2014/RBESPA-1

Centre for energy studies (CES)

Research in Energy Systems Planning and Analysis
Centre for energy studies (CES) was established on January 21, 1999. The Main
Objective of the centre is to enhance promotion and development of Renewable
Energy Technologies through study, research, human resource development at Research Book Series
various levels, and information dissemination for the sustainable development. Energy Systems Planning and Analysis
As an institution within IOE/TU, capacity building of local manpower is the main
focused activities of CES. CES has supported and provided assistance to the
courses on; Master of Science Engineering in Renewable Energy Engineering
(MSREE) and Master of Science Engineering in Energy Systems Planning and
Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin
Management (MSESPM). Zero Energy House (ZEH), and energy Park (EP) are the Gravitational Water Vortex Power Plant
parts of CES. Both ZEH and EP are being used as a living laboratory for research
students and also demonstration sites for all concerned in the application and Tri Ratna Bajracharya
development of Renewable Energy Technologies.
Study Team members: Subhash Dhakal, Arun Bikram Thapa, Pikam
Pun, and Sushan Nakarmi
For more information visit http://ces.ioe.edu.np

……………………………………………………………………………………..

APPEAR project “Development of Academic Program on Energy Systems Planning

and Analysis at Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University” is jointly
implemented by Centre for Energy Studies (CES) at the Institute of Engineering
(IOE) of Tribhuvan University, Nepal and Institute for Energy Systems and
Thermodynamics (IET) at Vienna University of Technology, Vienna and funded by Centre for Energy Studies (CES)
the Austrian Development Cooperation under the APPEAR programme. The Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, Nepal
“appear Project 42” is expected to directly contribute in building capacity of
energy systems planning and analysis for developing sustainable energy policies Supported by the Austrian Development Cooperation under
in the Nepal and creating awareness for the universal access to electricity in the the APPEAR programme
st
21 century.
 Copyright © 2014, Center for Energy Studies (CES)

Disclaimer:
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this
publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the
part of the publisher. The opinions expressed in this publication are those
Research Book Series of the author(s) alone and do not imply opinion on the part of the
Energy Systems Planning and Analysis publisher.

2014

Published by
Center for Energy Studies (CES)
Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University,
Zero Energy House, Pulchowk, Lalitpur
G.P.O. Box: 1915
Phone: 977-1-5532235
Fax: 977-1-5532234
e-mail: [email protected]
Published by http://ces.ioe.edu.np
Centre for Energy Studies (CES)
Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, Nepal

Supported by the Austrian Development Cooperation under the Print

APPEAR programme Anupam Printing Press
Bafal, Kathmandu
ABSTRACT

The conversion of water power to mechanical energy is carried out by the use of
Contents
different turbines. The most widely used turbines are Francis and Pelton turbines.
Pelton turbines (impulse type turbines) are normally used in high head and low ABSTRACT
discharge conditions while Francis turbines (reaction type turbines) are used in
medium head and medium discharge conditions. Hence, these turbines are useful LIST OF TABLES
in the hilly region where the aforementioned water characteristics are available.
LIST OF FIGURES
However, the Flat regions region has water resources with very low head and
medium to high discharge conditions. Hence, the people of the Flat regions region LIST OF SYMBOLS
are not being able to utilize the water resources available near them. This study is
intended to serve the purpose of further research of ultra-low head gravitational 1. Introduction ______________________________________ 1
water vortex turbines useful for power generation in the Flat regions region. 1.1 Background ......................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................ 2
Water vortex turbine produces power by creating artificial water vortex formed 1.3 Objectives............................................................................................ 2
due to the tangential passage of water through a rectangular canal to a basin
(cylindrical/conical) having a bottom exit hole. It doesn’t require direct control 2. Scope of work _____________________________________ 2
mechanism and doesn’t require a penstock. Hence, the cost of fabrication and
construction is low and can be realized using the locally available technology. 3. Delimitations ______________________________________ 3

4. Research Methodology ______________________________ 3

This study is carried out in two phases. In the phase, two different turbines are
designed and fabricated and the performance characteristics of the new turbine are 5. Review of Past Research _____________________________ 4
too compared with that of the installed turbine. The second phase is included the
design and fabrication of the conical basin. Experimental tests have been carried 6. Design ______________________________________ 8
out and the performance of the system due to the use of a conical basin was 6.1 Assumptions ....................................................................................... 9
compared with that of the system using the cylindrical basin. 6.2 Vortex theory for runner design ..................................................... 9
6.3 Blade profile development ............................................................... 10
6.4 Calculations at inlet............................................................................ 11
6.4.1 Calculations at outlet ............................................................ 11
6.4.2 Calculation of theoretical power ........................................ 11
6.5 Design of Basin .................................................................................. 11
6.5.1 Calculation of orifice diameter ........................................... 12
6.5.2 Blade Design.......................................................................... 12
6.5.3 Calculation of vortex velocity components ..................... 12
6.5.4 Calculations at inlet .............................................................. 13
6.5.5 Calculations at outlet ............................................................ 13
6.5.6 Calculation of theoretical power ........................................ 13
6.5.7 Calculation of theoretical efficiency .................................. 13
6.6 Basin Design Calculations ................................................................ 14
6.7 Shaft Design........................................................................................ 14
6.8 Runner blade analysis ........................................................................ 16
6.9 Load Information ............................................................................. 17
6.10 Shaft stress analysis ............................................................................ 17
7. Measurement Equipment ____________________________ 19 LIST OF TABLES
7.1 Torque Measurement ........................................................................ 19 Table 1 Velocity triangle symbols with meanings and units ..……………... 10
7.2 Volume flow rate measurement ...................................................... 21
7.3 Test Rig ................................................................................................ 21 Table 2 Blade Design Summary ……………………………..……………... 13
8. Measurement Equipment ____________________________ 22 Table 3 Measurement of vortex depth at different radii ………………..…... 23
8.1 Vortex Measurement and Data Analysis ....................................... 22 Table 4 Calculation of depth from surface of water for different radius….... 24
8.2 Test 1 .................................................................................................. 25
8.3 Test 2 .................................................................................................. 27 Table 5 Test 1 ……………………………………………..………………... 26
8.4 Test 3 .................................................................................................. 29
8.5 Test 4 .................................................................................................. 31 Table 6 Test 2 ……………………………………………..………………... 28
8.6 Test 5 .................................................................................................. 33 Table 7 Test 3 ……………………………………………..………………... 30
8.7 Test 6 .................................................................................................. 35
8.8 Test 7 .................................................................................................. 37 Table 8 Test 4 ……………………………………………..………………... 32
8.9 Test 8 .................................................................................................. 39
8.10 Test 9 .................................................................................................. 41 Table 9 Test 5 ……………………………………………..………………... 34
8.11 Test 10.................................................................................................. 43 Table 10 Test 6 …………………………………..………..…………….….. 36
8.12 Test 11.................................................................................................. 45
8.13 Test 12.................................................................................................. 47 Table 11 Test 7 ……………………………………..……..…………….….. 38
8.14 Site Testing .......................................................................................... 51
8.15 Test 1 on conical basin...................................................................... 53
Table 12 Test 8 ……………………………………..……..…………….….. 40
8.16 Test 2 on conical basin...................................................................... 55 Table 13 Test 9 ……………………………………………….………….…. 42
8.17 Vortex Strength Measurement and Comparison .......................... 56
Table 14 Test 10 …………………………………………..………………... 44

9. Conclusion and Reccommendations ___________________ 60 Table 15 Test 11 …………………………………………..………………... 46

Bibliography ............................................................................... 61 Table 16 Test 12 …………………………………………..………………... 48
Appendix I: Photographs .......................................................................... 65
Table 17 Maximum efficiency obtained at each Test….…..………………... 49
Table 18 Test 1 at site ……………………………………..…………….….. 51
Table 19 Test 2 at site ……………………………………..………………... 52
Table 20 Test 1 Conical Basin …………………………….………………... 53
Table 21 Test 2 Conical Basin …………………………….………………... 55
Table 22 Vortex Measurement and Data Analysis for conical basin ..…….... 56
Table 23 Calculation of depth from surface of water for different radius ...... 57
Table 24 Vortex Strength Comparison ...………………….………………... 59
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 27 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 10 ..………………………...... 45
Figure 28 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 11 ……………………..……………... 46
Figure 1 Velocity triangle for blade design ………………... ….………….. 9
Figure 29 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 11 ..………………………….. 47
Figure 2 Stress analysis of runner blades …………………..……..……….. 17
Figure 30 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 12 ……………………..……………... 48
Figure 3 Stress analysis of shaf ……………………………...…………….. 18
Figure 31 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 12 ..………………………….. 49
Figure 4 Torque measurement using Prony Brake Model …..…………….. 20
Figure 32 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 1 (Field Test) ……………….. 51
Figure 5 V-Notch ..…………………………………………………..…….. 21
Figure 33 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 2 (Field Test) ..…………….... 52
Figure 6 Test Rig ……………………………..………………………..….. 22
Figure 34 Efficiency vs rpm of Conical Basin ………………..…………….. 54
Figure 7 Vortex Profile ……………………………………………………. 25
Figure 35 Power and Torque vs rpm of Conical Basin ..…………………..... 54
Figure 8 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 1 ……………………….…………….. 26
Figure 36 Efficiency vs rpm of Conical Basin ………………..…………….. 55
Figure 9 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 1 ..………………………….... 27
Figure 37 Power and Torque vs rpm of Conical basin ..………………..…... 56
Figure 10 Efficiency vc rpm for Test 2 ……………………..……………... 28
Figure 38 Vortex profile for Conical Basin …………………..…………….. 58
Figure 11 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 2 ..………………………….. 29
Figure 12 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 3 ……………………..……………... 30
Figure 13 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 3 ..………………………….. 31
Figure 14 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 4 ……………………..……….…….. 32
Figure 15 Power and Torque vs for Test 4 ..……………………………….. 33
Figure 16 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 5 ……………..…………….. 34
Figure 17 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 5 ..…………………………………... 35
Figure 18 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 6 ……………………..……………... 36
Figure 19 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 6 ..………………………….. 37
Figure 20 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 7 ……………………..…………….. 38
Figure 21 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 7 ..…………………………. 39
Figure 22 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 8 ……………………..…………….. 40
Figure 23 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 8 ..………………………….. 41
Figure 24 Efficiency vs rpm Test 9 ………………………....…………….. 42
Figure 25 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 9 ..………………………….. 43
Figure 26 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 10 ……………………..……………. 44
LIST OF SYMBOLS Q Flow rate
A Area at the inlet of Basin
β1 Inlet jet angle
Cd Coefficient of discharge at basin
β2 Outlet jet angle
D Diameter of shaft
α1 Inlet blade angle
m Mass of turbine
α2 Outlet blade angle
F Weight of turbine
V Absolute Velocity of water (head velocity)
M Bending moment
Vf Velocity of flow
Cm The numerical combined shock and fatigue factor to be
U Blade velocity applied to the computed bending moment
Vt Total velocity Ct The numerical combined shock and fatigue factor to be
Vw Velocity of whirl applied to the computed torsional moment

