Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Embedment of steel spiral cases in concrete: China's experience MARK

a,b,⁎ b
Qi-Ling Zhang , He-Gao Wu
a
Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute, 430010 Wuhan, Hubei, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering Science, Wuhan University, 430072 Wuhan, Hubei, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: A spiral case refers to a water passage in a substructure of a hydropower house. The substructure is thus also
Steel spiral case known as a spiral case structure (SCS). For medium and high head hydroelectric power plants (HPPs), inner
Embedment walls of spiral cases are steel-lined. For a steel-lined SCS, the embedment condition of the steel liner (steel spiral
Hydropower house case) in the concrete is the dominant factor to determine the composite system's structural performance. Hence
Hydroelectric power plant
the issue of embedment of steel spiral cases has been a controversial and much disputed subject concerning the
Mass concrete
Steel-concrete composite structure
design and construction of HPPs. The purpose of the current work was to share China's experience on methods
of embedment of steel spiral cases in concrete. The work has highlighted China's design philosophy of P-type
and M-type SCSs. It is a joint-IWP-resisting philosophy for balancing the structural strength against integrity of
SCSs. The work has also underlined an innovative solution (NM-hybrid-type SCSs) for excessively uneven lifts of
generator pedestal structures confronting N-type SCSs. We believe that the experience can broaden the world's
current knowledge of the design and construction of HPPs.

1. Background and aim
Hydropower development has proceeded at a furious pace in China
these years, behind which is the international pressure on the country
to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Its hydropower capacity at the end
of 2015 reached about 320000 MW, the highest in the world. Longer-
term plans call for China to reach 420000 MW of hydropower capacity
by 2020. Against this background, Chinese hydraulic structural en-
gineers have accumulated considerable experience related to the design
and construction of dams and their ancillary works.
The aim of this work was to introduce the hydraulic and civil
engineering community to China's experience on methods of embed-
ment of steel spiral cases in concrete. We believe that the experience
can broaden the world's current knowledge of the design and con-
struction of hydroelectric power plants (HPPs).
2. Brief introduction to spiral cases in HPPs
The general use of the term spiral case refers to a water passage in a
substructure of a hydropower house. Consequently, the term spiral
case structure (SCS) is generally understood to mean the substructure
of a hydropower house. A spiral case provides a circumferentially
uniform water intake for a Kaplan or Francis turbine, thus it should be
designed to withstand the bursting pressure of maximum headwater
plus water hammer.
For low-head run-of-river HPPs, spiral cases may be of unlined
mass concrete with engineered reinforcement. In this case, the SCS has
clear mechanical behaviour with all applied dead, hydraulic and
equipment loads withstood by the mass concrete.
For medium and high head HPPs with storage or pumped-storage
facilities, however, inner walls of spiral cases are steel-lined. The steel
liner in an SCS is hence often called a steel spiral case. It is made of
steel plates with shop-welded longitudinal joints and field-welded
circumferential joints. Fig. 1 shows a nearly-completed steel spiral
case with its circumferential joints being field welded. After the
assembly of a steel spiral case is completed, the steel spiral case should
be proof tested hydrostatically with test internal water pressure (IWP).
Finally, the steel spiral case is embedded with encasement concrete
placing. In this condition, the SCS is a steel-concrete composite system
and has complex structural performance under IWP.
For a steel-lined SCS, the embedment condition of the steel spiral
case in the concrete is the dominant factor to determine the composite
system's structural performance. Because of this, the issue of embed-
ment of steel spiral cases has been a controversial and much disputed
subject concerning the design and construction of medium and high
head HPPs. Yet for all that, methods of embedment of steel spiral cases
have been undergoing a revolution over the last two decades in China's
hydropower engineering practices.

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Liam1982@163.com (Q.-L. Zhang).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.048
Received 8 January 2015; Received in revised form 24 August 2016; Accepted 25 October 2016
Available online 04 November 2016
1364-0321/ © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
Fig. 1. Field-welding of circumferential joints of a steel spiral case.
3. Methods of embedment of steel spiral cases in concrete
The conventional design philosophy of a steel-lined SCS has aimed
at making the steel liner resist the IWP as much as possible. In this
case, the surrounding concrete will only resist the dead and equipment
loads. The division of the structural responsibility between the two
components benefits maximizing the two construction materials’
strengths. In addition, such clear division to a large extent simplifies
the structural design of steel-lined SCSs.
To achieve the expected independent load-bearing of each compo-
nent, two classical methods of embedment of steel spiral cases in
concrete are commonly used [1].
3.1. Embedded under a pressurized condition
In this condition, a steel spiral case is filled with water and
temporarily pressurized while encasement concrete is placed. A test
barrel is used to close off the opening between the upper and lower stay
rings, and a test head is attached at the inlet of the steel spiral case
extension (Fig. 2). The two sealing devices make it possible for the steel
spiral case to be pressurized like a pressure vessel. The temporary
pressure is usually greater than or equal to the maximum design
pressure (maximum headwater plus water hammer) based on
American experience. After the concrete has set, the steel spiral case
is unwatered and will shrink slightly, with the sealing devices removed.
The shrinkage gives rise to a gap between the steel spiral case and its
surrounding concrete. So the gap is responsible for the independent
load-bearing of the two components.
Fig. 2. A test head being hoisted into position at the inlet of a steel spiral case.
1272
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
Fig. 3. Sheets of foam material being attached to a steel spiral case.
3.2. Embedded under an unwatered condition
In this case, the top portion of a steel spiral case is covered with a
compressible membrane before encasement concrete is placed, and the
steel spiral case is embedded in an unwatered condition. A compres-
sible membrane usually consists of sheets of foam material, and the
sheets are attached to a steel spiral case with an adhesive (Fig. 3). The
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [1] have specified the compression
property of a compressible membrane that a 1/4-in.-thick piece
deflects 0.10 in. under 50-psi uniform pressure applied normal to the
surface. That is, the compression modulus of the membrane should be
approximately 0.86 MPa. However, the membrane's thickness is not a
fixed design parameter. It depends on diameters and thicknesses of
steel liners, and also the IWP being resisted. In this embedment
condition, the compressible membrane is considered a barrier that
prevents the IWP being transmitted into the surrounding concrete too
much. Thus the compressible membrane plays a major role in breaking
up the load bearing of an SCS.
As far as we know, the forementioned independent-load-bearing
design philosophy of a steel-lined SCS is a classical and widely-adopted
strategy, but not the only one. In the former Soviet Union, another
design philosophy has been applied to structural design of steel-lined
SCSs in the last century. It considers the two components of a steel-
lined SCS as a whole and hence the two components jointly resist the
IWP. Under the guidance of this design philosophy, another non-
classical method of embedment of steel spiral cases in concrete has
been used in four HPPs in the former Soviet Union [2], as detailed in
Table 1. The steel spiral cases were embedded in concrete neither with
membrane coverings nor under pressurized conditions in the four
HPPs. Instead, they were embedded in their natural states.
So in summary, there are altogether three methods of embedment
of steel spiral cases in concrete in hydropower engineering practices
worldwide: embedded (a) under a pressurized condition, (b) under an
unwatered condition with a membrane covering, and (c) in a natural
state. For brevity, hereafter P-type (pressurized), M-type (membrane)
and N-type (natural) SCSs will be used to refer to steel-lined SCSs in
which steel spiral cases are in the above-mentioned embedment
Table 1
The four HPPs in the former Soviet Union in which the steel spiral cases were embedded
in natural states.
HPP Unit capacity Number of Today's location
(MW) turbines
Sayano–Shushenskaya 640 10 Russia
Nurek 335 9 Tajikistan
Inguri 260 5 Georgia
Irgana 200 4 Daghestan
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281

conditions (a), (b) and (c), respectively. water passage. The holding effect of concrete can considerably reduce
structural and operational risks to HPPs due to vibrations of steel spiral
4. China's experience cases.

