International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2013)
440

A Review of Desilting Basins Used in Small Hydropower
Plants
Gurdeep Singh
1
, Arun Kumar
2
1,2
M.Tech Student, Chief Scientific Officer, Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee,
Roorkee, Uttrakhand (India) -247667
Abstract - Small hydropower (SHP) is a renewable,
efficient and eco friendly technology. Out of all the essential
civil components, the desilting tank is one of the most vital
part of SHP schemes, which ejects the sediment and foreign
particles carried by water through the conductor system
and protects the hydro mechanical equipments. With the
passage of time, the desilting device has undergone
modifications and updation as per the choice of developer
or the geological condition and economic constrains. In this
paper, attempt has been made to review the different types
of desilting devices being deployed in SHP plants in the
Himalayan region.
Keywords-- Small Hydropower, Desilting basin, sediment,
vortex settling basin.
I. INTRODUCTION
Small Hydropower (SHP) being most reliable and
environmentally benign energy technology for electricity
generation plays an important role in development of a
region/nation. Major portion of hydropower potential in
India lies in Himalayan region. The Himalayan rivers
carry large amount of sediments (silt), which are harmful
for the hydro mechanical equipment of SHP. One of the
important components of SHP schemes is the desilting
tank, which protects the hydro mechanical equipments
from the harmful silt carried by the conducting system.
Desilting tanks are used on water treatment plants and
hydropower channels to remove objectionable sediment
of a specified size and quantity [1].Though the problem
of hydro-abrasion has emerged from Alpine and
Himalayas, what has added to it further is the recent
cost saving trend towards smaller size faster machinery,
designed to operate at higher heads. Such, damage is
accentuated if the metallurgy of the runner blades is
questionable and if the metal composition is less hard
compared to sediment particles, when they are of quartz
and feldspar. Abrasion of the runner caused by sediment
laden water may in a very short operating period assume
proportions seriously affecting the efficiency of the
wheel and may even lead to eventual failure. Thus,
during monsoon months, the Himalayan Rivers carry
heavy sediment loads comprising boulders, gravel and
sand as bed load and suspended load.



Since coarser sediments cause excessive abrasion and
aggravate cavitational affects on turbine parts, it is
proposed that all the sediments coarser than 0.2 mm size
be extracted from the water before it enters the headrace
tunnel. To arrest the entry of larger size particles, 80 mm
size trash-rack is provided at the power intake. For
extracting smaller particles, from 80 mm to 0.2 mm, from
the water entering the power tunnel, a sedimentation
arrangement is provided[2]. When a canal receives
sediment load in excess of its sediment transport capacity
and effective measures are not taken for its control, the
canal gets silted up. This results in a decrease in the
discharge carrying capacity of the canal. In the case of
power canals, that part of the sediment load, which is not
extracted from the flow upstream of the power plant,
passes through the turbines.
The sharp edged silt/sand tends to damage the turbine
runner blades/buckets due to abrasion, resulting in a
decrease in the efficiency of the power plant. In India, it
has been found in many cases that the turbines/pelton
wheels have been considerably damaged after 2,000 to
3,000 h of operation because of the presence of sand in
water. Turbines need to be repaired frequently causing
shutdown of the units for considerable duration, thereby
causing enormous loss of power and revenue.
This review-paper focuses on the latest research and
development desilting basin and the challenges of
desilting basin are also summarized.
The paper is organised as follows. Section II, of this
paper describes classification of desilting devices.
Section III, describes literature review of desilting
devices. Section IV reviews the benefits and applications
of desilting devices and finally conclusion has been
concluded in section V.
II. CLASSIFICATION OF DESILTING DEVICES
Mainly two type of desilting tank used in SHP sites
are:-
(a)Settling basin
(b)Vortex settling basin
(a)Settling basin
Settling basins are used on irrigation and hydropower
channels to remove objectionable sediment of specified
size and quantity.


