KATHMANDU UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PROJECT FINAL REPORT

ON

COMPUTATIONAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF AN ULTRA-LOW HEAD

TURBINE
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering

Submitted By:
Nischal Pokharel (42102)
Pradeep Parajuli (42098)
Pratik Koirala (42117)

July 2015
 © 2015
Nischal Pokharel
Pradeep Parajuli
Pratik Koirala
 Authorization

We hereby declare that we are the sole author of the project.

We authorize the Kathmandu University to lend this report to other institutions or

individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. We further authorize the Kathmandu
University to reproduce the thesis by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part,
at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research.

__________________ ____________________ ___________________

Nischal Pokharel Pradeep Parajuli Pratik Koirala

July 2015

ii
 CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL

Computational and Experimental Study of an Ultra-Low Head Turbine

by

Nischal Pokharel, Pradeep Parajuli, Pratik Koirala

This is to certify that we have examined the above project thesis and have found that it
is complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by
the report examination committee have been made.

_________________________________________
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ramesh Kumar Maskey
[Supervisor]
Department of Civil and Geomatics Engineering

_________________________________________
Associate Prof. Dr. Hari Prasad Neopane
[Supervisor]
Department of Mechanical Engineering

__________________________________________
Mr. Sailesh Chitrakar
[Co-supervisor]
Department of Mechanical engineering

_________________________________________
Associate Prof. Dr. Hari Prasad Neopane
HOD, Department of Mechanical Engineering

_________________________________________
External Examiner

July 2015

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our profound gratitude to our Project supervisor Dr. Ramesh
Kumar Maskey for extending our ideas and field of imagination and making us realize
to approach a project in such a way that it can be usable in any form or way. He has
always been supportive and provided us the idea of the models of the turbine and its
beneficiaries.
We are grateful to our next Supervisor Dr. Hari Prasad Neopane during the project
period for sharing his great enthusiasm for all things innovative, scientific and
engineering of the fluid system through the turbine.
We wish to express our heartfelt gratitude towards our Co-supervisor Mr. Sailesh
Chitrakar for his invaluable guidance and advice throughout the course of ANSYS.
Discussions and solutions relating to computational problems are greatly appreciated.
Mr. Pratisthit Lal Shrestha, our project coordinator is another person we would like to
thank for his suggestion, guidance and motivation in our works by giving weekly
feedback of our work. We are deeply indebted to his contributions in this project.
We can’t remain aloof from thanking Mr. Mahendra Man Sthapit and the whole
Technical Training Centre (TTC) team who facilitated to sort out the problem during
model preparation and the permit us to use the equipment and the machinery for the
model and setup preparation.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ ix
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................... xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS .................................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of study ............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Status and Current Research ................................................................................. 2
1.3 Objectives and scope of study .............................................................................. 4
1.3.1 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 4
1.3.2 Scope of study ................................................................................................ 4
1.4 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW: ULH OVERVIEW ........................................ 6
2.1 Structure of Ultra Low Head (ULH) Turbine ....................................................... 6
2.2 Operational Principles........................................................................................... 7
2.2.1 Force due to Hydraulic Pressure Difference .................................................. 9
2.2.2 Counter-acting Acceleration Force ................................................................ 9
2.2.3 Idealized Output Power ................................................................................ 10
2.2.4 Efficiency ..................................................................................................... 10
2.3 Demand for New Very Low Head Technology .................................................. 10
2.4 Hydropower Technologies for low head utilization ........................................... 11
2.4.1 Water wheel technologies ............................................................................ 11
2.4.2. Established Technologies: Turbines ........................................................... 12
2.4.3 Comparison of conventional turbines with Ultra Low Head turbine ........... 12
CHAPTER 3 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS .......................................... 14
3.1 Governing Equation ............................................................................................ 14
3.2 Finite volume method and finite element method .............................................. 15
3.3 Stages in CFD ..................................................................................................... 16