4.1. P-type SCSs 4.1.3. Contact nonlinearity in P-type SCSs

4.1.1. Classical independent-load-bearing design philosophy
For a P-type SCS, the temporary IWP, resisted by the steel spiral
case during the encasement concrete construction, is the most im-
portant design parameter. It determines the clearance between the
steel spiral case and its surrounding concrete when the temporary IWP
has been released. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [1] specified the
temporary IWP be greater than or equal to the maximum design
pressure. That means the steel spiral case is highly unlikely ever to
come into contact with the surrounding concrete and should resist all
the IWP during the operating period of a HPP. Under the circum-
stances, the steel spiral case is used to its fullest load-bearing capacity.
It benefits the anti-cracking of the surrounding concrete. However, this
classical principle for specifying the temporary IWP is also inherently
problematic; it focuses too much on the structural strength of the
surrounding concrete, but not enough on the structural integrity of the
composite system.
As far as a steel-lined SCS is concerned, its steel inner wall is subject
to pressure fluctuations induced by the complex flow developing in the
water passage. These pressure fluctuations lead to pressure waves
propagating in the steel spiral case. Their superposition may result in
resonance between the pressure excitation source and the steel spiral
case if the steel spiral case is not in contact with the surrounding
concrete. A persistent high-frequency vibration of the thin-walled
structure, i.e. the steel spiral case, may cause a fatigue failure of it.
Existing research has recognised the critical role played by repeated
cyclic stresses in causing fatigue failure of turbine components [3,4]. So
far, however, there has been little discussion about fatigue failure of
steel spiral cases.
In addition, the vibration of the steel spiral case can be transmitted
to the hydroelectric generating set through the stay rings and vanes.
The vibration transmission adversely affects the operating stability of
the turbine unit.
Despite the above advantage in engineering practices, however,
current structural analysis of P-type SCSs in China seems over-
simplistic. Traditionally, it has been argued that the contact behaviour
in a P-type SCS does not have much effect on the composite system's
structural performance [10,11]. Consequently, a simplified simulation
procedure (SSP) was usually used in earlier structural finite element
analyses (FEA) of P-type SCSs [12,13]. In the SSP, a steel spiral case
adheres on the internal surface of the surrounding concrete. The
contact nonlinearity in the composite system is not taken into account.
In this case, the temporary IWP of a P-type SCS is regarded as a
deciding threshold for the contact status between the two components.
Once the operating IWP rises to the threshold, the expanding steel
spiral case is considered to come into contact with the surrounding
concrete accompanied by a closing of the in-between gap. Based on this
assumption, only part of the design IWP is taken into account in the
FEA for the joint-IWP-resisting design of a P-type SCS. That is the
maximum design IWP minus the temporary IWP.
Unfortunately, the above assumption has been challenged by some
field monitoring data demonstrating that the temporary IWP may not
be a strict threshold. Taking the Ertan HPP (China's largest HPP built
in the 20th century, Fig. 4) as an example, the maximum design IWP of
its P-type SCSs is 2.31 MPa and the temporary IWP is 1.94 MPa.
According to the field monitoring data of the No.2 unit [14], part of the
steel spiral case had come into contact with the surrounding concrete
when the operating IWP was only 1.66 MPa (about 14% lower than the
threshold 1.94 MPa).
In the light of the above discrepancy, there has been an increasing
interest in the evolution of contact behaviour in P-type SCSs. Over the

4.1.2. Improved joint-IWP-resisting design philosophy

To reduce the above structural and operational risks to HPPs, for P-
type SCSs, the temporary IWP is usually specified as 50–80% of the
maximum static headwater of a turbine unit in China's hydropower
engineering practices [5]. That breaks the classical independent-load-
bearing design philosophy of steel-lined SCSs. Based on China's
experience, the IWP-resisting in a P-type SCS is divided into two parts
by the specified temporary IWP. The pressure below the temporary
IWP is solely resisted by the steel spiral case. The rest exceeding the
temporary IWP, however, is not only resisted by the steel spiral case
but by the surrounding concrete. In other words, the temporary IWP
essentially determines the IWP-resisting percentages of the steel spiral
case and the surrounding concrete. Based on this understanding, in
recent years the temporary IWP has been considered as a central issue
in the structural analysis and design of P-type SCSs [6–8].
The core idea of China's experience with P-type SCSs is to allow a
small percentage of IWP to be transmitted into surrounding concrete.
The idea takes into account the tensile strength of concrete, which is
typically neglected by design codes concerning steel-concrete compo-
site structures [9]. Provided the IWP-resisting percentage of the
surrounding concrete is low enough (that can be achieved by specifying
higher temporary IWP within a proper range), the structural strength
of a P-type SCS will not be a safety issue with a HPP. More importantly,
in this condition a steel spiral case is in contact with surrounding
concrete with IWP transmission between them. Thus, during the
operating period of a HPP, the concrete can hold the steel spiral case Fig. 4. The Ertan HPP. (a) The arch dam with a height of 240 m. (b) The underground
and absorb most excitation energy of the pressure fluctuations in the hydropower house with total installed capacity of 3300 MW.