International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2013)
441

The channel is expanded into the basin by widening its
width and lowering its floor through an expansion
transition and restored back through a contraction
transition at the end of the basin. Normally settling basins
are constructed in compartments. However, single-
chamber basins are not uncommon in the case of mini-
and micro hydroelectric projects. The main aspect of
their design to determine the dimensions, namely, length,
breadth, and depth remains the same.

(a)

b)
Fig 1.1 Definition Sketch: (a) Plan; (b) Section A-A[5]
(b)Vortex settling basin
This type of extractor makes use of vortex flow in a
basin as the sediment removal device. A higher velocity
flow is introduced tangentially into a cylindrical basin
having an orifice at the centre of its bottom, which
removes highly sediment concentrated flow. This along
with tangential entry of flow causes combined (Rankin
type) vortex conditions with free vortex forming near the
orifice and forced vortex conditions forming in the outer
region towards the periphery. Vortex flow causes a
sediment concentration gradient across the vortex and a
diffusive flux proportional but opposite to the centrifugal
flux (Julian, 1986). The secondary flow resulting from
this phenomenon causes the fluid layers near the basin
floor to move towards the outlet orifice at the centre. The
sediment particles present in the flow move along a
helicoidal path towards the orifice, thereby obtaining a
long settling length compared to the basin dimensions.
The sediment reaching the centre can be flushed out
through the orifice outlet channel/pipeAs compared to the
conventional type of settling basins and tunnel type
sediment extractors, the vortex chamber type of sediment
extractor has the advantage of smaller dimensions and
low flushing discharge for obtaining a certain efficiency
of sediment removal.


Vortex-Settling Basin [10]
III. LITERATURE REVIEW
Nandana Vittal et al.[1] settling basin were formed by
widening the approach channel and lowering its floor
through an expansion transition, so as to reduce the mean
velocity of flow into the basin. However, various
combinations of width, depth, and length of the basin are
possible to achieve desired removal efficiency in a given
situation. Taking the cost of the straight and prismatic
portion of the basin as the criterion, equations have been
developed for its best width, depth, and length.
R.H.A. Janssen [3] A numerical model for computing
efficiency of sediment basins was presented and was
compared to these methods. The model was solved using
a spreadsheet and yields similar results to Camps (1946)
detailed analytical approach. The comparison indicates
that when basins are sized using ideal settling theory with
typical turbulence factors, up to 15% of the target
sediment particles may not be removed.
B. M. Sumer[4]The authors examined the results of a
number of settling tests in a rectangular flume in order to
derive a relationship for the efficiency (removal ratio) of
settling basins, based on a dimensional analysis. The
relation found by the authors qualitatively confirms
solutions obtained by numerical simulations with the
diffusion-advection equation.
R. J. Garde et al.[5] Experiments have been carried out
in the laboratory concerning the efficiency of settling
basins. The data indicate that the existing methods of
their design were not satisfactory. Analysis of all the
available data has led to a new relationship for the
efficiency. The parameters L/D and w/u, were found to
govern the efficiency. where L was length of the settling
basin, D was depth of flow in the settling basin, u
*
was

shear velocity in the settling basin and w fall velocity of
the sediment in clear water.