Vr Vortex radial velocity 𝜏 Torsional shear stress

Vθ Vortex tangential velocity 𝛼 Ratio of maximum intensity of stress resulting from the axial
load to the average axial stress
ID Inner Diameter
l Length of shaft
OD Outer Diameter
K Radius of gyration of shaft
K Vortex Strength
N RPM
h Turbine depth from upper surface of vortex
r Vortex radius at h
LPS Liter per second
Rpm Rotation per minute
Vs. Versus
CES Center for Energy Studies
Fw Load applied (reading from spring2)
Ff Tension at fixed end ( reading from spring 1)
Ce coefficient of discharge for 900 v notch
T Torque
P0 Theoretical power
P Output power
ȵ Efficiency
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 1 2 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

1. INTRODUCTION fabrication of the spiral basin. The turbine installed at the Center for Energy
Studies (CES) will be used in the spiral basin. Experimental tests will be carried
1.1 Background out and the performance of the system due to the use of a spiral basin will
It is a well-known fact that Nepal is extremely rich in water resources. There are a compared with that of the system using the cylindrical basin.
lot of water resources available here for micro-hydropower generation. The
conversion of water power to mechanical energy is carried out by the use of 1.2 Problem Statement:
different turbines. The most widely used turbines are Francis and Pelton turbines. Research and study of power generation using high discharge and very low head
Pelton turbine (impulse type turbines) is normally used in high head and low has not been carried out effectively. People of the flat (Flat regions) region are not
discharge conditions while Francis turbines (reaction type turbines) are used in able to utilize the water resources near them due to the lack of technology and
medium head and medium discharge conditions. Hence these turbines are useful in study in the field of power generation with the characteristics inherent in the water
the hilly region where the aforementioned water characteristics are available. resources there. This study will focus on the study of different characteristics of
However, the flat region has water resources with very low head and medium to the ultra-low head gravitational vortex turbine which is suitable for use in the
high discharge conditions. Hence, the people of this region are not being able to regions of very low heads and high discharge. This study will be based on the
utilize the water resources available nearby. This study is intended to serve the recommendations of that study. Modifications of the turbine runner and basin will
purpose of further research of ultra-low head gravitational water vortex turbines be carried out with the view of improving the system performance.
useful for power generation in the geographically flat region.
1.3 Objectives
The purpose of this project is to take a new and different approach to improve the
Water vortex turbine produces power by creating artificial water vortex formed hydro power energy scenario in the country through the study of different aspects
due to the tangential passage of water through a rectangular canal to a basin of the nascent technology of Gravitational Water Vortex Power Plant. The primary
(cylindrical/spiral) having a bottom exit hole. It doesn’t require direct control objective of the study is to design, fabricate, install and test turbine runner and
mechanism and doesn’t require a penstock. Hence, the cost of fabrication and conical basin for gravitational water vortex power plant.
construction is low and can be realized using the locally available technology.
The principal author of this research have conducted similar research on past with 1.3.1 Specific Objectives
the financial support of Centre for Applied Research and Development (CARD)
The specific objectives of our project are: designing new turbine runner,
entitled “Developing Innovative Low Head Water Turbine for Free-flowing
fabricating designed turbine with different number of blades, comparing the
Streams Suitable for Micro-hydropower in Flat (Flat regions) Regions in Nepal”.
system performance between designed and installed runners, comparing the
As the outcome of the research a paper on the same topic author have presented in
system performance between designed runners by varying the number of blades,
an International Workshop (Bajracharya, 2013).
comparing the system performance between designed runners with varying blades
installed at different positions, designing conical basin for vortex creation,
This research is in fact continuation of previous research. Particularly in this
comparing the system performance using cylindrical and conical basins, and
research, author wishes to conduct detail work on new types of turbine suitable for
installing and test the designed turbine in appropriate site.
low head condition. This study will be carried out in two phases. In the first phase,
two different turbines will be designed and fabricated and the performance
2. Scope of work
characteristics of the new turbine will be compared with that of the installed
This study will cover two major portions of the design of the gravitational water
turbine. Study will also be carried out by changing the blade number, blade length
vortex power plant system namely design of turbine and design of conical basin.
and installation height of the turbine. The second phase will include the design and
The study will focus on the design of the system so that a proper understanding of
2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 3 4 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

the system can be gained for the installation of this type of system in the Flat f) Study of vortex characteristics in conical basin: After the design and
regions region. A site-specific testing will also be carried out to check the real life fabrication of the conical basin, tests to study the characteristics of the
application of the research work. This study doesn’t cover the design of canal for vortex were carried out by using a simple slider mechanism.
the system.
g) Site specific testing: Site for the testing of the final design of the turbine
system was being searched. Manohara Khola River located at Thimi,
3. Delimitations
Kathmandu.
The limitations of our project are listed as below:
 Ideal materials could not be used in fabrication of turbine runner due to h) Documentation: Final documentation was carried by arranging and
financial limitations which could affect its overall weight and hence the analyzing all the tests and findings.
overall performance of the system.
 Due to the limitation of the existing test rig at the CES lab, studies could 5. Review of Past Research
not be carried out by varying flow rates.
 During tests of the turbines, the vortex profile got distorted whenever a Human civilization has been greatly dependent upon the power of water.
significant increase in the tension forces took place. So, the turbine Realization of the power of water whether it is for irrigation or power generation
characteristics at higher braking forces could not be calculated. has been critical to the advancement of human civilization. Hydro-electric power
 Heat loss in the braking system was not taken into account. plants are one of the most important means of electricity generation in which the
power of water is used to run a turbine and consequently a generator for electricity
4. Research Methodology generation.
Following methodological approach has been adopted for the research work. Some
of the specified methodologies are still to be implemented. Turbine is a mechanical device which converts hydraulic energy into mechanical
a) Literature Review: Different books, journals, reports and websites have power output. In general it converts the energy of water into the mechanical
been accessed to learn about the theory of vortex creation, gravitational rotating energy developed in early 19th century and widely used in industries at
flow vortex turbine and characteristics of turbines. that time for power production and electricity generation. A turbine utilizes water
head and flow to generate mechanical power. There are different types of turbines
b) Design and fabrication of new turbine runners: Two turbine runners have which are discussed in the next section.
been designed and fabricated to improve efficiency.
c) Study of designed turbines: The performance characteristics of the High head turbines use relatively higher head to generate the mechanical power.
designed turbines have been found out by experimentation. Relatively low flow rate is sufficient to generate required amount of power.
Generally Impulse turbines like pelton, turgo, etc. are used in high head operation.
d) Performance comparison between turbines: The test results of the
Medium head turbines: It uses relatively low head than previous turbine and
turbines have been analyzed by sketching different characteristics curves.
required more flow for same amount of power production. Generally Reaction
e) Design and fabrication of conical basin: In order to increase the type of turbines are used in this type of operation such as, Francis turbines, Cross
efficiency of the system design and fabrication of conical basin was done flow turbine
using computer aided design strategy.
Low head turbines: It uses higher flow rate but lower head to produce power. The
turbines associated in this case are Propeller turbine, Kaplan turbine etc.
2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 5 6 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Ultra Low Head Turbines: Ultra low head turbines are generally used in Pico Chaulagain (Chaulagain, 2012) conducted research on vortex turbine and the
hydropower system whose output is quite low. The inlet and exhaust may be axial major finding of the project is that the exit hole diameter of the basin is equal to
and radial depending upon the design. There are several type of ultra-low head the double of vortex core diameter.
turbines some are as follows:- Axial Flow Rotor Turbine, Open Center Fan
Turbine, Helical Turbine, Cycladic Turbine, Hydroplane blades, Gravitation Water Date and Akbarzadeh (DTU-Development Technology Unit, 2010) designed a
Vortex Power Plant. reaction turbine constructed of a halved polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe with the
centres offset and joined to a top and bottom PVC plate. The prototype was trialed
Gravitation water vortex power plant: Gravitational water vortex turbine is an with a range of operating head pressures (approximately 2 m to 5 m) and flow
ultra-low head turbine which can operate in as low head as 0.7m with similar yield rates (10 L/s to 28 L/s) were trialed. The resulting output power ranged from
as conventional hydroelectric turbines characterized with positive environmental approximately 100 W to 500 W with optimal efficiencies of 52% to 56%. Razak
yield. Austrian engineer, Franz Zotloterer is the pioneer of this low head power et al. (Razak, 2010) designed, fabricated, and trialed a cross-flow turbine for a low
plant which makes the use of kinetic energy inherent in an artificially induced head site at the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. The scheme produced 100 W
vortex. while operating with a head of 1.2 m and flow rate of 20 L/s. The system
incorporated a gear transmission (12:108) to link the turbine and generator.
The water passes through a large, straight inlet through the channel and then
passes tangentially into a round basin, which forms a powerful vortex. An exit hole Williamson et al. (2011) devised and applied a qualitative and quantitative
is made at the bottom of the basin through which the vortex finds its outlet. selection criteria approach and determined that a single jet turgo turbine would be
The turbine does not work on pressure differential but on the dynamic force of the the most suitable technology for 1.3 kW power generation with a 3.5 m operating
vortex. Said aim is achieved by as hydroelectric power plant which supports the head, 304 rpm running speed, and 435 mm diameter wheel (Williamson, 2011).
formation of a stable gravitational vortex which tends to be formed also in the Smits (Smith, 1994) estimated nearly 60,000 low-head pico-hydropower units
upper reaches directly in front of the turbine inlet of conventional river stations as have been installed in Laos, and up to 130,000 units in Vietnam, where there is a
a lost vortex and is therefore prevented as much as possible there. The inventive relatively higher electrification rate. Asian Phoenix Resources Ltd. (APRL),
hydroelectric plant, however, ensures that the necessary current-related conditions situated in Vietnam and Canada, sells a range of pico hydro systems. Their suite of
are fulfilled for reinforcing the rotational movement of the water, which is created “Powerpal” turbine products includes propeller and turgo turbines for low and high
when the water flows off, in an unimpeded manner into a stable gravitational head sites respectively. The nominal generating capacity of the propeller turbines
vortex without using pressure lines and directing devices. A turbine that rotates in are 200 W, 500 W, and 1 kW with efficiencies ranging from 38.8% to 52.3%
a coaxial manner within the gravitational vortex and is impinged upon along the (Asian Phoenix Resources Ltd., 2008).
entire circumference thereof withdraws rotational energy from the gravitational
cortex, which is converted into electric power in a generator (Zotloterer, 2013). A 5 kW low head propeller turbine with an overall efficiency of 67%, designed to
A flow pattern in which the streamlines are concentric circles is a vortex. In a free operate at 850 rpm with 5 m head, was developed at the Department of Civil
(irrotational) vortex, fluid particles do not rotate as they translate in circular paths Engineering at the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore (Rao, 1986). The
around the vortex center (Fox, Pritchard, & McDonald, 2008). propeller consisted of 8 helical blades of constant thickness. Disadvantages of this
design included low speeds, the difficulty of manufacturing a complex helical
When cylindrical vortex is superimposed over radial flow described above, the blade shape, and nonstandard dimensions (Williamson, 2011). The Mechanical
resulting vortex is known as conical vortex. Motion of liquid in conical casing (i.e. Engineering Department of the Papua New Guinea University of Technology
volute) of a centrifugal pump is an example of conical vortex motion (Lal, 2009). developed a prototype propeller turbine (Ranatunga & Indrus, 1991). Eight

