Partial Reduction of Vortex in the

Vertical Intake Pipe

S.M.Borghei1
Abstract

In this paper experimental results of partial reduction of vortex in vertical intake pipes
are discussed. One of the easiest and most practical ways of reducing vortex effect is to
use anti-vortex plates (or baffles). Which prevent vortex completely or partially, the latter
being the concern of the present study.

Rectangular plates, with variable dimensions have been placed at different positions in
relation to the intake pipe. Three different diameters (D) of 50, 75 and 100 mm have been
used for intake pipes. For each discharge, water head without any plate (Hnp) and with
vortex avoidance (Hnv) as reference has been measured as well as the head for a plate (H)
at each position. Plate dimensions and positions have been chosen as multiples of the pipe
diameters in order to analyze and introduce the results in nondimensional forms. The
results of more than 7000 data points show that a plate as small as D×2D at the right
position, can reduce the vortex effect, hence increasing the discharge for the same head
by 75%. Finally, the results are presented in graphs, showing the effect of plate
dimensions and positions.

Key words: free vortex, anti-vortex plate, vertical intake pipe, experimental test, partial vortex.

1 Introduction

Swirling flow problems are associated with intake and hydraulic structures of different types,
which are prone to vortex formation. Problem arises from air entrainment and swirl intrusion at
the transition from free surface to pressure flow conditions. This can happen in intake structures,
which are associated with power plants, especially with pumped storage schemes for water
supply systems, or with various hydraulic structures at dams such as; outlets, morning glory or
siphon spillway.

Vortex is mainly stimulated by eccentric orientation of the intake relative to a symmetric

approach flow area; asymmetric approach flow conditions due to irregularities in boundary
lining; unfavorable effects of obstructions such as offsets, piers or dividing walls; nonuniform
velocity distribution caused by boundary layer separation, wind action, wakes, counter currents
and so on (Knauss, 1987).
1
Assoc. Prof., Civil Engng. Dept., Sharif Univ. of Tech., Azadi Ave., TEHRAN, IRAN.
e-mail: mahmood@sina.sharif.ac.ir
An eccentricity between the approach flow area and the intake may stimulate formation of a
circulating or swirling flow field in front of or above the inlet structure. Very often the given local
conditions or special design consideration such as an economic optimization of the whole
scheme interfere with the hydraulic principle of a vortex-free intake. Therefore, vortex formation
must be tolerated, provided that those operational problems that are due to dangerous air and
swirl entrainment can be eliminated. This means that circulation must be controlled and limited
by suitable measures.

Two main hydraulic problems may be encountered with regard to entrainment of air and swirl at
intakes: (a) unfavorable hydrodynamic impact on the operation and performance of hydraulic
machines, (b) dangerous hydropneumatic effects in the closed channel system downstream the
inlet such as producing noise and vibrations. Although air entrainment causes detrimental effects
on the operation of hydraulic structure and machinery, in particular cases small volumes of
entrapped air may not seriously degrade the performance conditions. On the other hand, since
swirling effect of the flow and its high velocity help to pass the debris, ice, and floating objects
more quickly, in case of flood flow using a shaft spillway, therefore, measures should be taken
to strengthen the swirling effect of the flow (Novak and Cabelka, 1981). Also, the existence of
air in the pressure conduits reduces the negative pressure effect and the cavitation danger. For
this reason, engineers some times prefer to reduce the vortex effect but not omit it completely,
this is of an economical preference as well. Therefore, vortex intensity can be reduced, leading
to increase of discharge or higher efficiency for intakes, using small (and of course more
economical) anti-vortex devices such as baffles, plates, vanes, chains, etc.

The basis for the study of vortex mitigation is experimental research. Using the correct
dimensions of anti-vortex devices such as baffles or vanes at the right position would reduce the
vortex effect to the desired amount. Thus, in order to study this effect a comprehensive set of
tests are carried out in this paper.