International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2013)
442

Daniel Develay et al.[6] have been designed
underground desilting basins on the basis of a theoretical
approach further checked and developed using hydraulic
model tests. The latter showed that with a design
discharge of 123 m3/s a 240-m-Iong basin equipped with
a 48-m diffuser and having a cross-sectional area of 170
m2 can satisfactorily meet the requirement.
Keh-Cbia Yeb et al[7]developed a two-dimensional
numerical model as well as the optimal regression
equations for the determining settling basin dimension,
and then simulated and compared the deposition
efficiency of the selected settling basins.
S. B. Weerakoon et al[8]presented a series of
laboratory experiments carried out to investigate the
effect of the entrance zone on the sand trapping
efficiency of the desilting tanks using a scale model of a
desilting tank with varying entrance expansion angles.
The sand trapping efficiency was found to vary from
50% to 85% with the reduction of expansion angle from
30
o
to 10
o
.
S.K Sharma[2]A detailed qualitative understanding
has to be developed to deal with sedimentation problem
in the Himalayan region. To start with, philosophy of
abrasion index was proposed in this paper. Apart from
design aspects, emphasis was ought for maintenance and
monitoring.
K. G. Ranga Raju et al.[9]Experimental investigations
have been carried out on the sediment removal efficiency
of settling basins. Laboratory data on removal efficiency
from the present and earlier studies were first
used for checking the accuracy of the existing empirical
and analytical methods for determination of the sediment
removal efficiency of settling basins
T. C. Paul,et al[10].showed that the circular basin
should have diameter equal to five times (as compared
with six times stipulated in American practice) the bed
width of inlet canal. The distinctive features of the
proposed design were formation of free vortex in the
outer region and flow in the basin traversing a relatively
longer path before reaching the overflow weir.
Mohammad Athar et al[11]Data from laboratories and
field have been analysed for validation of the existing
relationships on its sediment removal efficiency. Since
the existing relations were not found to produce
satisfactory results, a new relationship was developed for
determination of the efficiency.
Mohammad Athar et al [12] Experimental results on
sediment removal efficiency of vortex chamber type
sediment extractors were reported. A geometric
configuration of the extractor is identified that is able to
remove even the fine sediment (0.055<d<0.22 mm) from
flow with high efficiency.


Since the existing relations were not found to produce
satisfactory results, a new relationship is developed for
determination of the sediment removal efficiency of the
vortex chamber type sediment extractors.
Alired D. Mashauri [13] discussed the hydraulic
performance of vortex-type settling basins both, with
horizontal and sloping floor in the sediment removal
problem for water treatment intakes, hydropower plants
and irrigation schemes.
Niknia, Naser et al.[14]It was found that the trap
efficiency of the vortex settling chamber was about 88%
for the median particle size of 0.35mm used in this study.
To understand the flow structure inside the model under
the deflector with clear water flow, the flow velocity in
three directions was measured using ADV.
Nguyen Quang Truong [15]Based on the models of
vortex chamber from the earlier investigations, a deep-
depth type vortex chamber was developed and studied in
this paper.The experimental result also indicated that the
values of are considerably stable and reach the
maximum value for the case of three deflectors, so this
design was recommended for application. It can be
concluded that the new design of deep type vortex
chamber presented in this paper is feasible for removing
very fine sediment particles. The experimental results
also indicated that the values of are considerably stable
and reach the maximum value for the case of three
deflectors, so this design was recommended for
application. It can be concluded that the new design of
deep type vortex chamber presented in this paper was
feasible for removing very fine sediment particles
Salakhov (1975) firstly started to study the vortex
chamber by investigating a circulation chamber with
tangential inlet and spilling weir outlet at the periphery.
His design was applied to clarify water used for
hydropower plant with rivers in mountains having steep
slopes and high sediment concentration. Then, Mashauri
(1986) improved some features based on the earlier
designs. One of the most significant improvements was a
horizontal divider or a deflector above the inlet port
which acts as a flow separator to separate the flow so that
the sediment removal efficiency is larger. Then, the study
on sediment removal efficiency was also continued to be
conducted with different designs of vortex chamber (Paul
et al. 1991, Athar et al. 2002 and
Keshavarzi and Gheisi 2006). shows a schematic
diagram of a vortex chamber developed and used by Paul
et al. (1991). However, previous studies were limited in a
shallow-depth type vortex chamber that haves its
chambers height (H) smaller than its chambers diameter
(D). Hence, to improve the sediment removal efficiency
of finer particle, we need to raise the depth of vortex
chamber so that the residence time of sediment increases
in the chamber.