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 7 8 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

constant thickness blades were machined using computer numerically controlled

(CNC) machinery. The turbine power output was 200 W at 200 rpm with 1.5 m At the Nottingham Trent University, Demetriades (Demetriades, 1997) developed
head and 0.06 m3/s flow rate. The system coupled the propeller shaft to a a propeller turbine with up to 1 kW power output. The turbine consisted of an
generator-gear box assembly (Williamson, 2011). enclosed spiral casing and guide vanes guiding flow to a propeller runner directly
coupled to an overhung generator. The enclosed casing enables a short shaft to
The Department of Mechanical Engineering of the University of Canterbury directly drive the generator. Optimizations were made to the design based on
(Parker, 1993) developed a propeller turbine with a 2.8 m operating head, 0.4 m3/s numerical analysis conducted by Upadhyay (Upadhyay, 2004). A 5 kW (65%
flow rate, and a speed of 612 rpm. The output power was 3.7 kW with an overall overall efficiency) version (2006) was installed in Peru with tapered rectangular
efficiency of approximately 37%. The turbine was fabricated using mild steel. profile spiral casing, 6 guide vanes, and a runner with 4 blades constructed using
bent and twisted steel plate. Simpson and Williams extended this work towards an
Heitz (Heitz, 1993) with Nottingham Trent University, designed and constructed a open source propeller turbine design guide.
unit equipped with 5 guide vanes and 4 runner blades of constant thickness steel
plates. The design output was 1 kW at 2100 rpm operating under 2.9 m head and Williams et al. (Williams, Williams, A. A., Upadhyay, R., Demetriades, G. M.,
0.06 m3/s flow rate. This design was adapted (Williams, Williams, A. A., &2000) conducted a review of low head hydroelectric equipment including novel
Upadhyay, R., Demetriades, G. M., &2000) and installed at a low head site in designs and several conventional propeller designs. It was concluded that propeller
London, UK. The adapted turbine operated at 650 rpm and employed a belt turbines match well to low head pico hydro applications mainly due to high
transmission to drive a 4-pole induction generator. The turbine efficiency was rotational speeds allowing for direct driven connections to the generator. This
24%. The runner was redesigned with 6 blades instead of 4 and showed an results in compact designs with improved efficiency and lifespan, and reduced
improvement in performance. costs and maintenance.

Development Technology Unit (DTU-Development Technology Unit, 2010) of the The village of Schöftland in the canton of Aargau is home to the first gravitation
University of Warwick developed a “simpleto- make” low head propeller turbine, water vortex power plant in Switzerland. Opened in 2009, the plant, which
claimed to produce 200 W with 2.5 m head and 0.04 m3/s flow rate (20% overall measures 6.5 metres in diameter and has a height of fall of 1.5 metres, can
efficiency). The runner is fabricated from a series of nuts with welded steel flat generate between 10 and 15 kW, depending on the volume of water. This is
plate as blades. The design incorporates standard materials, but relies heavily on equivalent to an annual output of 80,000 to 130,000 kWh, enough to cover the
welding for the assembly. yearly electricity needs of around 20 to 25 Swiss households (50-60 people)
(Swissworld, 2012).
Alexander et al. (Alexander, 2009) developed low head turbines operating between Austrian engineer Franz Zotlöterer (Zotloeterer, 2012) has constructed a low-head
4 m and 12 m with efficiencies above 68%. The designs were axial, radial, and power plant that makes use of the kinetic energy inherent in an artificially induced
mixed flow turbines and incorporated features to simplify manufacture and vortex. The water's vortex energy is collected by a slow moving, large-surface
improve resistance to blockage. water wheel, making the power station transparent to fish - there are no large
pressure differences built up, as happens in normal turbines.
Singh and Nestmann (Singh, 2009) designed and tested a five blade propeller
turbine that produced 810 W (73.9% hydraulic efficiency) at 900 rpm while
operating under a head of 1.75 m and flow rate of 0.064 m3/s. This design was
optimized by trialing different inlet and exit blade angles of the runner.

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 9 10 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

6. DESIGN 6.3 Blade profile development

Only one study has been carried out so far on the gravitational water vortex power As mentioned earlier, the design of the blade has been carried out using a velocity
plant in Nepal. There are no fixed guidelines for design of this type of turbine as triangle as shown in Fig. 1. The symbols used in the above velocity triangle have
this is a nascent technology. been defined below along with their units:

Although there are no fixed guidelines for the design, the design which has been
carried out has been loosely based on the design of cross-flow turbines.
The water vortex striking the turbine blades has been modeled as a jet of water
striking the turbine blades like in cross-flow or other impulse turbines. Taking the
inlet jet angle to be 160and assuming no outlet whirl velocity, the design proceeds
with the calculation of the inlet and outlet blade angles use velocity triangles.

6.1 Assumptions
Certain valid assumptions were made for the design of the model turbine. They
are: Head and pressure losses are negligible, the velocity with which the water
strikes the runner is uniform along the length of the turbine, and The flow in the
water vortex is inviscid and irrotational.
Figure 1 Velocity triangle for blade design
6.2 Vortex theory for runner design
In a water vortex, water swirls around an empty core (vortex center)of decreasing Table 1 Velocity triangle symbols with meanings and units
radius. A water vortex can be defined as a flow pattern with streamlines having S. No. Symbol* Meaning Unit
concentric circles. In reality, since all fluids have viscosity, no flow is truly 1. β1 Inlet jet angle Degree
irrotational. However, flows can be successfully studied by assuming them to be 2. β2 Outlet jet angle Degree
inviscid and irrotational because of the negligible viscous effects (Fox, Pritchard, 3. α1 Inlet blade angle Degree
& McDonald, 2008). 4. α2 Outlet blade angle Degree
5. V Absolute Velocity of water (head velocity) m/s
In a free (irrotational) vortex, fluid particles do not rotate as they translate in
6. Vf Velocity of flow m/s
circular paths around the vortex center.
7. U Blade velocity m/s
For an irrotational vortex, the radial velocity (Vr) is zero, while the tangential
8. Vt Total velocity m/s
velocity (𝑣𝜃 ) is given by:
9. Vw Velocity of whirl m/s
𝑘
𝑣𝜃 = 10. Vr Vortex radial velocity m/s
2×𝜋×𝑟
Where, K is the strength of vortex and is defined as volume flow rate per unit 11. Vθ Vortex tangential velocity m/s
depth. i.e. 12. ID Inner Diameter mm
𝑄 13. OD Outer Diameter mm
𝐾=
ℎ
2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 11 12 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

14. K Vortex Strength m2/s 6.5 Design of Basin

15. h Turbine depth from upper surface of vortex mm The basin installed in the Center of Energy Studies is a cylindrical basin and the
16. r Vortex radius at h mm first set of tests was carried out in it. The second phase of the study is concerned
with the test of vortex characteristics and turbine characteristics using conical
* Subscripts 1 and 2 indicate the parameters at inlet and outlet.
basin. The inlet diameter of the conical basin is taken to be equal to the inlet
Following design equations are based on the above velocity triangles.
diameter of the cylindrical basin for comparative study.
6.4 Calculations at inlet The design is carried out by using Bernoulli’s theorem assuming the vortex flow to
𝜋×𝑂𝐷×𝑁𝑡
be free.
𝑉1 = √2 × 𝑔 × 𝐻 , 𝑉𝑡 = 𝑉1 + 𝑉𝜃 , 𝑉𝑤1 =
60
𝑉𝑓1 = 𝑉𝑡 × sin β1, 𝑉𝑤1 = 𝑉𝑡 × cos β1, Certain valid assumptions which were made during the design of the basin are
−1 𝑉𝑓1
α1 = tan ((𝑉𝑤1− ) given below:
𝑈1)
 The flow in the water vortex is inviscid and irrotational.
6.4.1 Calculations at outlet  The pressure and head losses are negligible.
𝜋×𝐼𝐷×𝑁𝑡 𝑉𝑓2
 Bernoulli’s equation is used which assumes a steady, inviscid and
𝑈2 = , 𝑉2 = 𝑉𝑓1 = 𝑉𝑓2 , α2 = tan−1 ( ) incompressible flow.
60 𝑈2
𝑉𝑤2 = 𝑉𝑡 × cos 𝛽2
6.5.1 Calculation of orifice diameter
6.4.2 Calculation of theoretical power The assumption of free vortex flow enables the use of Bernoulli’s equation, which
Neglecting pressure and head losses, the theoretical hydraulic power can be can be written as:
calculated using the following formula: 𝑃 𝑣2
+ + 𝑔𝑧 = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
𝑃0 = ƥ × 𝑄 × 𝑔 × 𝐻 𝜌 2
This value indicates the maximum power which can be extracted from the system Since the system is completely open, pressure at inlet and outlet is the same.
(test rig) where the tests are to be conducted. Similarly, the depth at inlet is equal to zero. Hence this equation reduces to the
form:
6.4.3 Calculation of theoretical efficiency 𝑣1 2 𝑣2 2
+ ℎ1 =
The theoretical hydraulic efficiency of the runner can be calculated using the 2𝑔 2𝑔
following formula: This reduced form of the Bernoulli’s equation can be used to calculate the orifice
diameter. The value of the orifice diameter should be equal to about 14% for low
(𝑉𝑤1 × 𝑈1 )
ŋℎ = head applications in order to generate maximum vortex strength (Mulligan & Hall,
(𝑔 × 𝐻) 2010).
6.4.4 Calculation of radius of curvature
The radius of curvature for the blade can be calculated using the following 6.5.2 Blade Design
formula:
Let β1 = 160, β2 = 900, ID = 100mm, OD = 180 mm for initial design. The head
𝑶𝑫𝟐 −𝑰𝑫𝟐
𝑅= (Merryfield & Mockmore, 1949) (H) was measured to be 0.78m while the flow rate was calculated was Q= 8.63 l/s.
𝟐×𝑶𝑫×𝐜𝐨𝐬 𝜷𝟏
Turbine depth from the upper surface of vortex was measured to be h = 0.735 m.

