Although hydropower is a clean source of energy, in some cases, it can jeopardize the life of some species of riverine fish. Very Low Head (VLH) water turbine is an innovative design that aims at reducing the adverse effects of such hydroelectric facilities. In this research, two methodologies are integrated to investigate barotrauma in juvenile salmons passing through this particular turbine. First, to quantify barotrauma, we implement a method known as BioPA (Biological Performance Assessment) by combining the results of some laboratory experiments on juvenile Chinook salmon moving through a simulated turbine passage with the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation of the flow field in this environment. In the second part, we added surrogate-based modeling as a tool, which enabled us to study the effects of two geometrical parameters on the environmental performance of the VLH turbine with low computational costs. The results indicate a significant dependency between the installation angle of the VLH turbine and the severity of the barotrauma of this particular fish. In addition, further investigations suggest that the region near the middle of blades is the safest for fish in the case of decompression.
WagnerTCongletonJLMarshDM. Smolt-to-adult return rates of juvenile Chinook salmon transported through the Snake-Columbia River hydropower system, USA, in relation to densities of co-transported juvenile steelhead. Fish Res2004; 68(1–3): 259–270.
2.
AmaralSVBevelhimerMSČadaGF, et al.Evaluation of behavior and survival of fish exposed to an axial‐flow hydrokinetic turbine. North Am J Fish Manag2015; 35(1): 97–113.
3.
ColoteloAHPflugrathBDBrownRS, et al.The effect of rapid and sustained decompression on barotrauma in juvenile brook lamprey and Pacific lamprey: implications for passage at hydroelectric facilities. Fish Res2012; 129-130: 17–20.
4.
CookeSJHatryCHaslerCT, et al.Department of Fisheries and Oceans ON(Canada). Great Lakes Lab. SSM. Literature Review, Synthesis and Proposed Guidelines Related to the Biological Evaluation of" Fish Friendly" Very Low Head Turbine Technology in Canada. ON(Canada): DFO, Sault Ste. Marie, 2011.
5.
PracheilBMDeRolphCRSchrammMP, et al.A fish-eye view of riverine hydropower systems: the current understanding of the biological response to turbine passage. Rev Fish Biol Fish2016; 26: 1–15.
6.
RichmondMCRomero-GomezPSerkowskiJARakowskiCLGrafMJ. Comparative study of barotrauma risk during fish passage through Kaplan turbines. Pacific Northwest National Lab.(PNNL), Richland, WA (United States);2015.
7.
MartinezJJDengZDTitzlerPS, et al.Hydraulic and biological characterization of a large Kaplan turbine. Renew Energy2019; 131: 240–249.
8.
HouHDengZDMartinezJJ, et al.A Hydropower Biological Evaluation Toolset (HBET) for characterizing hydraulic conditions and impacts of hydro-structures on fish. Energies2018; 11: 990.
9.
DengZCarlsonTJDaubleDD, et al.Fish Passage Assessment of an Advanced Hydropower Turbine and Conventional Turbine Using Blade-Strike Modeling. Energies2011; 4(12): 57–67.
10.
HammarLEggertsenLAnderssonS, et al.A Probabilistic Model for Hydrokinetic Turbine Collision Risks: Exploring Impacts on Fish. PLoS One2015; 10(3): e0117756.
11.
Romero-GomezPRichmondMC. Discrete Element Modeling of Blade -Strike Frequency and Survival of Fish Passing Through Hydrokinetic Turbines. Proc 2nd Mar Energy Technol Symp (METS), Seattle, WA; 2014;1–11
12.
Romero-gomezPRichmondMC. Movement and collision of lagrangian particles in hydro-turbine intakes: a case study. J Hydro Res2017; 55: 1686.
13.
KlopriesE-MSchüttrumpfH. Mortality assessment for adult European eels (Anguilla Anguilla) during turbine passage using CFD modelling. Renew Energ2020; 147: 1481–1490.
14.
SaylorRFortnerABevelhimerM. Quantifying mortality and injury susceptibility for two morphologically disparate fishes exposed to simulated turbine blade strike. Hydrobiologia2019; 842: 0123456789, DOI: 10.1007/s10750-019-04026-x.
15.
BevelhimerMSPracheilBMFortnerAM, et al.Mortality and injury assessment for three species of fish exposed to simulated turbine blade strike. Can J Fish Aquat Sci2019; 76(12): 2350–2363.
16.
BrownRSColoteloAHPflugrathBD, et al.Understanding barotrauma in fish passing hydro structures: a global strategy for sustainable development of water resources. Fisheries2014; 39(3): 108–122.
17.
BrownRSPflugrathBDColoteloAH, et al.Pathways of barotrauma in juvenile salmonids exposed to simulated hydroturbine passage: Boyle's law vs. Henry's law. Fish Res2012; 121-122: 43–50.
18.
RichmondMCSerkowskiJAEbnerLL, et al.Quantifying barotrauma risk to juvenile fish during hydro-turbine passage. Fish Res2014; 154: 152–164.
19.
LiXDengZDMartinezJJ, et al.Three-dimensional tracking of juvenile salmon at a mid-reach location between two dams. Fish Res2015; 167: 216–224.
20.
