R185 300. Additional expenses
are contributed to the extra work put in on faculty infrastructure. Savings were achieved through
a cut down in engineering costs, the initial cost for this being R179 900 and the final cost R168
000.
Table 17: Proposed Budget
Activity Engineering Time Running Costs Total

Hr R R R
Literature Study 65 22750 300 23050
Information Gathering 45 15750
Preliminary Calculations 140 49000 500 49500
Design Alterations 80 28000
Progress Report 35 12250 200 12450
Final Calculations and
90 31500 300 31800
Design
Final Report 60 21000 500 21500
TOTAL 514 179900 1800 181700
Table 18: Actual Budget
Faculty Running
Activity Engineering Time Total
Use Costs
Hr R R R R
Literature Study 90 31500 300 31800
Information
50 17500 17500
Gathering
Preliminary
50 17500 500 18000
Calculations
Design Alterations 40 14000 14000
Flownex
80 28000 15000 43000
Simulation
Progress Report 65 22750 200 22950
Final Calculations
45 15750 300 16050
and Design
Final Report 60 21000 1000 22000
TOTAL 480 168 000 15000 1800 185300
Y|Page
Planning:
An initial time of 514 hours was expected for the completion of this project. A total of 480 hours
were contributed to the completion of this project. A Gantt chart illustrating the time management
of the project can be viewed within Appendix G. Time was saved on the calculations after the
decision to shift the bulk of the calculations to the simulation, improving the accuracy of the results
due to the simulation accounting for unknown variables within the system. An amount of R11 900
was saved due to this action.
Technical impact:
The project has a positive impact on the field of study. By viewing the motivation and conclusion
of the project this is confirmed. The project is worthwhile to the society in the sense that it confirms
that a deeper insight in this field is necessary to contribute to a much bigger picture within South
Africa.
Return on investment:
The project serves as a viable baseline for the continued investment of time and money to this
specific field. From a financial and economic standpoint the project proves that such a system is
viable and has the potential to contribute positively towards the energy crisis South Africa faces.
As mentioned in the recommendations, this project should be taken further, with the aim of
implementing it in the near future. For further research into the topic, expertise from various
departments should be put together. This will increase costs, but the result will be accurate.
Potential for commercialization:
This project has the potential to be commercialized. With insight from various expertise and the
implementation of the recommendations, this project is set for commercialization. The value of
commercialization of this project will add a positive contribution towards the energy crisis that
South Africa faces.
Z|Page
Appendix G: Gantt Chart
Figure 27: Gantt Chart
AA | P a g e

A Study On The Implementation of A Hydropower Pump Energy Storage Scheme Within An Abandoned Deep Mine

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Study On The Implementation of A Hydropower Pump Energy Storage Scheme Within An Abandoned Deep Mine

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Study On

Mechanical Project 478

Which aspects of the project are new/unique?

What are the (expected) findings?

What value do the results have?

If more than one student is involved, what is each ones contribution?

What are the expected advantages of continuation?

What arrangements have been made to expedite continuation?

I know that plagiarism is wrong.

This assignment is my own work.

Student no: 16946618

Date: 21 October 2016

Dedicated to the authors Grandfather, Mr Nico J Smit.

2.1. Post-mining Development Opportunities

Opportunity Pros Cons

2.1.1. Subterranean hydropower generation

Figure 1: Hydro Power storage scheme (Wikipedia, 2016)

2.3.1. Radial Flow Turbine (Francis)

Figure 2: Francis Turbine (Basheer, 2015)

Figure 3: Francis turbine application range (Voith, 2013)

2.3.2. Axial Flow Turbine (Kaplan)

Figure 5 shows the application range for a Kaplan turbine.

Figure 5: Application range for a Kaplan turbine (Ossberger, 2007)

2.4.1. Centrifugal Pump

Figure 6: Centrifugal pump (Machinery Spaces, 2016)

2.4.2. Axial Flow Pump

Figure 7: Axial flow pump (Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2015)

2.5. Acid Mine Drainage

Figure 8: Acid Mine Drainage in Johannesburg (City of Johannesburg, 2011)

2.6. Energy Consumption of South Africa

Figure 9: Electricity produced and consumed in South Africa (StatsSA, 2015)

3. Feasibility Study Technical Analysis

3.1.1. Francis Turbine

The hydraulic efficiency:

3.1.2. Kaplan Turbine

3.1.3. Specific Speed Analysis

Figure 13: System Energy Line

From the above equation, the total net head is determined:

4.2.1. Pipe Materials

Weholite Structured Wall HDPE HOBAS GRP

4.3. Filtration Plant

4.5. Induction Motor

4.7. Final Design

5.1.1. Levelised Cost of Electricity

Capital Cost LCOE

Table 7: Turbine Simulation Component List

Identifier Property Result

Figure 17: Pump Simulation Setup

Table 9: Pump Simulation Component List

Identifier Property Result

E1: Turbine Inputs

Figure 18: Boundary Conditions - 1 and 0

Figure 19: Valve Conditions

Figure 23: Boundary Conditions - 16 and 17

Figure 24: Bend Conditions - 4 and 8

Activity Engineering Time Running Costs Total

Table 18: Actual Budget

Figure 27: Gantt Chart

You might also like