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 13 14 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

At this depth, the radius of vortex was calculated to be r =12 mm by substituting in 2 Blade outlet angle α2 450
the parabolic trend line of fig. 4.1.1. 3 Radius of curvature R 35 mm
Turbine speed for an impulse type turbine is given by: 4 Blade length L 80 mm
𝑁𝑡 = 39 × √𝐻 ÷ OD (Harvey, 1993) 5 No. of blades n 3,6 and 12
Therefore, Nt = 191 rpm, which is the design speed.
The above calculations are for the first turbine. For the second turbine, the blade
6.5.3 Calculation of vortex velocity components length was increased to 200 mm keeping blade inlet and outlet angles same as the
Vr = 0, 𝐾 = 𝑄 ÷ ℎ= 0.01174 m2/s first turbine. The radius of curvature (R) increased to 88 mm.
𝑉𝜃 = 𝐾 ÷ (2 ∗ 𝜋 ∗ 𝑟) = 0.1558 m/s
6.6 Basin Design Calculations
6.5.4 Calculations at inlet The basin inlet diameter for the conical basin is 600mm. The equation of
continuity can be written as:
𝑉1 = √2 ∗ 𝑔 ∗ 𝐻 =3.91 m/s
𝑄 = 𝐶𝑑 × 𝐴 × 𝑉, Q = 8.62 l/s, Cd = 0.5954, A = 0.175 * 0.15= .02625
Vt = V1 + Vθ = 4.068 m/s, 𝑉𝑤1 = 𝜋 ∗ 𝑂𝐷 ∗ 𝑁𝑡 ÷ 60 = 1.803 m/s m 2

𝑉𝑓1 = 𝑉𝑡 ∗ sin β1= 1.121 m/s, 𝑉𝑤1 = 𝑉𝑡 ∗ cos β1 = 3.91 m/s Hence, using the equation of continuity
α1 = tan−1 (𝑉𝑓1 ÷ (𝑉𝑤1 − 𝑈1)) = 28.020(300 chosen for fabrication 𝑣1 = 0.552 m/s
convenience) From section 3.2.3, we have,
𝑣1 2 𝑣2 2
6.5.5 Calculations at outlet + ℎ1 =
2𝑔 2𝑔
𝑈2 = 𝜋 × 𝐼𝐷 × 𝑁𝑡 ÷ 60 = 1 m/s, 𝑉2 = 𝑉𝑓1 = 𝑉𝑓2 = 1.12 m/s Hence, the velocity at exit is given by:
α2 = tan−1 (𝑉𝑓2 ÷ 𝑈2)= 480(450 chosen for fabrication convenience) 𝑣2 = 4.238 m/s
𝑉𝑤2 = 𝑉𝑡 × cos 𝛽2 = 0 Assuming constant flow rate,
𝑑2 2
6.5.6 Calculation of theoretical power 𝑄1 = 𝑄2 = 𝜋 × × 𝑣2
4
𝑃0 = ƥ × 𝑄 × 𝑔 × 𝐻 = 66 W Where, 𝑑2 is vortex core diameter at exit.
Substituting the known values in the above equation, we get,
6.5.7 Calculation of theoretical efficiency 𝑑2 = 0.05089 m = 50.89 mm
ŋℎ = (𝑉𝑤1 × 𝑈1 ) ÷ (𝑔 × 𝐻) = 92.14 % Now we have,
Exit hole diameter (d) = 2 * vortex core diameter (𝑑2 ) (Chaulagain, 2012)
6.5.8 Calculation of radius of curvature Hence, d = 101.78 mm (100mm assumed for ease of fabrication)
𝑅 = (𝑂𝐷2 − 𝐼𝐷2 ) ÷ (2 × 𝑂𝐷 × cos β1) = 35 mm This is the required diameter of the orifice.

Table 2 Blade Design Summary Optimum vortex strength occurs within the range of orifice diameter to tank
S. Parameters Symbols Design values diameter ratios (d/D) of 14% - 18% for low and high head sites respectively
No. (Mulligan & Hall, 2010).
1 Blade inlet angle α1 300
2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 15 16 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

𝑑 The above equation is difficult to solve by general method. Using iteration method
For d=100 mm, = 16 %, which is reasonably close to the value for which the
𝐷
(Grewal, 2011).
optimum vortex strength occurs.

𝑑 = 168.17 × 𝑑 4 + 21.02 × 𝑑 2 + 0.01189 = ∅(𝑑)

The base of the basin however should be greater than this value so that the orifice
Taking, 𝑑0 = 0.01 𝑚, we obtain
diameter can be adjusted for experimental tests.
𝑑1 = ∅(𝑑0 ) = 168.17 × 0.014 + 21.02 × 0.012 + 0.01189
6.7 Shaft Design = 0.01399 𝑚
Calculation of axial force: Mass of turbine (m) = 8.5 kg 𝑑2 = ∅(𝑑1 ) = 168.17 × 0.013994 + 21.02 × 0.013992 + 0.01189
Weight of turbine (F) = 𝑚 × 𝑔 = 83.385, = 0.016 𝑚
Calculation of torque: Design speed (N) = 191.35 RPM Repeating this process for twenty five iterations, we get
Design theoretical power (P) = 66.05 W 𝑑25 = ∅(𝑑24 ) = 168.17 × 0.022454 + 21.02 × 0.022452 + 0.01189
2𝜋𝑁𝑇 = 0.02253 𝑚
𝑃=
60 𝑑26 = ∅(𝑑25 ) = 168.17 × 0.022534 + 21.02 × 0.022532 + 0.01189
Torque (T) = 3.296 Nm = 0.02260 𝑚
According to maximum shear stress theory, 𝑑27 = ∅(𝑑26 ) = 168.17 × 0.02264 + 21.02 × 0.02262 + 0.01189
1
16 𝛼𝐹𝑑 2
3 = 0.02267 𝑚
𝑑=[ {√(𝑐𝑚 × 𝑀 + ) + (𝑐𝑡 × 𝑇)2 }] (Mahadevan & Reddy, 2011) The value of d27 and d28 are correct up to four decimal places.
𝜋𝜏 8

But, M = 0 Hence, 𝑑 = 0.02267 𝑚

16𝑇
𝜏= (Mahadevan & Reddy, 2011)
𝜋𝑑 3 Putting the value of d in equation below gives,
Above equation can be reduced to following simplified equation, 108.64𝑑 4 + 13.5795𝑑 2 − 0.646𝑑 + 7.686 × 10−3 = 0.0000486 ≈ 0
𝛼𝐹𝑑 2
𝑇2 = ( ) + (𝑐𝑡 𝑇)2
8 But for the design convenience, the diameter was taken to be 0.03 m i.e. 30 mm.
𝑙
Assuming ( ) < 115 Stress analysis: The stress analysis of the turbine blades and shaft was carried out
𝑘
1 in the Generative Structural Analysis workbench of CATIA V5.
𝛼= 𝑙 (Mahadevan & Reddy, 2011)
1−0.0044×( )
𝑘
𝑑 6.8 Runner blade analysis
𝑘= Geometry information: Blade length: 125 mm and radius of curvature: 38 mm
4
Length of shaft (l) = 1.24 m Material information:
𝑑 Material Steel
Hence, 𝛼 =
𝑑−0.0238
Young's modulus 2e+011N_m2
𝑐𝑡 = 1.5 (Mahadevan & Reddy, 2011)
Poisson's ratio 0.266
Putting the values in simplified equation gives
Density 7860kg_m3
2
𝑑 83.385 × 𝑑 2
3.296 = {( )× } + (1.5 × 3.296)2 Coefficient of thermal expansion 1.17e-005_Kdeg
𝑑 − 0.0238 8
Yield strength 2.5e+008N_m2
∴ 108.64𝑑 4 + 13.5795𝑑 2 − 0.646𝑑 + 7.686 × 10−3 = 0

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 17 18 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Mesh information is as follows. Nodes = 343 size, and elements = 895 size.

Material Steel
Young's modulus 2e+011N_m2
Poisson's ratio 0.266
Density 7860kg_m3
Coefficient of thermal expansion 1.17e-005_Kdeg
Yield strength 2.5e+008N_m2
Mesh information is Nodes size is 8176 and elements size is 31701.

6.9 Load information

Torque (T) = 3.296 Nm

Figure 2 Stress analysis of runner blades

Maximum value of Von Mises Stress is 2.94 * 10 6 N/m2 which is clearly less than
the yield strength of 2.50 * 108 N/m2. Hence this design is safe under the applied
load conditions.

6.10 Shaft stress analysis

Figure 3 Stress analysis of shaft
Geometry information: Length: 1.24 m, and Diameter: 30 mm
Load information: Axial load: 83.385 N, and Torque: 3.296 Nm
Material information is as follows.