1273
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
Fig. 5. A typical finite element modelling process of a P-type SCS in a CSP [15].
past decade, most research in P-type SCSs has emphasized the use of a
complete simulation procedure (CSP). In the CSP, not only the contact
nonlinearity in a P-type SCS but also the construction process of it are
considered. The temporary IWP and the maximum design IWP are
successively applied in the FEA to achieve a complete simulation of the
construction process of the P-type SCS. Fig. 5 shows a typical finite
element modelling process of a P-type SCS in a CSP.
Along with the improvement of the simulation technique in recent
years, a better understanding of the contact behaviour in P-type SCSs is
developed. Several numerical studies comparing the SSP with the CSP
have been carried out on P-type SCSs. In a study conducted by Wang
et al., it was shown that the contact behaviour in a P-type SCS has
significant effect on local FEA results [16]. Shen et al. have attempted
to explain why the effect of the contact behaviour occurs [17]. By
employing the CSP, Ma's group carried out a number of 2D and 3D
numerical investigations into the nonlinear contact behaviour in P-type
SCSs [18–20]. They point out the early and delayed closing of in-
between gaps in P-type SCSs and their FEA results concerning the
nonlinear contact behaviour are supported by the earlier field-mon-
itoring findings [14] with regard to the aforementioned discrepancy. In
a follow-up study, Fu et al. performed a structural FEA of a P-type SCS
using the CSP [21,22]. They draw our attention to the influence
mechanism of the early and delayed closing phenomenon on the
structural performance of P-type SCSs.
A significant analysis and discussion on the nonlinear contact
behaviour in P-type SCSs was presented by Guo et al. in 2015 [15].
First, they validate the applicability of the CSP based on a structural
FEA of a steel spherical pressure vessel embedded in concrete with a
cylindrical opening. After that, they carried out a structural FEA of the
No.9 P-type SCS (Unit capacity=650 MW) of the Nuozhadu HPP. Fig. 6
details some simulation results concerning the evolution of the contact
status between the steel spiral case and its surrounding concrete. The
results have further strengthened our conviction that the temporary
IWP should not be a strict deciding threshold for the contact status
between the steel spiral case and its surrounding concrete in a P-type
SCS.
The numerical studies presented thus far [15–22] provide evidence
that the contact behaviour in a P-type SCS is a complex nonlinear
evolution process. Meeting the requirement that the operating IWP
rises to the temporary IWP of a P-type SCS does not necessarily
indicate a closing of the in-between gap, and vice versa. Collectively,
these studies [15–22] outline a critical role of the unevenly distributed
1274
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
gap in a P-type SCS for the nonlinear contact behaviour in it.
What is now needed is further studies involving detailed compar-
isons of FEA results and field monitoring data with regard to the gap-
closing/opening behaviour in P-type SCSs. Continued efforts are
needed to make the CSP for the structural FEA of P-type SCSs more
accessible to practicing engineers. In a word, further improvements in
the structural analysis and design of P-type SCSs will challenge us for
years.
4.2. M-type SCSs
4.2.1. Classification of parameters with respect to membrane
coverings
As was mentioned in Section 3, traditionally the compressible
membrane in an M-type SCS is considered a barrier to ensure that
the steel spiral case resists as much IWP as possible. This produces a
similar problem confronting classical P-type SCSs; the holding effect of
concrete on steel spiral cases has not gotten as much attention as it
should. Consequently, the membrane has been increasingly viewed as a
load-transmitting regulator rather than a barrier in an M-type SCS in
China's hydropower engineering practices, especially in the last decade.
Different membrane coverings will produce different IWP-transmitting
mechanisms, thus lead to different structural performance of M-type
SCSs. By adjusting parameters with respect to membrane coverings, we
can achieve structural control of M-type SCSs to some degree. The
parameters are generally classified into two types: mechanical and
spatial.
4.2.2. Mechanical parameters of membranes
Mechanical parameters of a membrane include its compression
modulus, E, and thickness, t. Data from several early numerical studies
have identified increased IWP-resisting percentages of surrounding
concrete associated with increases in E [23–25] or decreases in t [26–
28] of membranes in M-type SCSs. A seminal study in this area is the
work of a 3D nonlinear FEA of an M-type SCS by Fu et al. in 2003 [29].
It has been suggested [29] that the ratio, E/t, which determines a
membrane's compressive stiffness, should be recognised as a key
parameter for controlling the IWP-resisting percentages of the steel
and concrete components in an M-type SCS. An optimized E/t ratio
produces appropriate compressive stiffness of a membrane, and thus
ensures ideal IWP-resisting percentages in an M-type SCS. Up to now,
an increasing number of numerical studies have revealed a correlation
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
Fig. 6. The FEA-predicted contact status between the steel spiral case and its surrounding concrete under different IWP [15].
between the mechanical parameters of membranes and the static
structural performance of M-type SCSs [30–33]. Preliminary work on
the dynamic structural performance of M-type SCSs was undertaken by
Chen et al. in 2010 [34]. They argue that a membrane with a smaller E/
t ratio can to a greater degree reduce the vibration transmission from
the steel liner, which is subject to IWP fluctuations, to its surrounding
concrete in an M-type SCS.
In China's hydropower engineering practices, the compression
modulus of a membrane is usually below 10 MPa and more often
between 1 and 3 MPa. This range of values is above the fixed value
(0.86 MPa) specified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [1]. It shows
that stiffer membrane materials are preferred in China. The preference
reflects Chinese engineers’ perspective on compressible membranes in
M-type SCSs; membranes are regarded as regulators for IWP transmis-
sion, not barriers. Regarding a membrane's thickness, it is usually
between 20 and 50 mm. In recent years, Chinese engineers have tended
to specify this parameter between 20 and 30 mm for large-scale SCSs.
4.2.3. Spatial parameters of membranes
Spatial parameters of a membrane determine the covering range of
it on a steel spiral case. Traditionally a membrane stretches over the
top portion of a steel spiral case from its inlet to (almost) its end (also
known as “trunk's end”). Thus the value of the parameter in Fig. 7(a),
α, is routinely not less than 270°.
By contrast, the parameters in Fig. 7(b), β and γ, have attracted
considerable interest in the last century. Early design of M-type SCSs
allowed a membrane to stretch to the upper stay ring of a turbine unit
in a c-cross-section. In other words, the parameter, γ, was assigned its
greatest possible value. One major drawback of this attempt is that it is
likely to cause excessive bending stresses of connection elements (skirt
plates) between steel spiral cases and upper stay rings [2]. For this
reason, in current design the parameter, γ, is usually assigned a value
that enables upper ends of membranes to keep reasonable distances
from upper stay rings. That brings about local joint-IWP-resisting of
skirt plates and concrete near upper stay rings, for avoiding excessive
bending stresses of skirt plates. With regard to its lower end in a c-
cross-section, a membrane usually extends downward to the vicinity of
1275
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
the horizontal centerline of a steel spiral case. The value of the
parameter, β, hence falls within a range routinely between −30° (below
the centerline) and 30° (above the centerline). At present it is generally
accepted that the more downward a membrane extends, the more IWP
a steel spiral case resists in a c-cross-section [26,29,32,35]. So by
adjusting the spatial parameter, β, we can adopt an alternative strategy
to obtain ideal IWP-resisting percentages of the steel and concrete
components and thus achieve, to some extent, structural control of an
M-type SCS. The preliminary work carried out by Chen et al. shows that
a wider membrane-covered range in a c-cross-section of an M-type SCS
produces smaller vibration amplitudes of both the steel liner and its
surrounding concrete caused by IWP fluctuations [34].
4.2.4. Nonlinear and inelastic mechanical behaviour of membrane
materials
Despite widespread adoption of M-type SCSs in engineering
practices, mechanical properties of various membrane materials
(usually PVC or PU foam materials) are still poorly understood.
Membranes were routinely assumed to be linear elastic materials in
the structural design of M-type SCSs [36]. However, recent evidence
suggests that foam materials exhibit noticeable nonlinear [37–39] and
inelastic [40,41] mechanical behaviour. Several attempts have been
made aimed at describing the nonlinear stress-strain behaviour of
membrane materials in M-type SCSs with piecewise linear models [42–
44].
A key and probably the most systematic experimental investigation
into membrane materials in M-type SCSs is that of Gan et al., in which
the compressive stress-strain behaviour of a PU cork material is fully
examined [45–47]. The PU cork material is finding wide and increasing
employment in China's HPPs, such as Longyangxia (320 MW×4,
1988), Lijiaxia (400 MW×5, 1995), Gongboxia (300 MW×5, 2003),
Zipingpu (190 MW×4, 2004), Pengshui (350 MW×5, 2006), Laxiwa
(700 MW×6, 2007), etc. Fig. 8 presents some test results with respect
to the compressive mechanical behaviour of the PU cork material under
cyclic pressure. The results offer compelling evidence for the nonlinear