AbernethyCSAmidanBGCadaGF. Laboratory Studies of the Effects of Pressure and Dissolved Gas Supersaturation on Turbine-Passed Fish. WA: Pacific Northwest Natl Lab Richland, 2001. PNNL-13470.
21.
BrownRSCarlsonTJWelchAE, et al.Assessment of barotrauma from rapid decompression of depth-acclimated juvenile chinook salmon bearing radiotelemetry transmitters. Trans Am Fish Soc2009; 138(6): 1285–1301.
22.
StephensonJGingerichABrownR. Assessing barotrauma in neutrally and negatively buoyant juvenile salmonids exposed to simulated hydro-turbine passage using a mobile aquatic barotrauma. Fish Res2010; 106: 271–278.
23.
BrownRSCarlsonTJGingerichAJ, et al.Quantifying mortal injury of juvenile Chinook salmon exposed to simulated hydro-turbine passage. Trans Am Fish Soc2012; 141(1): 147–157.
24.
FraserRDeschênesCO’NeilC, et al.VLH: development of a new turbine for very low head sites. Proceeding 15th Waterpower2007; 10(157): 23–26.
25.
LautierPO’NeilCDeschenesC, et al.Variable speed operation of a new very low head hydro turbine with low environmental impact. In: Electrical Power Conference, 2007 EPC 2007 IEEE, Canada: IEEE, 2007, pp. 85–90.
26.
PaishO. Small hydro power: technology and current status. Renew Sustain Energ Rev2002; 6(6): 537–556.
27.
KempPWilliamsCSassevilleR, et al.Very low head turbine deployment in Canada. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci2014; 22(6): 62005.
28.
FernandoJNRivalDE. Characterizing the influence of upstream obstacles on very low head water-turbine performance. J Hydraulic Res2014; 52(5): 644–652.
29.
WrightMKRivalDE. An experimental investigation of the approach flow conditions for a non-rotating, very low head water-turbine model. Exp Therm Fluid Sci2013; 49: 105–113.
SofotasiouPCalautitJKHughesBR, et al.Towards an integrated computational method to determine internal spaces for optimum environmental conditions. Comput Fluids2016; 127: 146–160.
32.
ZangiabadiEMastersIWilliamsAJ, et al.Computational prediction of pressure change in the vicinity of tidal stream turbines and the consequences for fish survival rate. Renew Energ2017; 101: 1141–1156.
33.
McHaleMPFriedmanJR. Standard for verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics and heat transfer. Am Soc Mech Eng ASME V & v 202009.
34.
MohammadiMRiasiA. Design and optimization of the very low head turbine by the “CST” method. Modares Mech Eng2017; 16(11): 339–348.
35.
SutiknoPAdamIK. Design, simulation and experimental of the very low head turbine with minimum pressure and freevortex criterions. Int J Mech Mechatronics Eng2011; 11(1): 9–16.
36.
RichmondMCSerkowskiJARakowskiC, et al.Computational tools to assess turbine biological performance. Hydro Rev2014; 33(6): 88–97.
37.
HardingSRichmondMMuellerR. Experimental observation of inertial particles through idealized hydroturbine distributor geometry. Water2019; 11(3): 471.
38.
ForresterASobesterAKeaneA. Engineering Design via Surrogate Modelling: A Practical Guide. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
39.
GiuntaAWojtkiewiczSEldredM. Overview of modern design of experiments methods for computational simulations. In: 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,. Reno, Nevada;2003. p. 649.
40.
GautheirTD. Detecting trends using spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Environ Forensics2001; 2(4): 359–362.
41.
ZhouDGuiJDengZD, et al.Development of an ultra-low head siphon hydro turbine using computational fluid dynamics. Energy2019; 181: 43–50.
42.
HoganTWCadaGFAmaralSV. The status of environmentally enhanced hydropower turbines. Fisheries2014; 39(4): 164–172.
43.
TuononenEI. Fish Community Interactions with Very Low Head (VLH) Turbine Technology. Carleton University, 2019.
44.
TuononenEICookeSJTimuskERSmokorowskiKE, Extent of injury and mortality arising from entrainment of fish through a Very Low Head hydropower turbine in central Ontario, Canada. Hydrobiologia. 2020;1–14.
45.
LagarrigueTVoegtleBLascauxJ. Tests for Evaluating the Injuries Suffered by Downstream-Migrating Salmonid Juveniles and Silver Eels in Their Transiting through the VLH Turbogenerator Unit Installed on the Tarn River in Millau. Fr. Prep by ECOGEA Forces Mot Farebout Company, Fr ECOGEA Muret, 2008.
46.
LagarrigueTFreyA. Test for evaluating the injuries suffered by downstream-migrating eels in their transiting through the new spherical discharge ring VLH turbogenerator unit installed on the Moselle River in Frouard. Muret, Fr: Rep E CO GEA MJ2 Technol ECOGEA, 2010.
47.
LagarrigueT. Tests for evaluating damage to fish species migrating downstream during their transit through the VLH hydraulic turbine installed on the Tarn River in Millau-report on tests run in May and June 2013. Pins-Justaret, Fr: Prep by Etudes Cons en Gest lEnvironnement Aquat (ECOGEA), 2013.
48.
BoysCAPflugrathBDMuellerM, et al.Physical and hydraulic forces experienced by fish passing through three different low-head hydropower turbines. Mar Freshw Res2018; 69: 1934–1944.