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 19 20 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Maximum value of Von Mises Stress is 1.94 * 10 6 N/m2 which is clearly less than d. Weight carrying bag and weights: A small weight carrying bag was
the yield strength of 2.50 * 108 N/m2. Hence this design is safe under the applied attached at the other end of the spring balance and weights (brick
load conditions. pieces, metallic scrap, etc.) were loaded onto it.

7. MEASURING EQUIPMENT
Measurement of torque and rpm was essential part of testing. For the measurement
of torque produced by the turbines, Prony Brake was used with two springs, a rope
and weights. Measurement of rpm was done by digital tachometer. The flow rate
was measured by measuring the height of the 900 V-notch.

7.1 Torque Measurement

To measure the torque, Brake Drum Dynamometer (The Prony Brake) is used.
Equipment are 2 numbers Digital Spring Balances, wheel, rope, pulley, Weight
carrying bag and different weights
a. Spring specifications:
Type : Digital Figure 4 Torque measurement using Prony Brake Model
Minimum weight : 10g
Maximum weight : 40 kg One end of a spring balance is fixed and other end is connected to the rope. The
Least count : 0.01 kg rope circles the wheel and is attached to the other spring balance via pulley. The
a. Wheel: A nylon wheel was used which is attached to shaft supported other end of the second spring balance is connected to the weight. The wheel is
by wooden wheel and metallic disc. The diameter of the wheel is 110 attached to the shaft through wooden wheel and metal disc (which is bolted to the
mm with hole of diameter 22 mm. The wheel has groove around its shaft).
circumference for the adjustment of rope.
Initially the turbine is made to rotate at no braking load. Then the weight is
b. Rope: Simple rope of diameter 5mm was used. The length of rope is measured and added to the bag. The loads (kg) indicated by two digital spring
around 84mm. balances were noted. The difference in loads multiplied by the radius of the wheel
gives the braking torque.
c. Pulley: Nylon pulley of diameter 50 mm was used to connect rope
from wheel to the spring balance connected to the load. The pulley Hence, Braking Torque = (Fw-Ff) 9.8 r
has groove cut around its circumference and a hole of diameter 9 mm Where, Fw = weight (kg)
was drilled at its center to fix the pulley by using bolt. Ff =load (kg) indicated on fixed digital spring
r= radius of the wheel.

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 21 22 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

The rpm of the shaft, while applying braking torque, was measured by using water is allowed to drop chamber in order to kill extra head. Then water enters
digital tachometer. cylindrical basin through canal forming vortex. Water exits through an exit hole at
the end of the basin to the tank below. The tank is separated to two chambers by
7.2 Volume flow rate measurement weir. The height of water level at the weir can be measured for the measurement of
The volume flow rate of water was measured by measuring the height of the 90 0 the volume flow rate of water.
V-notch.

Figure 5 V-Notch

Following formula gives the volume flow rate of water:

8 θ Figure 6 Test Rig
𝑄 = 𝐶𝑒 √2𝑔 tan 𝐻2.5
15 2
Where, Q= volume flow rate (m3/s) 8. MEASUREMENT, CALCULATION and discussions
g=9.8m/s2
8.1 Vortex Measurement and Data Analysis
H=water level height at weir (m)
Discharge : 8.63 LPS Basin Height : 850 mm
θ=900
Exit hole diameter : 110 mm Basin diameter : 600 mm
H/P<0.4
Depth of water level from top of basin: 115 mm
Therefore, Ce=0.578
Further reducing above equation to simpler form, we get:
Q = 1.36H2.5 (Fox, Pritchard, & McDonald, 2008)

7.3 Test Rig

Turbine was installed in the test rig available in the Center of Energy Studies
Laboratory. Test rig consists of tank of test rig, three pumps, surge tank, drop
chamber, Canal, cylindrical basin, top bearing block, supports and 90 degree V-
notch.

Opening only one pump does not form the vortex. Therefore, either two or three
pumps need to be opened. The water fills the surge tank. Through surge tank, the
2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 23 24 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 3 Measurement of vortex depth at different radii

Radius Depth from top of basin Average depth Table 4 Calculation of depth from surface of water for different radius
100 190 196.67 Radius (mm) Depth from surface of water (mm)
100 195 120 70
100 205 100 82
32 615 605 86 178
32 595
73 232
32 605
55 257
55 375 371.67
55 370 45 372
55 370 32 490
45 485 486.67 15 724
45 490
45 485
15 866 839.33
15 816
15 836
120 185 185
120 190
120 180
86 283 292.67
86 300
86 295
73 350 347.33
73 352
73 340

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 25 26 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 5 Test 1
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150
S.N. Fw Ff F(kg) F(N) T N P (W) Po(W) ŋ(%)
0
(N-m) (rpm)
1 0.33 0.09 0.24 2.35 0.26 156 4.23 65.16 6.49%
100 2 0.65 0.32 0.33 3.24 0.36 153 5.70 65.16 8.76%
3 0.85 0.43 0.42 4.12 0.45 141 6.69 65.16 10.27%
200
4 0.54 0.08 0.46 4.51 0.50 148 7.69 65.16 11.81%
5 1.11 0.46 0.65 6.38 0.70 142 10.43 65.16 16.01%
300
6 0.72 0.05 0.67 6.57 0.72 143 10.83 65.16 16.61%
7 1.36 0.58 0.78 7.65 0.84 135 11.90 65.16 18.26%
400
8 0.91 0.03 0.88 8.63 0.95 132 13.13 65.16 20.14%
9 1.31 0.28 1.03 10.10 1.11 142 16.53 65.16 25.36%
500

600

700
y = 0.0607x2 + 14.044x + 894.81 y = 0.0607x2 - 14.044x + 894.81
800
R² = 0.9787 eff vs rpm
30.00%
Figure 7 Vortex Profile
25.00%
20.00%

eff
15.00%
8.2 Test 1 10.00% eff vs rpm
Turbine 1
Number of blades: 6, Radius of Prony brake: 110 mm, and Height from upper 5.00%
bearing: 825 mm 0.00%
80 100 120 140 160 180 200
rpm

Figure 8 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 1

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 27 28 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

18 1.2
Table 6 Test 2
16
1 S.N. F1 F2 F(kg) F(N) T N P Po Ŋ
14 (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
1 0.58 0.2 0.38 3.73 0.19 151.6 2.96 68.60 4.31%
12 0.8

torque(Nm)
power(W)

2 1.09 0.19 0.9 8.83 0.44 150 6.93 68.60 10.11%

10
0.6 3 1.35 0.51 0.84 8.24 0.41 146.4 6.32 68.60 9.21%
8
4 1.51 0.41 1.1 10.79 0.54 140 7.91 68.60 11.53%
6 0.4
5 2.14 0.84 1.3 12.75 0.64 134 8.95 68.60 13.04%
4 6 3.07 1.2 1.87 18.34 0.92 126.4 12.14 68.60 17.70%
0.2
2 7 3.91 1.65 2.26 22.17 1.11 117.3 13.62 68.60 19.85%
0 0 8 4.66 1.94 2.72 26.68 1.33 106 14.81 68.60 21.59%
100 120 140 160 180 200 9 5.52 2.35 3.17 31.10 1.55 103 16.77 68.60 24.45%
rpm power 10 6.9 3.18 3.72 36.49 1.82 50 9.55 68.60 13.93%
torque

Figure 9 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 1

eff vs rpm
The maximum efficiency among the test experiments was 25.36% at breaking
torque 1.856 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 20.40W. Further 30.00%
increasing the braking load leads to deformation in vortex. So, the readings above 25.00%
at high braking were not included. 20.00%

eff
15.00%
8.3 Test 2 10.00%
Turbine 1 5.00%
Number of blades 6, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper
bearing is585 mm. 0.00%
0 50 100 150 200
rpm

Figure 10 Efficiency vc rpm for Test 2

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 29 30 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

18 2 Table 7 Test 3
S.N. Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
16 1.8
(kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
14 1.6
1 0.62 0.18 0.44 4.32 0.22 139.5 3.15 66.05 4.77%
12 1.4
1.2 2 1.16 0.32 0.84 8.24 0.41 136.2 5.88 66.05 8.90%

torque
power

10
1 3 2.08 0.68 1.4 13.73 0.69 133.5 9.60 66.05 14.53%
8
0.8 4 2.68 0.92 1.76 17.27 0.86 127.5 11.53 66.05 17.45%
6 0.6
5 3.33 1.24 2.09 20.50 1.03 119.4 12.82 66.05 19.41%
4 0.4
2 6 4.18 1.8 2.38 23.35 1.17 109.2 13.35 66.05 20.21%
0.2
0 0 7 4.85 2.3 2.55 25.02 1.25 101.3 13.27 66.05 20.09%
0 50 100 150 200 8 5.38 2.3 3.08 30.21 1.51 95.2 15.06 66.05 22.80%
RPM 9 5.9 2.8 3.1 30.41 1.52 83.9 13.36 66.05 20.23%
power 10 7.35 3.5 3.85 37.77 1.89 72.2 14.28 66.05 21.62%
torque 11 8.48 3.7 4.78 46.89 2.34 50.0 12.28 66.05 18.59%

Figure 11 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 2

The maximum efficiency obtained was 24.45% at 103 rpm and at breaking torque eff vs rpm
of 1.55 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 16.77 W. 25.00%

20.00%
8.4 Test 3

efficiency
Turbine 1 15.00%
Number of blades: 6, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper
bearing: 380 mm 10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
0 50 100 150
rpm

Figure 12 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 3

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 31 32 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

16 2.5
Table 8 Test 4
14 S.N Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
2
12 (kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
1 0.46 0.09 0.37 3.63 0.18 153.5 2.92 66.05 4.42%

Torque(Nm)
10
Power(W)

1.5
2 0.65 0.23 0.42 4.12 0.21 148 3.19 66.05 4.83%
8
3 1.17 0.46 0.71 6.97 0.35 146 5.32 66.05 8.06%
6 1
4 1.27 0.49 0.78 7.65 0.38 144 5.77 66.05 8.73%
4 5 1.55 0.77 0.78 7.65 0.38 141 5.65 66.05 8.55%
0.5
2 6 1.67 0.52 1.15 11.28 0.56 146 8.62 66.05 13.06%
0 0 7 1.84 0.68 1.16 11.38 0.57 141 8.40 66.05 12.72%
0 50 100 150 8 2.3 0.87 1.43 14.03 0.70 138 10.14 66.05 15.35%
rpm 9 2.84 1.3 1.54 15.11 0.76 123 9.73 66.05 14.73%
power 10 3.25 1.49 1.76 17.27 0.86 112 10.13 66.05 15.33%
torque 11 3.62 1.8 1.82 17.85 0.89 92 8.60 66.05 13.02%