and inelastic stress-strain behaviour of the membrane material.
In the last few years, some effective attempts have been made by
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
Fig. 7. The membrane-covered range on a steel spiral case. (a) Stretching the water flow
in a horizontal plane. (b) In a c-cross-section.
Zhang and Wu with the purpose of improving the conventional way of
describing membrane materials in FEA [48,49]. They employed the
*HYPERFOAM model in conjunction with the *MULLINS EFFECT
option based on the ABAQUS code, to describe the PU cork material
[48]. The simulation results [48] fit well with the test data [47], as
highlighted in Fig. 9. They state that the simulation technique for
describing the nonlinear stress-strain behaviour of membrane materi-
als is reliable and practical. It is unfortunate that the presented
simulation technique is not capable of dealing with the inelastic
mechanical behaviour of membrane materials.
In a follow-up study, Zhang and Wu reported on a new simulation
concept of modelling membrane materials in FEA [49]. The essence of
the concept is the definition of a softened contact relationship between
the steel spiral case and its surrounding concrete in an M-type SCS. The
1276
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
Fig. 8. Some test results concerning the PU cork material under cyclic pressure in [47].
(a) The response curves of the loading-unloading cycles 1, 2, 10, 11, 19 and 20. (b)
Permanent strain versus cycles.
Fig. 9. A comparison of the simulation results [48] with the test data [47].
technique could be applied to the description of a membrane material
regarding both its nonlinear and inelastic mechanical behaviour. A key
strength of the technique is its simplicity for finite element modelling of
thin-layer membranes in M-type SCSs.
Overall, the recent numerical studies [48,49] highlight the need for
further experimental investigations to determine mechanical proper-
ties of various membrane materials, especially the rheologic behaviour
of them. More mechanical information on membrane materials would
help us to establish a greater degree of accuracy on structural control of
M-type SCSs.
4.2.5. Sliding behaviour in M-type SCSs
Another increasingly important area with respect to M-type SCSs is
the sliding behaviour of steel liners on surrounding concrete. Central to
this area is the frictional effect between steel and concrete components.
Initial work in this field focused primarily on the effect of friction on
concrete stresses, with the purpose of improving the reinforcement
calculation for M-type SCSs [50–52]. More recent evidence highlights a
key role of the sliding behaviour in the IWP transfer mechanism
between the steel and concrete components in an M-type SCS [53].
Unfortunately, the sliding behaviour in M-type SCSs has not been dealt
with in depth in engineering practices. The friction coefficient between
steel liners and concrete was empirically assigned a value between 0.2
and 0.25 in the structural design of M-type SCSs [48,54–56]. This
empirical value range has been being challenged by the current design
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
specification for steel penstocks in HPPs [57], which recommends a
0.42–0.59 range of the steel-concrete friction coefficient.
As a matter of fact, to date experimental data about the friction
coefficient between steel and concrete are limited due to the difficulty in
measurement. Previously published experimental studies are not
consistent and show very scattered values of the steel-concrete friction
coefficient (from 0.1 to 0.6) [58–60]. There is no general agreement
about the value-assignment of the friction coefficient in FEA of
different types of steel-concrete composite systems [61–63]. The
parameter analysis of the friction coefficient has thus become an
important issue in recent FEA of steel-concrete composite systems
[64–66].
The evidence [58–66] presented above suggests that there is still
considerable uncertainty with regard to the friction coefficient between
steel and concrete. Collectively, these studies outline a critical role of
the friction coefficient for the structural performance of M-type SCSs,
considering the role of the sliding behaviour highlighted in the
preliminary work [53]. Consequently, in our view the steel-concrete
friction coefficient should be recognised as an important calculation
parameter in future structural design of M-type SCSs. More broadly,
further experimental research is also needed to determine the steel-
concrete friction coefficient.
4.3. N-type SCSs
4.3.1. Cracking issue
An N-type SCS has many advantages, the most obvious being its
structural integrity and simplicity. The pursuit of putting this method
of embedment into engineering practices had long been a subject of
interest for Chinese engineers in the last century. Initial concern on N-
type SCSs was potential severe cracking of concrete due to joint-IWP-
resisting.
A number of nonlinear numerical studies of the No.15 N-type SCS
(in the initial design proposal) of the Three Gorges HPP have been
carried out since 2005 [67–71]. These studies indicate that although
the predicted cracking (damage) of the concrete is noticeable (Fig. 10),
the calculated surface-crack widths are generally less than the upper
limit value 0.3 mm specified by related design codes [72,73]. In follow-
up studies, it was shown that the cracking range and degree of the
concrete would stabilise after a certain number of loading-unloading
cycles of the IWP [74,75].
Considering the numerical simulation results concerning the No.15
N-type SCS of the Three Gorges HPP [67–71,74,75], it seems that
concrete cracking is not a major issue for N-type SCSs. With adequate
Fig. 10. The predicted tension damage isolines in the concrete of the No.15 N-type SCS
of the Three Gorges HPP under the design loads [71].
1277
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
reinforcements, concrete structures in N-type SCSs are guaranteed of
their durability and integrity, which has been a basic consensus
amongst Chinese hydraulic structural engineers.
4.3.2. Uneven lifts of generator pedestal structures
Besides concrete cracking, another primary concern of N-type SCSs
is uneven lifts of generator pedestal structures (Fig. 7(b)). An uneven
lift of a generator pedestal structure will tilt the hydrogenerator shaft,
thereby posing an operational risk to the hydrogenerator. For P-type or
M-type SCSs, the issue of uneven lifts of generator pedestal structures
has not received considerable critical attention due to the relatively low
IWP-resisting percentages of the concrete of them. In 2009, Zhang
et al. performed a comparative numerical study investigating the
structural performance of an SCS under different embedment condi-
tions of the Xiluodu HPP (the world's third-largest HPP, after the
Three Gorges HPP in China and the Itaipu HPP on the border between
Brazil and Paraguay) [76]. The simulation results highlight much
higher significance of the uneven-lift issue to N-type SCSs, compared
with that to P-type or M-type SCSs, as illustrated in Fig. 11.
In the case of the No.15 N-type SCS of the Three Gorges HPP, the
nonlinear-FEA-predicted uneven lift of the generator pedestal struc-
ture can reach a maximum of around 2.50 mm [67–71]. The commu-
nity has raised some concerns about the uneven-lift issue of this level.
Consequently, the attempt to embed the No.15 steel spiral case of the
Three Gorges HPP in a natural state has eventually been abandoned.
To date the main issue confronting an N-type SCS, as far as we
know, has been an excessively uneven lift of its generator pedestal
structure, rather than cracking of its concrete component. In China's
hydropower engineering practices, the uneven-lift issue has been dealt
with based more on experience. There is thus an urgent need to address
the uneven-lift issue in related design codes for powerhouses of HPPs.
Future work should concentrate the influence mechanism of uneven
lifts of generator pedestal structures on operating status of hydro-
generators.
4.3.3. Alternative method of embedment
Concerning the uneven-lift issue, Chinese engineers have developed
an alternative method of embedment of steel spiral cases. In the
alternative embedment condition, a compressible membrane is also
employed to cover the top portion of a steel spiral case. However, the
membrane stretches more flexibly along the water flow, also from the
inlet but not always to the “trunk's end” of the steel spiral case. In this
way, the spatial parameter in Fig. 7(a), α, is adjustable between 0° and
270°. While the parameter, β, is responsible for controlling IWP-
resisting percentages of steel and concrete components in c-cross-
sections, the parameter, α, is responsible for controlling IWP-transmit-
ting paths in a horizontal plane (Fig. 7).
A generally accepted definition of steel-lined SCSs in which steel
spiral cases are in the above-mentioned alternative embedment con-
dition is lacking. We thus tend to use NM-hybrid-type SCSs for the
definition. An NM-hybrid-type SCS is a good compromise between an
N-type SCS and an M-type one. It combines the technical advantages of
the two classical types: (a) the structural integrity and simplicity of N-
type SCSs, and (b) the structural flexibility and controllability of M-
type SCSs.
Initial work in this field focused primarily on the dependence of the
structural performance concerning the cracking and uneven-lift issues
of an NM-hybrid-type SCS on the in-horizontal-plane stretching range
of the membrane [77]. In their seminal paper of 2010, Yao et al. draw
our attention to the in-horizontal-plane hydraulic thrust acting on steel
spiral cases along the axes of the straight tubes of them [78]. They
highlight the need for considering the hydraulic thrust in the structural
design of P-type and NM-hybrid-type SCSs. This is the first systematic
report on the hydraulic thrust in SCSs. Since 2011, much more
information on the hydraulic thrust in SCSs has become available
[79–81]. The studies have linked the in-shear status of stay rings with
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281