2 Vortex Theory

If the entire body of fluid rotates as a solid mass under the influence of an outside force, forced
vortex is introduced. In this case, the tangential velocity (vt) varies directly with the radius of
rotation (r) and the angular velocity (ω), or vt = ωr. This type of flow is known as rotational
flow. However, if the vortex is the result of internal activities of the fluid (as mentioned), apart
from gravitational and Coriolis effect, it is a free vortex and hence, an irrotational flow exists. A
real vortex flow consists of two parts; forced vortex near the center of rotation and, free vortex
at the main body. The vortex, which exists at the inlet of intake pipes, is considered a free vortex
and, therefore, free vortex theory applies. For a free vortex, the tangential velocity and
circulation are:

v θ = Ωr (1)
Γ = ∫ v θ .ds (2)
s

Where, Ω(r, t)=dθ/dt, θ = the angle, s = a closed path of particle and Γ = circulation or rate of
transport for s. In a free surface situation, the water surface for forced vortex is parabolic, while
for free vortex it is hyperbolic (Fig. 1).

Free Surface
Free Surface

(a) Free vortex (b) Forced vortex

FIG. 1- Free Surfaces for Vortices

Free vortices can be categorized differently. Due to the type of existence, they are called surface
and subsurface as shown in Fig. 2. But from stability point of view, they are steady and unsteady.
Considering strength of vortex, they are differentiated in six levels, from weak to strong, as
shown in Fig. 3.

1 Surface vortex
1
1
2 Subsurface vortex
2 (Submerged or underwater vortex)
(a)

1 Local vortex

2 Concentric or column vortex

(b)

Open air-core
Dimple (vortex orifice flow)
(c)
Line vortices

FIG. 2- Types of Vortices Due to Location of Appearance and Resulting Shape

3 Vortex Elimination

In order to weaken or omit a free vortex, different measures can be taken. One of the most
efficient ways is the water head being greater than the critical submergence head (Glliver and
Rindles, 1987; Yildirim and Kocabas, 1995). In this case, water head at intake entrance should
be large enough to submerge the intake. However, this situation may not always happen, since in
many cases the head is not constant and varies during the
FIG. 3- Vortex Type Classification (Knauss, 1987)
1 4
Coherent surface swirl Vortex pulling floating
trash but not air

2 5
Surface Dimple Vortex pulling air
Coherent swirl at surface bubles to intake

3 6
Dye core to intake Full air core
coherent swirl throughout to intake
water column

operation. Therefore, other means of avoiding free vortex (or reducing vortex) flow are
suggested (Knauss, 1987; May and Willough, 1990).

In three different categories, elimination and suppression of surface vortex can be done; (a)
elongation of streamlines between the intake and the free water surface, (b) elimination of
approach flow non-uniformity and, (c) use of special vortex suppression device. Among the
special anti-vortex devices, vertical walls or baffles are suggested, which are used in this study.

4 Vortex Parameters

The important variables influencing vortex at intakes are, Q = discharge entering intake, H =
submergence depth to centerline of intake, D = intake diameter, Γ = circulation strength, g =
gravitational acceleration, µ = liquid viscosity, ρ = liquid density, and σ = liquid surface tension.
Using dimensional analysis, the following nondimensional parameters are introduced:
v v
Fr = or FrD = Froude number (3)
gH gD
ΓD Γ
NΓ = or K= Circulation or Kolf number (4)
Q vD
Q gH 3
Re = or Reynolds number (5)
νH ν
 ρv 2 D
We = Weber number
σ 6)

4Q µ
where v = and ν =
πD 2
ρ
Any measures taken to avoid vortex occurrence at intake structures must influence these
parameters. However, when Re≥2.5 x 104 (Dagget and Kenlegon, 1974), the effect of viscosity
is minimal. On the other hand, a minimum value of 720 for Weber no. has been suggested
(Odgaard, 1986) to eliminate the surface tension effect. Other critical values for Re and We are
suggested due to different definitions of the numbers or experimental conditions (for example
Anwaar, 1983). However, in these tests, results of minimum value of H = 40 mm has been
taken into account in order to omit the influence of viscous and surface tension effects. Also, it
should be mentioned that for these tests choosing three different pipe diameters could check the
scale effect and the influence of variables as it is discussed later in the result section.

5 Experimental Setup

The tests were carried out in a cylindrical tank, 1000 mm-diameter and 900 mm-height. The
inflow was from the bottom of the tank with 45o angle inclination in plan. The outflow was from
top through vertical pipes of 50, 75 and 100 mm-diameters (D), and 500 mm- long.
Rectangular anti-vortex plates of various dimensions (from D×D to 2.5D×2.5D) were placed at
different positions relative to the center of inlet pipe. For each discharge (Q), two heads were
measured, one having free vortex without any plate (Hnp), and the other without any vortex and
complete elimination of vortex (Hnv). Then, the plates were situated in x and y positions from the
center of the inlet (Fig. 4), and the water heads (H) were measured. A comprehensive set of
tests was done for 75 mm-diameter pipe. To check the scale effect of intake pipe diameter,
some of the tests were repeated for 50 mm and some for 100 mm-diameter pipes. Table 1
shows a summary of the tests’ variables.