Figure 13 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 3

The maximum efficiency obtained was 22.80% at 95.2 rpm and at breaking torque eff vs rpm
of 1.55 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 15.06 W. 18.00%
16.00%
8.5 Test 4 14.00%
Turbine 1 (blade added) 12.00%

efficiency
Number of blades: 12, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper 10.00%
bearing: 825 mm 8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
0 50 100 150 200
rpm

Figure 14 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 4

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 33 34 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 9 Test 5
12 1
S.N. Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
0.9
(kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
10
0.8 1 0.39 0.1 0.29 2.84 0.14 156 2.32 66.05 3.52%
0.7 2 0.84 0.22 0.62 6.08 0.30 150 4.78 66.05 7.23%
8

torque (Nm)
power (w)

0.6 3 1.47 0.45 1.02 10.01 0.50 146 7.65 66.05 11.58%
6 0.5 4 1.01 0.3 0.71 6.97 0.35 151 5.51 66.05 8.34%
0.4 5 1.69 0.69 1 9.81 0.49 144 7.40 66.05 11.20%
4 6 2.12 0.9 1.22 11.97 0.60 140 8.77 66.05 13.28%
0.3
0.2 7 2.59 1.1 1.49 14.62 0.73 129 9.87 66.05 14.95%
2
8 3.21 1.35 1.86 18.25 0.91 113 10.80 66.05 16.34%
0.1
9 3.66 1.69 1.97 19.33 0.97 95 9.61 66.05 14.55%
0 0
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 10 4.34 2.1 2.24 21.97 1.10 66.5 7.65 66.05 11.58%

rpm 11 4.59 1.8 2.79 27.37 1.37 54 7.74 66.05 11.72%

power
12 5.78 2.7 3.08 30.21 1.51 17 2.69 66.05 4.07%
torque

Figure 15 Power and Torque vs for Test 4 12 1.6

The maximum efficiency obtained was 15.33% at 112 rpm and at breaking torque 1.4
10
of 1.55 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 10.13 W.
1.2

power (watt)
8

torque(Nm)
1
8.6 Test 5 6 0.8
Turbine 1 (blade added) 0.6
4
Number of blades: 12, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper
0.4
bearing:585 mm 2
0.2
0 0
0 50 100 150 200
rpm Power
Torque

Figure 16 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 5

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 35 36 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 10 Test 6
S.N. F1 F2 F F T N P Po Ŋ
18.00%
(kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
16.00% 1 0.21 0.07 0.14 1.37 0.07 144.8 1.04 66.05 1.58%
14.00% 2 0.82 0.31 0.51 5.00 0.25 140.9 3.69 66.05 5.59%
3 0.92 0.38 0.54 5.30 0.26 138 3.83 66.05 5.80%
12.00%
4 1.19 0.46 0.73 7.16 0.36 138 5.17 66.05 7.83%
10.00%
eff

5 1.6 0.61 0.99 9.71 0.49 126 6.41 66.05 9.70%

8.00%
6 1.72 0.65 1.07 10.50 0.52 130.1 7.15 66.05 10.83%
6.00% 7 2.44 0.82 1.62 15.89 0.79 115 9.57 66.05 14.49%
4.00% 8 2.62 1.04 1.58 15.50 0.77 102 8.28 66.05 12.53%
2.00% 9 3 1.26 1.74 17.07 0.85 86 7.69 66.05 11.64%

0.00% 10 3.43 1.49 1.94 19.03 0.95 71 7.08 66.05 10.71%

0 50 100 150 200 11 3.76 1.56 2.2 21.58 1.08 49 5.54 66.05 8.38%
rpm

Figure 17 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 5 eff vs rpm

The maximum efficiency obtained was 16.34%at 113 rpm and at breaking torque 16.00%
0.91 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 10.8 W. 14.00%
12.00%
10.00%
8.7 Test 6

eff
8.00%
Turbine 1 (blade added) 6.00%
Number of blades: 12, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper 4.00%
bearing:380 mm
2.00%
0.00%
0 50 100 150 200
rpm

Figure 18 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 6

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 37 38 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

12 1.2 Table 11 Test 7

S.N Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
10 1 (kg) (N) (Nm) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
1 0.48 0.04 0.44 4.32 0.22 102 2.31 66.05 3.49%
8 0.8
power (watt)

2 1.06 0.37 0.69 6.77 0.34 99 3.51 66.05 5.31%

torque(Nm)
3 1.68 0.5 1.18 11.58 0.58 96 5.82 66.05 8.81%
6 0.6
4 1.98 0.7 1.28 12.56 0.63 95 6.25 66.05 9.46%
4 0.4 5 2.9 1.08 1.82 17.85 0.89 91 8.51 66.05 12.88%
6 3.07 1.1 1.97 19.33 0.97 88 8.90 66.05 13.48%
2 0.2
7 3.6 1.4 2.2 21.58 1.08 89 10.06 66.05 15.23%

0 0 8 4.22 1.8 2.42 23.74 1.19 81 10.07 66.05 15.24%

0 50 100 150 200 9 4.36 1.9 2.46 24.13 1.21 87.5 11.06 66.05 16.74%
rpm 10 5.12 2.5 2.62 25.70 1.29 75 10.09 66.05 15.28%

Power 11 5.9 2.7 3.2 31.39 1.57 68 11.18 66.05 16.92%

Torque

Figure 19 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 6

eff vs rpm
20.00%
The maximum efficiency obtained was 14.49% at 115 rpm and at breaking torque
0.79 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 9.57W. 15.00%

efficiency
10.00%
8.8 Test 7
Turbine 2 5.00%
Number of blades: 3, Radius of Prony brake : 50 mm, and Height from upper
bearing:825 mm 0.00%
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
rpm

Figure 20 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 7

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 39 40 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 12 Test 8
12 1.8 S.N Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
(kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
1.6 1 0.48 0.15 0.33 3.24 0.16 110 1.86 66.05 2.82%
10
1.4 2 0.99 0.36 0.63 6.18 0.31 106.6 3.45 66.05 5.22%
8 1.2

Torque(Nm)
3 1.12 0.36 0.76 7.46 0.37 105.5 4.12 66.05 6.24%
power (w)

1 4 1.4 0.48 0.92 9.03 0.45 105 4.96 66.05 7.51%

6
0.8 5 2.09 0.76 1.33 13.05 0.65 103 7.04 66.05 10.65%
4 0.6 6 2.33 0.9 1.43 14.03 0.70 99 7.27 66.05 11.01%
0.4 7 2.85 1.1 1.75 17.17 0.86 92 8.27 66.05 12.52%
2
0.2 8 3.08 1.2 1.88 18.44 0.92 89 8.59 66.05 13.01%
0 0 9 3.42 1.4 2.02 19.82 0.99 77 7.99 66.05 12.10%
60 70 80 90 100 110 10 4.15 1.6 2.55 25.02 1.25 48 6.29 66.05 9.52%
rpm
power vs rpm

torque vs rpm eff vs rpm

14.00%
Figure 21 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 7
12.00%
The maximum efficiency among the test experiments was 16.92% at breaking 10.00%

efficiency
torque 0.79 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 9.57W. Further 8.00%
increasing the braking load leads to deformation in vortex. So, the readings above
6.00%
at high braking were not included. rpm vs eff
4.00%
2.00%
8.9 Test 8 0.00%
Turbine 2 0 50 100 150
Number of blades: 3, Radius of Prony brake : 50 mm, and Height from upper
rpm
bearing:585 mm
Figure 22 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 8

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 41 42 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

10 1.4 Table 13 Test 9

S.N Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
9
1.2 (kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
8
1 0.26 0.1 0.16 1.57 0.08 96 0.79 66.05 1.19%
7 1

torque(Nm)
power (w)

2 0.8 0.3 0.5 4.91 0.25 93 2.39 66.05 3.62%

6 0.8
5 3 1.26 0.48 0.78 7.65 0.38 90 3.61 66.05 5.46%
4 0.6 4 1.85 0.72 1.13 11.09 0.55 85 4.93 66.05 7.47%
3 0.4 5 2.15 0.9 1.25 12.26 0.61 83 5.33 66.05 8.07%
2 6 2.47 1 1.47 14.42 0.72 82 6.19 66.05 9.37%
0.2
1
7 2.95 1.37 1.58 15.50 0.77 78 6.33 66.05 9.58%
0 0
40 60 80 100 120 8 3.6 1.7 1.9 18.64 0.93 73 7.12 66.05 10.79%

rpm 9 3.96 1.3 2.66 26.09 1.30 60.5 8.27 66.05 12.51%
power vs rpm 10 4.56 1.6 2.96 29.04 1.45 58 8.82 66.05 13.35%
torque vs rpm

Figure 23 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 8 eff vs rpm

The maximum efficiency obtained was 13.01% at 89 rpm and at breaking torque 16.00%
0.79 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 8.59W. 14.00%
. 12.00%
10.00%

efficiency
8.10 Test 9
Turbine 2 8.00%
Number of blades: 3, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper 6.00%
bearing:380 mm 4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
rpm

Figure 24 Efficiency vs rpm Test 9

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 43 44 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

10 1.6
Table 14 Test 10
9 1.4
8 S.No. Fw Ff F(kg) F(N) T(N-m) N(rpm) P (W) Po(W) ŋ(%)
1.2
7

torque(Nm)
power (w)