Fig. 11. The uneven lifts of a generator pedestal structure of the Xiluodu HPP under different embedment conditions of the steel spiral case [76].

Table 2
Some China's HPPs in which NM-hybrid-type SCSs have been or will be adopted.

HPP Unit capacity Number of NM-hybrid- (Estimated)

(MW) type SCSs/Total number Completion date
of SCSs

Jinghong 350 5/5 2009

Three Gorges 700 2/32 2012
Gongguoqiao 225 4/4 2012
Xiluodu 770 18/18 2015
Xiangjiaba 800 4/8 2015
Wudongde 850 12/12 2020
Baihetan 1000 16/16 2020

hybrid-type SCSs in China.

5. Experimental investigations into SCSs in China

So far this paper has focused on numerical studies of SCSs. This

Fig. 12. Typical dependence of the in-shear status (the vector of the shear force caused
by the hydraulic thrust) of the stay ring on the in-horizontal-plane stretching range of the
membrane in an NM-hybrid-type SCS (see Fig. 7(a) for information on the parameter, α).
the hydraulic thrust in NM-hybrid-type SCSs, and shown that the
former is highly dependent on in-horizontal-plane stretching ranges of
membranes (Fig. 12). Several studies, for example [82] and [83], have
been carried out with the purpose of optimising NM-hybrid-type SCSs
by adjusting the parameter, α (Fig. 7(a)), which determines the in-
horizontal-plane stretching range of a membrane. The structural
optimisation takes account of (a) cracking ranges and degrees of
concrete, (b) deformations of stay rings, (c) in-shear status of stay
rings, (d) uneven lifts of generator pedestal structures and (e) torsion of
water passages.
Overall, these studies have gone some way towards enhancing our
understanding of NM-hybrid-type SCSs [77–83]. This method of
embedment of compromise has been successfully used in two (No.15
and 27) of all 32 SCSs in the Three Gorges HPP [84]. Table 2
summarizes some China's large-scale HPPs including the Three
Gorges HPP, in which NM-hybrid-type SCSs have been or will be
adopted in recent years or the years to come. We note from Table 2 that
the next decade is likely to see a considerable rise in adoption of NM-
section will briefly discuss experimental investigations into SCSs
carried out in the last three decades in China.
Physical model tests have been instrumental in our understanding
of the structural performance of SCSs, especially in the 20th century
when numerical methods were not well-developed and widely-used on
PCs. Table 3 lists some representative large-scale model tests on SCSs
[85–94], which have made noteworthy contributions to the design and
construction of HPPs in China.
The primary task of model tests on SCSs is to examine the
structural safety and failure mechanisms of them, under the design
and overloading IWP, respectively. Concrete usually gets more atten-
tion than steel liners in SCSs because the latter have much higher safety
margins. Consequently, when concrete cracking arises and how it
propagates as IWP rises are classic problems in experimental investi-
gations into SCSs. Significantly, the model test results have shown that
the concrete surrounding the straight tubes of the steel spiral cases
undergoes damage more easily [85–94]. The results may be explained
by the fact that the straight tubes have larger diameters (higher ring
tension) and the concrete surrounding them is relatively thin. The
example of the Ertan 1/20 scale physical model test (Fig. 13) illustrates
this point clearly (Fig. 14) [86].
As stated in Section 4, what we know about the structural
performance of SCSs is largely based on numerical analysis. Hence
another critical aspect of model tests on SCSs is serving as bases for
validating the applicability and reliability of different numerical
analysis programs. Detailed validation of the ABAQUS and MARC
programs for finite element modelling of SCSs was performed by Jiang

1278
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281

Table 3
Representative large-scale model tests on SCSs in China.

HPP Unit capacity Maximum design Real inlet In-model embedment Model Research institute Completion date
(MW) IWP (MPa) diameter (m) condition scale

Longyangxia[85] 320 1.800 6.7 N-type (Model A) 1/10 Northwest Hydrotechnical 1991
M-type (Model B) Research Institute
Ertan[86] 550 2.310 7.2 P-type 1/20 Wuhan University 1996

Three Gorges[87,88] 700 1.395 12.4 P-type 1/12 Wuhan University (Model A) 2000
Changjiang River Scientific
Research Institute (Model B)

Three Gorges (No.15 SCS) 700 1.395 12.4 N-type 1/12 Wuhan University (Model A) 2006
[89,90] Changjiang River Scientific
Research Institute (Model B)
Jinghong[91] 350 1.000 11.2 N-type 1/11 Wuhan University 2006
Xiaowan[92] 700 2.900 6.5 P-type 1/6.5 Wuhan University 2006
Pubugou[93] 600 2.450 8.0 P-type 1/10 Wuhan University 2007
Nuozhadu[94] 650 2.800 7.0 P-type 1/10 Dalian University of Technology 2011

calculation results regarding concrete cracking propagations and sur-

face-crack widths in SCSs [96,97]. In this context recent experimental
studies investigating SCSs have considered generator pedestal struc-
tures in their physical models (Fig. 15) [93,94]. The findings add
substantially to our understanding of the uneven-lift issue for SCSs.
Collectively, all of the studies reviewed here [85–94] outline an
irreplaceable role of experimental investigations for the structural
analysis and design of SCSs. A greater focus on the contact status
between steel spiral cases and their surrounding concrete in model
tests could produce interesting findings that account more for the
contact nonlinearity in SCSs.