Y Baffle Plate

Hn.p a
H
Hn.v y

x X
Pipe Intake D

FIG. 4- Definition Sketch

6 Results
The results were analyzed in three groups. First the comprehensive results for 75 mm- diameter
pipe, next for 50 mm and 100 mm-diameter pipes and, finally, the conclusive results for the
three pipes. However, before presenting the results, it should be
TABLE 1-Test Variables

Q NO OF NO OF 'Plate Dimensions (vert. * hori.)

D(cm) (m3/hr) y PLATES RUNS

1.5D * 1.5D

1.5D * 2.5D

2.5D * 1.5D

2.5D * 2.5D
1.5D * 2D

2D * 1.5D

2D * 2.5D

2.5D * 2D
D * 1.5D

D * 2.5D
1.5D * D

2.5D * D
2D * 2D
D * 2D

2D * D
D*D
5 4 - 11 -2D, -D , 0 , D , 2D 8 1320 * * * * * * * *
7.5 6 - 18 -2D, -D , 0 , D , 2D 16 4320 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
10 9 -18 -2D, -D, 0 8 1728 * * * * * * * *

remembered that since the initial strength of the vortex (which depends on the approach velocity
to the intake) is very important, the inflow to the test tank introduces an initial circulation in the
body of water. A real example of this effect exists when the intake pipe is
situated on the side of a river (or canal), producing an initial circulating flow around the pipe
intake with the strength weakening from the bottom to the top.

Also, to present and compare the results, two more parameters are introduced. Qo, being the
discharge when Hnp = D and, efficiency of the baffles (as to reduce the vortex effect and
increase the discharge) which is:

H np − H
η= × 100 (7)
H np − H nv

75 mm-Diameter Pipe

The aim of this research was to find the best position (x and y) with maximum efficiency of each
anti-vortex plates. Therefore, for a comprehensive conclusion, over 4000 different data were
taken for the 75 mm-diameter pipe. Fig. 5 shows an example of the head variation versus
discharge due to the influence of position (x and y) for the plate with dimensions 1.5D×2D
(vertical×horizontal). Also two extreme data, free vortex (no plate or np) and omitting the vortex
(no vortex or nv) are shown in this fig.

Referring to Fig. 5 and choosing the position of x at each y in a way the plate is most influential,
then Fig. 6 is introduced. In Fig. 6 it is shown that, for example, for 1.5D×2D plate at Q=14
m3/h, the head varies from 70 mm when vortex is omitted to 220 mm when free vortex exists.

However, for the same discharge the plate position at x = 1.5D, y = -2D has a head of 100 mm
and the same plate at x = D, y =D has a head of 130 mm. Using the definition in equation (7),
the plate at its first position is 80% efficient, while at its second position is 65% efficient in
mitigating the vortex, or, at equal head (say 70 mm), the range of discharge in Fig. 6 is from 9
m3/h for free vortex to 14 m3/h for no vortex.

Y= -2D a b
Y= -D
35
N.V. N.P. X=1.5D X=2D X=3D 35
30 30 N.V. N.P. X=1.5D* X=2D X=3D
25 Not Plate 25
H(cm)

H(cm)
20 20
15 15
10 10

5 Not Vortex 5
0
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Q(m3/hr) Q(m3/hr)

Y=0 c Y=D d
35 35
N.V. N.P. X=0 X=D X=2D X=3D
30 30 N.V. N.P. X=0 X=D X=2D X=3D
25 25
H(cm)

H(cm)
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Q(m3/hr) Q(m3/hr)

FIG. 5- Influence of Plate with Dimensions a=1.5D and b=2D at Different x and y

40 A=1.5D * 2D

35

30

25
H(cm)

20

15

10

5
Q(m3/hr)
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

#REF!

N.V. #REF!