6 1 1 0.65 0.22 0.43 4.22 0.21 110 2.430 68.600 3.54%

5 0.8 2 1.06 0.36 0.7 6.87 0.34 108 3.883 68.600 5.66%
4 0.6 3 1.53 0.6 0.93 9.12 0.45 103 4.920 68.600 7.17%
3 4 1.96 0.7 1.26 12.36 0.62 101 6.537 68.600 9.53%
0.4
2
0.2 5 2.9 1.12 1.78 17.46 0.87 78 7.132 68.600 10.40%
1
0 0 6 3.67 1.7 1.97 19.33 0.97 66 6.678 68.600 9.74%
50 60 70 80 90 100 7 5.25 2.75 2.5 24.53 1.23 56 7.191 68.600 10.48%
rpm 8 6.16 3.5 2.66 26.10 1.30 46 6.285 68.600 9.16%
power vs rpm
9 7.5 3.6 3.9 38.26 1.91 36 7.212 68.600 10.51%

torque vs rpm 10 8.04 4.75 3.29 32.28 1.61 24.5 4.140 68.600 6.04%

Figure 25 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 9

eff vs rpm
The maximum efficiency among the test experiments was 13.35% at breaking
12.00%
torque 1.45 Nm. The power produced at this efficiency was 8.82W. Further
increasing the braking load leads to deformation in vortex. So, the readings above 10.00%
at high braking were not included.
8.00%

eff
6.00%
8.11 Test 10
Turbine 2 4.00% eff vs rpm
Number of blades: 6, Radius of Prony brake : 50 mm, and Height from upper
2.00%
bearing: 825 mm
0.00%
0 50 100 150
rpm

Figure 26 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 10

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 45 46 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

8 2.5 Table 15 Test 11

S.N. Fw Ff F F T N P Po Ŋ
7 (kg) (N) (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
2
6 1 0.4 0.13 0.27 2.65 0.13 113 1.57 68.60 2.28%

Torque (Nm)
Power (W)

5 1.5 2 1 0.3 0.7 6.87 0.34 108 3.88 68.60 5.66%

4 3 1.44 0.5 0.94 9.22 0.46 103.8 5.01 68.60 7.31%
3 1 4 2.02 0.82 1.2 11.77 0.59 95.5 5.89 68.60 8.58%
2 5 2.54 1.1 1.44 14.13 0.71 88 6.51 68.60 9.49%
0.5
1 6 3.18 1.5 1.68 16.48 0.82 76.6 6.61 68.60 9.64%
0 0 7 4.16 2.1 2.06 20.21 1.01 73 7.72 68.60 11.26%
0 50 100 150 8 4.83 2.5 2.33 22.86 1.14 70.7 8.46 68.60 12.33%
rpm 9 5.56 2.8 2.76 27.08 1.35 59.8 8.48 68.60 12.36%
power vs rpm 10 7.43 2.9 4.53 44.43 2.22 30 6.98 68.60 10.18%

torque vs rpm

Figure 27 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 10 eff vs rpm

14.00%
12.00%
8.12 Test 11
10.00%
Turbine 2
8.00%
Number of blades: 6, Radius of Prony brake : 50 mm, and Height from upper

eff
bearing: 585 mm 6.00%
4.00% eff vs rpm
2.00%
0.00%
0 50 100 150
rpm

Figure 28 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 11

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 47 48 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 16 Test 12
10 2.5 S.N Fw Ff F(kg) F(N) T N P Po Ŋ
9 (N-m) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
1 0.58 0.09 0.49 4.81 0.24 100.2 2.52 68.60 3.68%
8 2
7 2 0.98 0.32 0.66 6.47 0.32 99.3 3.37 68.60 4.91%

Torque (Nm)
Power (W)

6 1.5 3 1.4 0.45 0.95 9.32 0.47 97 4.73 68.60 6.90%

5 4 1.8 0.75 1.05 10.30 0.52 91.5 4.93 68.60 7.19%

4 1 5 2.48 1 1.48 14.51 0.73 89.2 6.78 68.60 9.88%
3 6 3.24 1.3 1.94 19.03 0.95 85.1 8.48 68.60 12.36%
2 0.5 7 3.96 1.9 2.06 20.20 1.01 81.5 8.62 68.60 12.57%
1 8 4.76 2.3 2.46 24.13 1.2Q 74.4 9.40 68.60 13.70%
0 0 9 5.46 2.8 2.66 26.09 1.30 71.2 9.73 68.60 14.18%
0 50 100 150 10 6.54 3.2 3.34 32.77 1.64 66.8 11.46 68.60 16.71%
rpm 11 8.1 4.5 3.6 35.32 1.77 59.5 11.00 68.60 16.04%
power vs rpm 12 8.58 4.4 4.18 41.01 2.05 39 8.37 68.60 12.21%
torque vs rpm

Figure 29 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 11 eff vs rpm

20.00%

8.13 Test 12 15.00%

Turbine 2

eff
Number of blades: 6, Radius of Prony brake : 50 mm, and Height from upper 10.00%
bearing: 380 mm
eff vs rpm
5.00%

0.00%
0 50 100 150
rpm

Figure 30 Efficiency vs rpm for Test 12

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 49 50 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

14 1.8 Above data shows that the best position for obtaining maximum power is at the
12 1.6 bottom of the basin. Increasing the number of blades reduced power as in case of
1.4 first turbine. It may be because of increase in weight due to the addition of blades.
10
1.2

Torque (Nm)
Power (W)

8 1
6 0.8
0.6
4
0.4
2 0.2
0 0
60 70 80 90 100 110
rpm
power vs rpm
torque vs rpm
Figure 31 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 12

Table 17 Maximum efficiency obtained at each Test

Test Fw Ff F(kg) F(N) T N P (W) Po(W) ŋ(%)
no. (N-m) (rpm)
1 1.31 0.28 1.03 10.10 1.11 142 16.53 68.60 25.36%
2 5.52 2.35 3.17 31.10 1.55 103 16.77 68.60 24.45%
3 5.38 2.3 3.08 30.21 1.51 95.2 15.06 68.60 22.80%
4 3.25 1.49 1.76 17.27 0.86 112 10.13 68.60 15.33%
5 3.21 1.35 1.86 18.25 0.91 113 10.80 68.60 16.34%
6 2.44 0.82 1.62 15.89 0.79 115 9.57 68.60 14.49%
7 5.9 2.7 3.2 31.39 1.57 68 11.18 68.60 16.92%
8 3.08 1.2 1.88 18.44 0.92 89 8.59 68.60 13.01%
9 4.56 1.6 2.96 29.04 1.45 58 8.82 68.60 13.35%
10 7.5 3.6 3.9 38.26 1.91 36 7.21 68.60 10.51%
11 5.56 2.8 2.76 27.08 1.35 59.8 8.48 68.60 12.36%
12 6.54 3.2 3.34 32.77 1.64 66.8 11.46 68.60 16.71%

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 51 52 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

8.14 Site Testing The maximum output power among the test experiments was 18.2757W at braking
After several tests in the test rig, a site test was carried out in the Manoharariver torque 2.9086 Nm. Increase in braking load beyond this value caused significant
located at Pepsicola, Kathmandu. The primary purpose of the site test was to vortex distortion. So, the readings at greater braking forces are not included.
briefly assess the possibility of power generation from a local river with low head.
The site has a head of about 1m. Since the existing system was used, no significant Table 19 Test 2 at site
changes in rpm or power were observed. The test data are tabulated below: Fw Ff F(kg) F(N) T(N-m) N(rpm) P (W)
2 0.7 1.3 12.75 0.64 96 6.41
Table 18 Test 1 at site
3.11 1.08 2.03 19.91 1.00 90 9.38
Fw Ff F(kg) F(N) T(N-m) N(rpm) P (W)
4.4 1.5 2.9 28.45 1.42 84 12.51
1.35 0.39 0.96 9.42 0.47 108 5.33
6.18 2.6 3.58 35.12 1.76 72 13.24
2.5 1.12 1.38 13.54 0.68 102 7.230
8 3 5 49.05 2.45 66 16.95
3.64 1.58 2.06 20.21 1.01 96 10.16
8.97 3.85 5.12 50.23 2.51 60 15.78
5.16 1.7 3.46 33.94 1.70 87 15.46
6.2 1.8 4.4 43.16 2.16 75 16.95 10 5 5 49.05 2.45 54 13.87
7.32 2.7 4.62 45.32 2.27 66 15.66
8.6 3.3 5.3 51.99 2.60 63.15 17.19 18 3
10.33 4.4 5.93 58.17 2.91 60 18.28 16
2.5
14

Torque (Nm)
12 2

Power (W)
10
1.5
8
20 3.5
18 6 1
3 4
16 0.5
14 2.5 2
Torque (Nm)
Power (W)

12 2 0 0
10 0 50 100 150
8 1.5
rpm
6 1
4 power vs rpm
2 0.5
torque vs rpm
0 0
Figure 33 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 2 (Field Test)
40 60 80 100 120 power vs
rpm rpm
The maximum output power among the test experiments was 16.9504 W at
Figure 32 Power and Torque vs rpm for Test 1 (Field Test) braking torque 2.4525 Nm. Increase in braking load beyond this value caused
significant vortex distortion. So, the readings at greater braking forces are not
included.
2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 53 54 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

8.15 Test 1 on conical basin 35.00%

Turbine 1
Number of blades: 12, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper 30.00%
bearing: 585 mm 25.00%

Table 20 Test 1 Conical Basin 20.00%

eff
S.No F1 F2 F F T N P Po Ŋ 15.00%
(kg) (N) (Nm) (rpm) (W) (W) (%)
10.00%
1 0.29 0.13 0.16 1.57 0.08 158.5 1.30 66.05 1.97%
2 0.55 0.21 0.34 3.34 0.17 156 2.72 66.05 4.12% 5.00%
3 0.9 0.33 0.57 5.60 0.28 154 4.51 66.05 6.83% 0.00%
4 1.25 0.49 0.76 7.46 0.37 152.4 5.95 66.05 9.01% 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
5 1.8 0.68 1.12 10.99 0.55 148 8.51 66.05 12.89% rpm
6 2.38 1.03 1.35 13.24 0.66 147 10.19 66.05 15.43%
Figure 34 Efficiency vs rpm of Conical Basin
7 3.4 1.45 1.95 19.13 0.96 143.7 14.39 66.05 21.79%
8 4.82 2.5 2.32 22.7 1.14 136 16.21 66.05 24.54%
25 3.5
9 5.75 2.75 3 29.43 1.47 127 19.57 66.05 29.63%
10 6.36 3.25 3.11 30.51 1.53 118.5 18.93 66.05 28.23% 3
20
11 7.71 3.9 3.81 37.38 1.87 93.5 18.3 66.05 26.89% 2.5

power (watt)

torque(Nm)
12 8.2 4.1 4.1 40.22 2.01 86 18.11 66.05 26.23% 15 2
13 9.2 4.2 5 49.05 2.45 62.5 16.05 66.05 22.91%
10 1.5
14 11 5 6 58.86 2.943 43 13.25 66.05 18.65%
1
5
0.5
0 0
40 90 140 190
rpm Power
Torque