Fig. 13. A 1/20 scale physical model of a P-type SCS of the Ertan HPP.
[74] and Chen et al. [95], respectively. The validation is based on the 1/
12 scale model tests on the No.15 N-type SCS of the Three Gorges HPP
[89,90]. Their numerical simulation results [74,95] are encouraging
and correlate satisfactorily with the model test results [89,90]. The
validation thus further supports the key role of numerical analysis in
our understanding of the structural performance of SCSs.
Earlier experimental investigations into SCSs had tended to focus
on the cracking issue rather than the uneven-lift issue for them.
Accordingly, generator pedestal structures were usually ignored in
earlier physical models of SCSs [85–92]. Due to the absence of
generator pedestal structures, it was not possible to obtain uneven-lift
data of them in model tests. Moreover, lack of generator pedestal
structures in numerical models has been shown to lead to inaccurate
6. Conclusions
The purpose of the current work was to share China's experience on
methods of embedment of steel spiral cases in concrete, in the design
and construction of HPPs. In general, there are altogether three
methods of embedment in hydropower engineering practices world-
wide. Our work has highlighted China's design philosophy of P-type
and M-type SCSs. It is a joint-IWP-resisting philosophy that in a
controlled way ensures ideal IWP-resisting percentages of the steel and
concrete components in an SCS. Its core goal is to balance the
structural strength against integrity of SCSs, thus ensuring the
structural safety and operating stability of HPPs as much as possible.
It was also shown that considerable progress has been made with
regard to N-type SCSs in China. Chinese engineers have found an
innovative solution for excessively uneven lifts of generator pedestal
structures confronting N-type SCSs. The key is to allow a compressible
membrane to stretch more flexibly along the water flow over a steel

Fig. 14. The concrete cracking propagations surrounding the straight tubes of the steel spiral cases in the Ertan 1/20 scale physical models [86]. (a) The temporary IWP=1.94 MPa. (b)
The temporary IWP=0.95 MPa.