International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2013)
443

M. Athar et al.[16]In this paper an attempt has been
made to study the distribution of suspended sediment
concentration within the chamber of vortex type sediment
Extractor. A satisfactory agreement was found to exist
between the observed values of sediment concentration
and its values computed using the method proposed.
IV. DEVELOPMENT AND THE CHALLENGES OF
DESILTING DEVICES
One of the major problems confronting hydraulic
engineers is the control of sediment entering irrigation
and power canals. Methods of sediment control have
been described by Huffered et al. (1975). To remove the
sediment that has entered a canal, vortex tubes, tunnel-
type sediment extractors, and settling basins are often
used. Vortex-tube installations are very rare, presumably
because of the no availability of a dependable design
method. Vortex tubes are not so efficient in extracting
suspended sediment, though the water abstraction ratio,
Q
0
/Qc, is 10-25%. Here Q
0
is the flushing discharge and
Qc is the inlet canal discharge. Trapping efficiency, P, of
tunnel-type sediment extractors is about 40%, while
Q
D
/Q
C
is 15-25%.. Settling basins perform reliably as
long as the suspended sediment is larger than 0.06 mm.
Velocity in the basin ranges from 0.08-0.45 m/s, while
Q
0
/Qc is 0.5-3%. Conventional settling basins suffer
from two main disadvantages: (1) Requirement of large
dimensions; and (2) long residence time, t. A vortex-
settling basin (VSB) is a fluidic device that uses only the
vortices of the flow to extract the bed and suspended
loads in the inlet canal. Principal features of VSB designs
after Salakhov (1975), Cecen and Bayazit (1975),
Ogihara and Sakaguchi (1984), and Mashauri (1986).The
size of a VSB is very small, compared with conventional
settling basins treating the same volume of water and
sediment load (Cecen and Akmandor 1973). Thus the
cost of construction of a VSB is just a fraction of the cost
required for the construction of a classical settling basin
to extract comparable particles (Mashauri 1986). The
VSB structure holds promise as an economical, efficient,
and water-conserving alternative to the other available
sediment-extraction devices. Investigators have carried
out a detailed investigation on the performance of vortex
type sediment extractors of various configurations, with
the object of determining their removal efficiency basin.
Trap efficiency relationship of vortex settling basin
proposed by various investigators given in table no.1








Table 1
Previously published relationships

V. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
The main objective of this review paper is to give an
overview in the development of desilting basin.
Classification of desilting basin, development and the
challenges of desilting devices and detailed literature
review have been presented.
The vortex chamber mainly composes of a cylindrical
hopper, a bottom cone and a tangential inlet. This type of
sediment extractor has overcome the disadvantages of
conventional settling basins, i.e. the requirement of large
dimensions and long residence time. The size of a vortex
settling chamber is small, as compared with conventional
settling basins treating the same volume of water and
sediment.
The problem associated with vortex settling basin is
that physical model studies has to be carried out before
its implementation at site.
It is concluded that efficiency of vortex chamber is
better than simple settling basin for same discharge. It
has been suggested that vortex settling basin should be
integral part of water conductor system carries the
diverted discharge used where sediment problem is more
prominent. Vortex settling basin can mitigate Operation
and Maintenance problems face by Power Stations such
as;
1. Damage to runner vanes of the turbines,
2. Wear of penstock,
3. Frequent choking of strainers,
4. Choking and puncturing of coolers tubes,
5. Damage to cooling water pumps, valves etc,
6. Frequent damage of turbine shaft seal,
7. Damage to drainage and dewatering system
besides siltation of sumps,
8. Higher leakage through runner labyrinths
resulting in high top cover pressure,