v
 3.4 Turbulence modeling .......................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER 4 NUMERICAL PROCESS AND RESULTS .......................................... 17
4.1 Design of the three different ULH turbine models in SolidWorks ..................... 17
4.2 Domain................................................................................................................ 19
4.3 Workflow ............................................................................................................ 19
4.3.1 Mesh Generation .......................................................................................... 20
4.3.2 Preprocessing ............................................................................................... 21
4.3.3 Solver Control .............................................................................................. 23
4.4 Simulation result ................................................................................................. 23
4.4.1 Streamline flow ............................................................................................ 24
4.4.2 Velocity Distribution .................................................................................... 26
4.4.3 Pressure distribution ..................................................................................... 26
4.4.4 Mesh independent test .................................................................................. 27
4.4.5 Torque comparison....................................................................................... 28
4.4.6 Conclusion drawn......................................................................................... 30
4.5 Optimization of curved profile ........................................................................... 31
CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTAL TESTING AND RESULTS.................................... 33
5.1 Model design and preparation............................................................................. 33
5.2 Canal setup design and preparation .................................................................... 34
5.2.1 Setup design ................................................................................................. 34
5.2.2 Setup preparation ......................................................................................... 34
5.3 Testing of the model ........................................................................................... 35
5.3.1 Instruments used........................................................................................... 35
5.3.2 Parameters measured .................................................................................... 36
5.4 Experimental test result ...................................................................................... 39
5.5 Model Scaling ..................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................ 41
6.1 Torque comparison ............................................................................................. 41
6.2 Power comparison............................................................................................... 41
6.3 Efficiency comparison ........................................................................................ 41

vi
 6.3.1 Flow Acceleration ........................................................................................ 42
6.3.2 Increase in revolution ................................................................................... 43
6.3.3 Leakage ........................................................................................................ 43
6.3.4 Turbulence.................................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ..................................... 44
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 45
APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................... 46
APPENDIX 2 ............................................................................................................... 47
APPENDIX 3 ............................................................................................................... 48
APPENDIX 4 ............................................................................................................... 49
APPENDIX 5 ............................................................................................................... 53

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Turbine Selection based on Head and Discharge [3] ................................... 1
Figure 1.2 Successive modification of turbine model ................................................... 3
Figure 2.1 Components of ULH turbine [3] .................................................................. 7
Figure 2.2 Showing pressure acting on a simple vertical plate [3] ................................ 8
Figure 2.3 Static pressure difference in Ultra low head turbine [3] .............................. 9
Figure 2.4 Variation of efficiency and power with discharge [4] ................................ 10
Figure 2.5 Water Jet direction of different type of waterwheel [3] ............................. 11
Figure 4.1 Rotating (left) and stationary (right) domain in Design Modeler .............. 19
Figure 4.2 Workflow of CFD for different turbine model ........................................... 20
Figure 4.3 Meshing in rotating (left) and stationary domain (right) ............................ 21
Figure 4.4 Setup of stationary and rotating domain .................................................... 22
Figure 4.5(a-c) Flow along straight, twisted and curve blade profile respectively ..... 25
Figure 4.6 Decrease in splash loss by the use of cover in canal .................................. 25
Figure 4.7 Increase in velocity of downstream flow ................................................... 26
Figure 4.8 Showing pressure and suction side of the curved blade ............................. 27
Figure 4.9 Graph of Element Size Vs Efficiency ........................................................ 28
Figure4.10 Variation of torque and power output for different profiles ...................... 30
Figure 4.11 Showing efficiency variation with blade angle ........................................ 32
Figure 5.1 Turbine model prepared at workshop ......................................................... 33
Figure 5.2 Complete set up for electricity generation using ULH turbine .................. 34
Figure 5.3 Complete test setup .................................................................................... 35
Figure 5.4 Measuring tape ........................................................................................... 36
Figure 5.5 Tachometer ................................................................................................. 36
Figure 5.6 Digital spring balance................................................................................. 36
Figure 5.7 Velocity measurement using floatation method ......................................... 37
Figure 5.8 Head difference between inlet and outlet ................................................... 37
Figure 5.9 Loading for stopping torque measurement................................................. 38
Figure 6.1 Level drop due to flow acceleration ........................................................... 42