1279
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
Fig. 15. Physical models of SCSs including generator pedestal structures. (a) The
Pubugou 1/10 scale physical model. (b) The Nuozhadu 1/10 scale physical model.
spiral case. The adoptions of innovative-type SCSs, i.e. NM-hybrid-type
SCSs, so far in China have been very encouraging. We believe that NM-
hybrid-type SCSs are becoming increasingly mainstream for large-scale
HPPs in China and even the world. Further investigation and experi-
mentation into NM-hybrid-type SCSs would be of great help in the
design and construction of large-scale HPPs.
Acknowledgements
This work was made possible by Grants from the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (51679013, 51309030, 51609020,
51679175, 41301434), the Fundamental Research Funds for Central
Public Welfare Research Institutes (Changjiang River Scientific
Research Institute CKSF2016015/GC, CKSF2015020/GC) and the
Open Research Fund Program of State Key Laboratory of Water
Resources and Hydropower Engineering Science (2015SDG02).
The original photographs for Figs. 2, 3 and 15(b) were provided by
Sinohydro Bureau 7 Co. Ltd., HydroChina ZHONGNAN Engineering
Corporation and Dalian University of Technology, respectively. The
provision is hereby gratefully acknowledged. We thank Dr. Xin-Yong
Xu, who works in North China University of Water Resources and
Electric Power, for his help.
We gratefully acknowledge the constructive comments of the
anonymous reviewers.
References
[1] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers . EM 1110-2-3001 planning and design of hydro-
electric power plant structures. Washington, DC: Department of the Army; 1995.
1280
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
[2] Migurenko VR, Lisichkin SE. Verification of design of turbine block with steel/
reinforced-concrete spiral casing in the powerhouse at the Rogun HPP. Power
Technol Eng 2012;46:253–61.
[3] Dorji U, Ghomashchi R. Hydro turbine failure mechanisms: an overview. Eng Fail
Anal 2014;44:136–47.
[4] Kumar R, Singal SK. Operation and maintenance problems in hydro turbine
material in small hydro power plant. Mater Today: Proc 2015;2:2323–31.
[5] China's Ministry of Water Resources . SL 266-2001 design code for hydropower
house. Beijing, China: China Water Power Press; 2001, [in Chinese].
[6] Shen Y. Static and dynamic analysis on reloading filling scroll case structure of large
pumped storage power station [Ph.D. Dissertation]. Wuhan, China: Wuhan
University; 2007, [in Chinese].
[7] He Y. Structural study on spiral case keeping constant internal water pressure in
Pubugou hydropower station [Ph.D. Dissertation]. Wuhan, China: Wuhan
University; 2009, [in Chinese].
[8] Nie JY, Wu HG, Su K. Study on optimizing precast water head of spiral case at
pumped-storage power plant. Water Resour Power 2009;27(1):151–4, [in Chinese].
[9] Spacone E, El-Tawil S. Nonlinear analysis of steel-concrete composite structures:
State of the art. J Struct Eng 2004;130:159–68.
[10] Li SJ, Li ZF, Wang RX. Stress analysis methods of spiral case structures in high-
head pumped storage hydroelectric power plants. Water Resour Hydropower Eng
1998;29(12):30–3, [in Chinese].
[11] Li WF, Li JC, Zhao XN. The study on stress simulation of the preloading filling
spiral case of hydropower station. Water Power 2004;30(3):52–4, [in Chinese].
[12] Qin JZ, Ma SD, Wu HG, Kuang HJ. 3-D FEM analysis for surrounding concrete of
steel spiral case keeping constant internal pressure. J Hydraul Eng
2001;32(6):28–32, [in Chinese].
[13] Wu HG, Ma SD, Bai JM. 2-D nonlinear analysis for the spiral case of Three Gorges
Power Station. J Hydraul Eng 2003;34(5):57–61, [in Chinese].
[14] Li WH. Field monitoring of the joint-IWP-resisting in a spiral case structure of the
Ertan HPP. Des Hydroelectr Power Stn 2003;19:41–4, [in Chinese].
[15] Guo T, Zhang LX, Li SJ. Research on three-dimensional simulation algorithm of
preloaded filling spiral case with non-uniform gap. J Hydraul Eng
2015;46:1434–43, [in Chinese].
[16] Wang HJ, Huang JM, Wang RX. Research on stress analysis method for periphery
concrete of steel spiral case keeping internal water pressure. China Rural Water
Hydropower 2007(6):131–3, [in Chinese].
[17] Shen Y, Wu HG, Jiang KC. Research on preloading filling spiral case structure in
large pumped storage power station. J Huazhong Univ Sci Tech (Nat Sci Ed)
2008;36(5):97–9, [in Chinese].
[18] Xu XY, Li MZ, Ma ZY, Zhang HZ, He PC. Simulation and analysis of the constant
internal pressure spiral case with non-uniform gap. J Hydroelectr Eng
2009;28(4):75–80, [in Chinese].
[19] Ma ZY, He PC, Zhang YL, Zhang HZ. Nonlinear simulation analysis for preloading
spiral case of keeping constant internal water pressure of hydropower station. J
Dalian Univ Tech 2010;50:1014–9, [in Chinese].
[20] Xu XY, Ma ZY, Zhang HZ. Simulation algorithm for spiral case structure in
hydropower station. Water Sci Eng 2013;6:230–40.
[21] Fu D, Wu HG, Shi CZ. Study on contact behavior and forced state of stay ring for
preloading filling spiral case in hydropower station. J Sichuan Univ (Eng Sci Ed)
2014;46(S2):54–9, [in Chinese].
[22] Fu D, Wu HG, Hu L. Gap closing and contact transferring mechanism in preloading
filling spiral case of hydropower station. J Huazhong Univ Sci Tech (Nat Sci Ed)
2014;42(7):27–32, [in Chinese].
[23] Li XC, Ma L. A finite element analysis of a hydropower house substructure. Water
Power 1992;18(3):23–8, [in Chinese].
[24] Dong YX, Lu YH, Ma ZY. Analysis for composite structure of steel scroll case and
outer covering reinforced concrete. J Dalian Univ Technol 1995;35:389–94, [in
Chinese].
[25] Dong YX, Guo YG, Qian XZ, Lin YS. Study about effect of different material of
elasticity cushion layer on spiral case structure of turbine. Large Electr Mach
Hydraul Turbine 1996(4):45–8, [in Chinese].
[26] Guo X, Zhang ZQ, Yu YS, Wang ZG. Analysis on the scroll combined structure of the
Wanjiazhai Water Power Station with the finite element method. Des Water Resour
Hydroelectr Eng 1999(4):43–5, [in Chinese].
[27] Li JH, Sun J, Zhu YY, Yang JS. A comparative study of a spiral case structure in a
hydroelectric power plant. Eng Mech 1999(S):44–50, [in Chinese].
[28] Li JH, Si JH, Jian Z, Yang JS. Structural performance of spiral case structures with
a double-row arrangement in a hydroelectric power plant. Water Resour
Hydropower Eng 2002;33(9):34–6, [in Chinese].
[29] Fu HX, Ma ZY, Dong YX. Study on structure of cushion layer for spiral case in
hydropower station. J Hydraul Eng 2003;34(6):85–8, [in Chinese].
[30] Yang F, Wu HG. Structural study on the spiral case of large hydraulic turbines. Eng
J Wuhan Univ 2004;37(5):46–9, [in Chinese].
[31] Qin L, Lian JJ, Zheng W. Study on the scroll case structure styles of a large
hydropower station. China Rural Water Hydropower 2006(1):69–72, [in Chinese].
[32] Zhang YL, Ma ZY, Cheng GR, Chen J. Analysis and discussion on giant spiral casing
embedded with soft cushion layer. Water Resour Power 2006;24(6):65–8, [in
Chinese].
[33] Lu SS, Liu XQ, Zhao LH, Xia H. Influence of steel cushion layer thickness on spiral
case stress. Water Resour Power 2011;29(2):59–61, [in Chinese].
[34] Chen J, Yao FJ, Ma ZY. Effect of bedding layer on dynamic characteristics of
powerhouse. Water Resour Power 2010;28(4):86–9, [in Chinese].
[35] Zhao YX. A computational analysis of a spiral case structure with an elastic
membrane. Des Water Resour Hydroelectr Eng 1995(2):42–9, [in Chinese].
[36] Yang JS, Lan SR. Models of pad layers in finite element analysis and their
Q.-L. Zhang, H.-G. Wu
application in GTSTRUDL software. Adv Eng Softw 1993;17:141–5.
[37] Hawkins MC, O'Toole B, Jackovich D. Cell morphology and mechanical properties
of rigid polyurethane foam. J Cell Plast 2005;41:267–85.
[38] Fischer F, Lim GT, Handge UA, Altstädt V. Numerical simulation of mechanical
properties of cellular materials using computed tomography analysis. J Cell Plast
2009;45:441–60.
[39] Rizov V. Indentation of foam-based polymer composite sandwich beams and panels
under static loading. J Mater Eng Perform 2009;18:351–60.
[40] Krishnaswamy S, Beatty MF. The Mullins effect in compressible solids. Int J Eng
Sci 2000;38:1397–414.
[41] Shen Y, Golnaraghi F, Plumtree A. Modelling compressive cyclic stress-strain
behaviour of structural foam. Int J Fatigue 2001;23:491–7.
[42] Cao LG. A three-dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis of a spiral case
structure considering the joint-IWP-resisting. Dongfang Electr Mach
1995(4):4–11, [in Chinese].
[43] Li SJ, Li ZF, Wang RX. A combined bearing structure analysis for scroll case with a
cushion course of power station. J Hydroelectr Eng 1998;17(4):21–30, [in
Chinese].
[44] Zhang J, Jian Z, Luo SM. Numerical simulation study on the spiral case with
cushion layer of turbine. Water Power 2009;35(6):50–2, [in Chinese].
[45] Gan QM. Application of PU cork cushion material in hydropower station. Water
Power 2008;34(12):107–9, [in Chinese].
[46] Gan QM, Lv H, Sun JY. Discussion on using cork expansion joint filler as cushion