International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2013)
444

9. Damage to guide vane bushes and their cup
seals,
10. Damage to seals of intake valve and main inlet
valve,
11. Seating/Sealing problems in hydro-mechanical
gates (intake as-well-as draft tube Gates).
REFERENCES
[1 ] Nandana Vittal and Mavendra Singh Raghav Design Of Single-
Chamber Settling Basins Journal Of Hydraulic Engineering /
May 1997/ pp 469-471.
[2 ] S.K Sharma Sediment Management in the Himalayan Rivers
HydroVision 2006 - Copyright HCI Publications, 2006 -
www.hcipub.com pp 1-12.
[3 ] R.H.A. Janssen Analysis and Design of Sediment Basins The
Institution of Engineers, Australia 8th National Conference on
Hydraulics in Water Engineering ANA Hotel Gold Coast,
Australia 13-16 July 2004.
[4 ] B. M. Sumer Design Of Settling Basins Journal of Hydraulic
Research, 29:1, 136-143. (1991).
[5 ] R. J. Garde , K. G. Ranga Raju and A. W. R. Sujudi Design of
settling basins Journal of Hydraulic Research, vol 28:1, 81-91
(1990).
[6 ] Daniel Develay, Jean Binquet, Divatia and C. R. Venkatesha
Desilting Basin System Of The Dul Hastihydroelectric Project
Journal Of Hydraulic Engineering october 1996 pp 565-572.
[7 ] Keh-Cbia Yeb and En-Tian Lin Efficiency Simulation and
Design of Settling Basinpp 655-666.
[8 ] S. B. Weerakoon and U. S. Rathnayake Effect of the Entrance
Zone on the Trapping Efficiency of Desilting Tanks in Run-of-
River Hydropower Plants International Conference on Small
Hydropower - Hydro Sri Lanka, 22-24 October 2007 pp 1-6.
[9 ] K. G. Ranga Raju, U. C. Kothyari, Somya Srivastav, and Manish
Saxena Sediment Removal Efficiency Of Settling Basins
Journal Of Irrigation And Drainage Engineering /
September/October pp 308-314.
[10 ] T. C. Paul,S. K. Sayal, V. S. Sakhuja, and G. S. Dhillon Vortex-
Settling Basin Design Considerations J. Hydraul. Eng.
1991.117:172-189.
[11 ] Mohammad Athar M.ISH , U. C. Kothyari and R. J. Garde
Studies On Vortex Chamber Type Sediment Extractor ISH
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol 8:, 1-16 (2002).
[12 ] Mohammad Athar, Umesh C. Kothyari, and Ramchandra J. Garde
Sediment Removal Efficiency of Vortex Chamber
TypeSediment Extractor J. Hydraul. Eng. 2002.128:1051-1059.
[13 ] Alired D. Mashauri Removal Of Sediment Particlesby Vortex
Basin Aqua Fennica 13: 27-33.(1983).
[14 ] Niknia, Naser, Keshavarzi, Ali-Reza, Hosseinipour, E. Zia
Improvement the Trap Efficiency of Vortex Chamber for
Exclusion of Suspended Sediment in Diverted Water World
Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2011,Bearing
Knowledge for Sustainability ASCE 2011 pp 4124-4134.
[15 ] Nguyen Quang Truong Effect Of Deflectors On Removal
Efficiency of A Deep- Depth Vortex Chamber Sediment
Extractor HCMUT 26-28/10/2011 pp 1-6.
[16 ] M. Athar, U.C. Kothyari & R.J. Garde Distribution of sediment
concentration in the vortex chamber type sediment extractor
Journal of Hydraulic Research, 41:4, 427-438 (2003).
[17 ] Cecen, K. (1977). "Hydrauliccriteria of settling basins for water
treatment, hydropower and irrigation." Proc. 17th Congress of the
Int. Assoc, of Hydr. Res., Baden-Baden, West Germany, 275-294
[18 ] Cecen, K., and Akmandor, N. (1973). "Circular settling basins
with horizontal floor."MAG Report No 183, TETAK, Ankara,
Turkey.
[19 ] Salakhov, F. S. (1975). "Rotational designs and methods of
hydraulic calculation of load-controlling water intake structures
for mountain rivers." Proc. of Ninth Congress of the ICID,
Moscow, Soviet Union, 151-161.
[20 ] Sullivan, R. H. (1972). "The swirl concentrator as a combined
sewer over-flow regulatory facility." Report No: EPA-R2-72-008,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Washington, D.