N.P. #REF! X=1.5D #REF! X=1.5D #REF! X=2D, #REF! X=D, #REF! X=D
Y=-2D Y=-D Y=0 Y=D Y=2D

FIG. 6- Influence of Plate at Fig.5 at Its Best Positions From y=-2D to y=2D

50 mm- and 100 mm-Diameter Pipes

In order to check the scale effect of experimental plates, some of the tests (as for 75mm pipe)
have been done for 50 and 100 mm-diameter pipes (see Table 1). The results of the two pipes
agree well with the 75 mm-diameter pipe results. Fig. 7 shows the result of the three pipes for 4
different plate dimensions. The close agreements of the results show that a comprehensive
conclusion can be reached from the data for 75 mm-diameter pipe. However, for 100 mm-
diameter pipe, due to limitation in pump discharge, the head of water is limited and, hence, in Fig.
7, the complete range of results are not covered by this diameter, but the trend of them for
lower nondimensional discharge show a very good agreement. Obviously, due to existence of
great amount of curves and tables for results, it is not possible to present all of them and,
therefore, the conclusion of the study is presented.

1.5D * D a 1.5D * 1.5D b

100 90
80
80 70
60

η
60 η50
40
40 30
20
20
10
0
0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 Q/Q 0
5cm 7.5cm
Q/Q 0 10cm 5cm 7.5cm 10cm

1.5D * 2D c 1.5D * 2.5D d

100 120
90
80 100
70 80
η
60
50 η60
40
30 40
20
20
10
0 0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Q/Q7.5cm
0 5cm
Q/Q 0
7.5cm 10cm
5cm 10cm

FIG. 7- Sample Results for the Three Pipes

7 Conclusions

The tests were done for the special case of vertical intake with entrance from top, while there is
a small rotation due to inflow to the tank with decreasing strength from bottom to top. The tests
were carried out for three different pipe diameters with different anti-vortex plate dimensions.
The following conclusions were reached:

1- the results of three different pipe diameters show a very good agreement (Fig. 7) and no
important scale effects were observed.
2- different positions for anti-vortex plate were tested and the best positions for each plate,
regarding mitigation or partial omission, were achieved.

3- Fig. 8 shows in bar chart the effect of plate dimensions for the three different pipe diameters.
It shows that the horizontal dimension of plates is more influential than the vertical dimension.
For example η for plate of D×1.5D is 65%, while for the same size situated at 1.5D×D, is less
than 50%.

4- Fig. 8 shows that a plate with small dimensions (D×2D) at the right position reduces the
vortex effect as much as 75 %.

100

90

80

70

η
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
D*D

D * 2D

2D * D

2D * 2D
D * 1.5D

1.5D * D

2.5D * D
1.5D * 2D

2D * 1.5D

2.5D * 2D
1.5D * 1.5D

2.5D * 1.5D

Plate Dim. (Vert.xHori.)

FIG. 8- Plate Dimensions (at Their Best Position) vs Efficiency

Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge the financial support of this project by Sharif University
of Thechnology and the exprimental work done by Mr. D. Rajabi.

References

- Anwaar, H.O., 1983, “ The non-dimensional parameters of free-surface vortices measured

for horizontal and vertically inverted intakes.” La Houille Blanche, No. 1.
- Daggett, L.L., and Keulegan, G.H., 1974, “ Similitude conditions in free-surface vortex
formations.” ASCE, Vol. 100, No. HY11, Proc. Paper 10941, Nov., PP. 1565-1581.
- Gulliver, J.S., and, Rindels, A.J., 1987, “ Weak vortices at vertical intakes.” J. Hyd. Engng,
ASCE, Vol. 113 (9). PP.1101 - 1116.
- Knauss, J. 1987. “ Swirling flow problems at intakes.” Hydraulic Structures Design Manual,
1.A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
- May.R.W.P. and Willough, I.R., 1990, “ Performance of vortex inhibitors for reservoir
intakes.”, Hydraulics Research Wallingford.
- Novak, P., and Cabelka, J., 1981, “ Models in hydraulic engineering.” Pitman Publishing Inc.
- Odgaard, A.J., 1986, “ Free - surface air core vortex.” J. Hyd. Engng. ASCE, Vol. 112(7)
PP. 610 - 620.
- Yildirim, N. and Kocabas, F., 1995, “ Critical submergence for intakes in open channel
flow.” J. Hyd. Engng. ASCE, Vol. 121 (12), PP. 900 - 905.