material for steel spiral case in hydropower stations. Mach Woodwork Equip
2008;36(12):28–9, [in Chinese].
[47] Gan QM. Characteristic and influence factors analysis of compression modulus of
polyurethane cork cushion material. Water Power 2010;36(5):82–4, [in Chinese].
[48] Zhang QL, Wu HG. Effect of compressible membrane's nonlinear stress-strain
behavior on spiral case structure. Struct Eng Mech 2012;42:73–93.
[49] Zhang QL, Wu HG. Using softened contact relationship describing compressible
membrane in FEA of spiral case structure. Arch Civ Mech Eng 2013;13:506–17.
[50] Ma ZY, Zhang YL, Chen J, Cheng GR, Wang Y. The feasibility evaluation of the giant
spiral case using cushion layer. Water Power 2006;32(1):28–32, [in Chinese].
[51] Yu Y, Zhang QL, Wu HG. Reinforcement calculation for spiral case embedded with
cushion layer of hydropower station. J Tianjin Univ 2009;42:673–7, [in Chinese].
[52] Sun HQ, Wu HG, Hao JG, He M. Analysis on influences of contact slippage on
stress of spiral cases with different embedded manners. J Hydraul Eng
2010;41:619–23, [in Chinese].
[53] Zhang QL, Wu HG. Contact state between membrane-covered steel spiral case and
concrete in hydropower house substructures: finite element analysis. J Hydraul Eng
2013;44:1468–74, [in Chinese].
[54] Zhang YL, Han T, Zhang CH, Li ZX, Hou P, Zhao XF. Geometrical parameter
selection for the soft cushion layer of spiral case in Xiluodu hydropower station.
Water Power 2011;37(9):58–60, [in Chinese].
[55] Nie JY, Wu HG, Zhang QL, Guo YQ. Effect of penstock joint-passing structure on
spiral case with a membrane. J Hydroelectr Eng 2012;31(2):192–7, [in Chinese].
[56] Yang Y, Li SY, Liang Q, Han YH. Influence of the periodical loading on surrounding
concrete of spiral case. Chin J Appl Mech 2015;32:794–8, [in Chinese].
[57] The Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of China . SL 281-2003
Design specification for steel penstocks of hydroelectric stations. Beijing, China:
China Water and Power Press; 2003, [in Chinese].
[58] Rabbat BG, Russell HG. Friction coefficient of steel on concrete or grout. J Struct
Eng 1985;111:505–15.
[59] Baltay P, Gjelsvik A. Coefficient of friction for steel on concrete at high normal
stress. J Mater Civ Eng 1990;2:46–9.
[60] Pallett P, Gorst N, Clark L, Thomas D. Friction resistance in temporary works
materials. Concr 2002;36(6):12–5.
[61] Chen CC, Ko JW, Huang GL, Chang YM. Local buckling and concrete confinement
of concrete-filled box columns under axial load. J Constr Steel Res 2012;78:8–21.
[62] Hu HS, Nie JG. Numerical study of concrete-filled steel plate composite coupling
beams. Thin-Walled Struct 2015;96:139–54.
[63] Budaházy V, Dunai L. Numerical analysis of concrete filled Buckling Restrained
Braces. J Constr Steel Res 2015;115:92–105.
[64] Johansson M, Gylltoft K. Mechanical behavior of circular steel-concrete composite
stub columns. J Struct Eng 2002;128:1073–81.
[65] Ferrer M, Marimon F, Crisinel M. Designing cold-formed steel sheets for composite
slabs: an experimentally validated FEM approach to slip failure mechanics. Thin-
Walled Struct 2006;44:1261–71.
[66] Guezouli S, Lachal A. Numerical analysis of frictional contact effects in push-out
tests. Eng Struct 2012;40:39–50.
[67] Wu HG, Jiang KC, Shen Y, Ma SD. Three-dimensional nonlinear finite element
static calculation of complete bearing spiral case. J Hydraul Eng 2006;37:1323–8,
[in Chinese].
[68] Niu XQ, Xie HB, Liu ZM. Research for direct embedding scheme of spiral case of
TGP power station on right bank. Yangtze River 2008;39(1):1–2, [in Chinese].
[69] Chen Q, Lin SZ, Su HD. Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis on directly
embedded spiral case of large-scale turbine unit with various measures of
restricting cracks. J Yangtze River Sci Res Inst 2008;25(6):101–5, [in Chinese].
[70] Zhang YL, Zhang CH, Ma ZY. Nonlinear FEM analysis on stress and strain of
1281
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 1271–1281
directly-embedded large-scale spirals. J Hydraul Eng 2009;40:220–5, [in Chinese].
[71] Wu HG, Shen Y, Jiang KC, Shi J. Structural analysis of the embedded spiral case in
the Three Gorges hydropower station. Pr Period Struct Des Constr 2012;17:41–7.
[72] The Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of China . SL 191-2008
Design code for hydraulic concrete structures. Beijing, China: China Water and
Power Press; 2008, [in Chinese].
[73] The National Energy Administration of the People's Republic of China . DL/T
5057–2009 Design specification for hydraulic concrete structures. Beijing, China:
China Electric Power Press; 2009, [in Chinese].
[74] Jiang KC. Structural study on complete bearing spiral case in Three Gorges
hydropower station [Ph.D. Dissertation]. Wuhan, China: Wuhan University; 2007,
[in Chinese].
[75] Zhang CH, Zhang YL, Ma ZY. Damage analysis of reinforced concrete surrounding
the spiral case under the action of repeated water pressure. J Hydraul Eng
2008;39:1262–6, [in Chinese].
[76] Zhang QL, Wu HG, Huang XY, Li J, Zhao XF. Structural analysis of different
embedding types of spiral case in large-scale hydropower station. J Hydroelectr
Eng 2009;28(3):85–90, [in Chinese].
[77] Liu B, Wu HG, Xue P, Yang HQ. Effect of different range of cushion layers on
mechanical characteristics of spiral case in hydropower station. J Huazhong Univ
Sci Tech (Nat Sci Ed) 2010;38(9):120–4, [in Chinese].
[78] Yao SX, Sun CH, Wang DT. A preliminary study of the unbalanced hydraulic thrust
in the spiral case structure. Northwest Hydropower 2010(5):16–20, [in Chinese].
[79] Li XJ, Zhang HZ, Chen J, Ma ZY, Wang H. Characteristics analysis of shear force of
support ring for spiral case with cushion layer. Water Resour Power
2011;29(11):159–61, [in Chinese].
[80] Zhang HZ, Yao SX, Ma ZY, Li XJ. Analysis of shear property of stay rings for spiral
case with cushion layer under unbalanced hydraulic thrust. J Dalian Univ Tech
2013;53:565–71, [in Chinese].
[81] Fu D, Wu HG, Hu L, Li H. Study on transfer mechanism of stay ring forces of spiral
case with cushion layer in hydropower station. J Hydroelectr Eng
2014;33(4):196–201, [in Chinese].
[82] Sun HQ, Wu HG, Li J, Zhao XF. Discussion of in-plane scope of local cushion layer
set in spiral case structure of hydropower station. J Sichuan Univ (Eng Sci Ed)
2011;43(2):39–44, [in Chinese].
[83] Zhang QL, Wu HG, Li DY. Principle of determining plane covering range of
membrane for spiral case in hydropower station. Chin J Appl Mech
2011;28:194–200, [in Chinese].
[84] Zhou SD, Xie HB. The design of Three Gorges hydropower station. Eng Sci
2011;13(7):78–84, [in Chinese].
[85] Yan L. Experimental study on structural of combined loading of reinforced concrete
and steel spiral case for the hydropower station. J Hydraul Eng 1995;26(1):57–62,
[in Chinese].
[86] Qin JZ, Ma SD, Wu HG, Kuang HJ. Experiment on material model of steel spiral
case and surrounding reinforced concrete of Ertan hydropower station. J Hydraul
Eng 1999;30(6):11–5, [in Chinese].
[87] Qin JZ, Ma SD, Gong GZ, Xiong DY. Structural model test for surrounding concrete
of steel spiral case keeping constant internal pressure. J Hydraul Eng
2002;33(10):33–8, [in Chinese].
[88] Chen J, Huang W. Model test on filling pressure water scroll of hydroelectric power
station of Three Gorges project. J Hydroelectr Eng 2002;21(1):83–8, [in Chinese].
[89] Qin JZ, Wu HG. A model test on the No.15 N-type SCS of the Three Gorges HPP.
Wuhan, China: School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, Wuhan
University; 2006, [in Chinese].
[90] Zhang J, Lan DY, He YJ. Experimental research on spiral case of Three Gorges
power station's unit with directly burying scheme. J Yangtze River Sci Res Inst
2007;24(1):47–50, [in Chinese].
[91] Qin JZ, Wu HG. A model test on an N-type SCS of the Jinghong HPP. Wuhan,
China: School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, Wuhan
University; 2006, [in Chinese].
[92] Qin JZ, Wu HG. A model test on a P-type SCS of the Xiaowan HPP. Wuhan, China:
School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, Wuhan University; 2006,
[in Chinese].
[93] He Y, Wu HG, Li J, Peng H, Yin JH. Test of surrounding concrete of steel spiral case
keeping constant internal water pressure in Pubugou hydropower station. J Tianjin
Univ 2009;42:400–6, [in Chinese].
[94] Wang YB, Zhang HZ, Ma ZY, Liu XN, Hong ZW. Structural model test for the large
scale spiral case of Nuozhadu hydropower station. J Water Resour Arch Eng
2015;13(5):179–84, [in Chinese].
[95] Chen Q, Lin SZ, Zhang J. Three-dimensional nonlinear finite-element analysis on
directly embedded spiral case model of TGP hydroelectric power plant. J Yangtze
River Sci Res Inst 2007;24(2):51–4, [in Chinese].
[96] Zhang CH, Zhang YL, Ma ZY. Influence of super and sub-structures on static
performances of directly-embedded spiral case. Water Resour Power
2008;26(5):107–9, [in Chinese].
[97] Zhang QL, Wu HG, Yang HQ. Effect of modeling range on structural analysis for
powerhouse of hydroelectric power plant by FEM. Trans Tianjin Univ
2009;15:388–92.