Figure 35 Power and Torque vs rpm of Conical Basin

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 55 56 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

18 2.5
16
8.16 Test 2 on conical basin 2
14
Turbine 1

power (watt)
12

torque(Nm)
Number of blades: 12, Radius of Prony brake: 50 mm, and Height from upper 1.5
bearing: 250 mm 10
8
1
Table 21 Test 2 Conical Basin 6
S.No F1 F2 F F T N P Po Ŋ 4 0.5
(kg) (N) (Nm) (rpm) (W) (W) (%) 2
1 0.9 0.3 0.6 5.89 0.29 133 4.10 66.05 6.21% 0 0
40 60 80 100 120 140
2 2.16 0.8 1.36 13.34 0.67 128 8.94 66.05 13.54%
rpm
3 2.9 1.22 1.68 16.48 0.82 122 10.53 66.05 15.94%
Power
4 3.36 1.45 1.91 18.74 0.94 119 11.67 66.05 17.68%
Torque
5 4.1 1.92 2.18 21.39 1.07 116 12.99 66.05 19.67%
6 5.62 2.45 3.17 31.10 1.55 101.8 16.58 66.05 25.10% Figure 37 Power and Torque vs rpm of conical basin
7 6.37 2.7 3.67 36.00 1.80 85 16.02 66.05 24.26%
8.17 Vortex Strength Measurement and Comparison
8 7.5 3.3 4.2 41.20 2.06 72.7 15.68 66.05 23.75% Discharge : 8.63 LPS Basin Height : 850 mm
9 8.5 4 4.5 44.15 2.21 67 15.49 66.05 23.45% Exit hole diameter : 100 mm Basin upper diameter : 600
mm

30.00%
25.00% Table 22 Vortex Measurement and Data Analysis for conical basin
20.00% Radius(mm) Depth Depth Average Depth Depth from upper
(Data1) (Data2) (Left Side) (mm) surface of water
eff

15.00%
140 120 130 125 60
10.00% 110 215 225 220 155
5.00% 90 230 210 220 155
0.00% 62 450 490 470 405
40 60 80 100 120 140
50 470 468 469 404
rpm
40 560 590 575 510

Figure 36 Efficiency vs rpm of Conical Basin 27 650 655 652.5 587.5

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 57 58 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Radius(mm) Depth Depth Average Depth Depth from

(Data 1) (Data 2) (Right Side)(mm) upper bearing
-140 66 66 66 1
-110 100 100 100 35
-90 110 120 115 50
-62 175 185 180 115 Rdius (mm)
-50 205 195 200 135 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200
-40 325 325 325 260 0
-27 455 465 460 395
100

Table 23 Calculation of depth from surface of water for different radius

200
Radius (mm) Depth from surface of water (mm)
140 138

Depth
300
110 208
90 215.5
62 373 400
50 382.5
40 498 500
27 604.25 y= 0.0372x2 + 10.072x + 722.24
R² = 0.9785 y = 0.0372x2 - 10.072x + 722.24
600 R² = 0.9785

Figure 38 Vortex profile for Conical Basin

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 59 60 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Table 24 Vortex Strength Comparison 9. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Radius Depth Depth Vortex Vortex %
Two turbines with different number of blades and blade radii were tested by
(cylindrical (conical) strength K strength differenc
measuring torque and rpm. The measurements indicated that the best position for
) (cylindrica K(conical e
the placement of turbine is the bottommost position. The value of velocity head
l) basin)
increases with the increase in depth. Hence greater efficiency was noted at the
5 826.1 672.81 3.282E-04 4.030E-04 22.784%
bottommost position.
10 760.4 625.24 7.131E-04 8.672E-04 21.617%
15 697.7 579.53 1.166E-03 1.403E-03 20.391%
Similarly, the values of efficiency were greater for turbines with smaller number of
20 638 535.68 1.700E-03 2.024E-03 19.101% blades. There was a significant distortion of vortex even with smaller loads in case
25 581.3 493.69 2.332E-03 2.746E-03 17.746% of the turbine configuration with greater number of blades. Also, increase in the
30 527.6 453.56 3.083E-03 3.587E-03 16.324% radius of the blades decreases the efficiency of turbines. This is because of friction
35 476.9 415.29 3.980E-03 4.570E-03 14.835% at the inner surface of the basins.
40 429.2 378.88 5.053E-03 5.725E-03 13.281%
Strength comparison between the vortexes formed with conical and cylindrical
45 384.5 344.33 6.346E-03 7.086E-03 11.666%
basins shows that vortex formation was aided by conical basin. Use of conical
50 342.8 311.64 7.909E-03 8.700E-03 9.999% created a significant increase in vortex strength as shown in the vortex strength
55 304.1 280.81 9.807E-03 1.062E-02 8.294% comparison table. Tests of the same turbine on conical basin provided the
60 268.4 251.84 1.212E-02 1.292E-02 6.576% maximum efficiency of 29.63% which is significantly greater than the values
65 235.7 224.73 1.495E-02 1.568E-02 4.881% provided by all the tests on cylindrical basin. Hence it is preferable to use conical
basins for gravitational water vortex turbines.
70 206 199.48 1.843E-02 1.903E-02 3.268%
75 179.3 176.09 2.268E-02 2.309E-02 1.823%
It is also recommended that tests should be carried out by varying flow rates on a
80 155.6 154.56 2.788E-02 2.807E-02 0.673% different test rig and turbine fabrication should be carried out using better
85 134.9 134.89 3.417E-02 3.417E-02 0.007% materials for weight reduction and increase in structural strength.
90 117.2 117.08 4.164E-02 4.168E-02 0.102%
95 102.5 101.13 5.026E-02 5.094E-02 1.355%
100 90.8 87.04 5.972E-02 6.230E-02 4.320%
105 82.1 74.81 6.935E-02 7.611E-02 9.745%

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 61 62 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Mahadevan, K., & Reddy, K. B. (2011). Design Data Handbook For Mechanical
Bibliography Engineers.

Alexander, K. V. (2009). Axial-flow turbines for low head microhydro systems. Merryfield, F., & Mockmore, C. A. (1949). The Banki Water Turbine.
Renewable Energy , 34 (1), 35-47.
Mulligan, S., & Hall, P. (2010). Design and Optimization of Water vortex power
Asian Phoenix Resources Ltd. (2008). Use and care instructions for your new plant.
powerpal low head micro-hydroelectric generator. Victoria, Canada: Asian
Parker, G. J. (1993). A low head turbine for micro hydropower. RERIC
Phoenix Resources Ltd.
International Energy Journal , 15 (2), 137-146.
Bajracharya, T. R. (2013). Developing Innovative Low Head Water Turbine for
Ranatunga, S. &. (1991). Innovative micro plant for electricity generation in
Free-flowing Streams Suitable for Micro-hydropower in Flat (Flat regions)
remote areas. Australia: International Mechanical Engineering Congress.
Regions in Nepal. International Workshop on the Role of Microhydel for
Developing Countries. Kathmandu: NAM S&T Centre, New Delhi. Rao, G. J. (1986). Investigation on a hydraulic turbine with helical bladed runner
for micro power development. India: Indian Institute of Science.
Chaulagain, R. K. (2012). Development and Testing of Gravitational Water Vortex
Turbine. IOE. Razak, J. A. (2010). Razak, J. A., Alghoul, MApplication of crossflow turbine in
off-grid pico hydro renewable energy system. Cambridge, MA, USA.: American
Date, A. &. (2009). Design and cost analysis of low head simple reaction hydro
Conference on Applied Mathematics (AMERICAN-MATH 2010), Cambridge,
turbine for remote area power supply. Renewable Energy , 34 (2), 409-415.
MA, USA.
Demetriades, G. M. (1997). Design of low-cost propeller turbines for standalone
Singh, P. &. (2009). Experimental optimization of a free vortex propeller runner
micro-hydroelectric generation units. Nottingham: Ph.D., University of
for micro hydro application. Singh, P., & Nestmann, F. (2009). Experimental
Nottingham.
optimizatiExperimental Thermal and Fluid Science , 33 (6), 991-1002.
DTU-Development Technology Unit. (2010). Simple Low Head Microhydro
Smith, N. (1994). Motors as generators for micro-hydro power. London: UK,
Turbine. UK: University of Warwick.
ITDG Publishing.
Fox, R. W., Pritchard, P. J., & McDonald, A. T. (2008). Introduction to Fluid
Swissworld. (2012).
Mechanics. Wiley India.
(http://www.swissworld.org/en/switzerland/swiss_specials/green_technology/wate
Grewal, B. S. (2011). Numerical Methods. r_vortices_a_new_source_of_alternative_energy/). Retrieved December 15, 2012,
from
Harvey, A. (1993). Micro-hydro Design Manual. London: IT Publications. (http://www.swissworld.org/en/switzerland/swiss_specials/green_technology/wate
r_vortices_a_new_source_of_alternative_energy/)
Heitz, M. (1993). Design and construction of a small axial flow water turbine.
Unpublished B.A.Sc., The Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK. Upadhyay, D. (2004). Low head turbine development using computational fluid
dynamics. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.
Lal, J. (2009). Hydraulic Machines. Metropolitan Books.

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 63 64 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Williams, A. A. (Williams, A. A., Upadhyay, R., Demetriades, G. M., &2000).

Low head pico hydropower: A review of available turbine technologies. Brighton,
UK.

Williamson, S. J. (2011). Low head pico hydro off-grid networks. London, UK.:
LowEWB-UK National Research & Education Conference.

Zotloeterer. (2012). Willkommen. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from

http://www.zotloeterer.com/willkommen

Zotloterer. (2013). Retrieved December 2012, from Zotloterer website:

www.zotloterer.com

2014/RBESPA-1
 Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 65 66 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

APPENDIX I: PHOTOGRAPHS

Inspection of fabricated turbine

First turbine with six blades

Vortex hitting the blade of turbine.

Turbines with three and twelve blades

2014/RBESPA-1
Development and Testing of Runner and Conical Basin … 67 68 Research in Energy Systems Planing and Analysis

Tachometer Digital spring balance

Making the curvature of blade

On-site testing at Pepsicola On-site testing at Pepsicola

Testing of torque and speed (rpm)

2014/RBESPA-1