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Comparison of hydropower technology with Ultra low head turbine ......... 12
Table 4.1 Showing features of different turbine model ............................................... 18
Table 4.2 Showing number of nodes and elements for different domains ................... 20
Table 4.3 Showing the boundary conditions ................................................................ 22
Table 4.4 Solver control for CFX solver ...................................................................... 23
Table 4.5 Variation of efficiency with decrease in element size .................................. 27
Table 4.6 Calculation of torque and efficiency in each model ..................................... 29
Table 5.1 Full scale estimation..................................................................................... 40

ix
 ABSTRACT

The challenge of the limited energy and the need of the time have motivated towards
the development of the small hydropower in the country like, Nepal. It’s obviously the
concerned thing to get noticed towards the utilization of the small level resources like
canals for the energy generation purposes. Viewing its capability in large scale, research
has been performed for the feasibility study of the usage of the Ultra-Low Head (ULH)
turbine for energy generation purpose in the unutilized site of our country Nepal. The
research result in the development of three model for the purpose of testing the working
principle of such turbine. The availability of the site with the low head in adequate
amount in our country signifies the positive feasibility towards its possible
development.
Despite the large possibility of the development it had been the essential thing to have
knowledge about the system of the profile of the blades required for the purpose of
efficiency. As the experimental testing for the optimization of the profile of the blades
had been rarely done and the analytical solution for this purpose had been the efficient
method of selection of the profile for the increased efficiency, the computational study
of the turbine with the blade profile of three types was adapted to find out the best one.
Flow simulation was performed in the 3D model of the turbine with different blade
profile using ANSYS CFX and the analysis of result on three profile shows the
preference of curved blade profile over both end twisted, one end twisted and the
straight one on the basis of streamline pattern, pressure contour and torque variation.
The new concept of the ULH has now got a direction for the actual practical physical
testing. The knowledge about the design specification was used for the fabrication of a
physical turbine model in order to test. The model was fabricated and assembled in the
canal that was made for the testing purpose. The experimental testing was successfully
completed and the result was analyzed and the comparison was done with the result
from the computational process. The successful analysis points towards the feasibility
of similar type of turbine in the industrial level.

x
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

cm centimeter
CV Control Volume
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
FVM Finite Volume Method
FEM Finite Element Method
gm gram
KE Kinetic Energy
kg kilogram
kW kilowatt
lps liter per sec
m meter
mm millimeter
MW megawatt
Nm Newton meter
PE Potential Energy
PVC Poly Vinyl Chloride
rad/s radian per second
rpm revolution per minute
TTC Technical Training Center
ULH Ultra-Low Head
W watt

xi
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

d1 Upstream water depth [m]

d2 Downstream water depth [m]
D Diameter of the hub [m]
FA Counter-acting acceleration force [Newton, N]
FP Force due to hydraulic pressure difference [Newton, N]
g Acceleration due to gravity [m/s2]
G Gap width between canal wall and turbine [m]
H Head of the turbine [m]
Lm Linear dimension of model [m]
Lp Linear dimension of prototype [m]
LR Scale factor -
Q Discharge [m3/s]
Qm Discharge for model [m3/s]
Qp Discharge for prototype [m3/s]
Pm Power output of model [Watt, W]
Pp Power output of prototype [Watt, W]
T Blade depth [m]
v1 Upstream velocity [m/s]
v2 Downstream velocity [m/s]
ω Angular velocity [rad/s]
ρ Density of water [kg/m3]
𝜏 Torque [Nm]

xii
 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of study

Hydropower is the exploitation of flowing water to generate electrical or mechanical
power. The source of water in the majority of cases is natural, ranging from streams
flowing down mountains to rivers and canals flowing along plains. Many countries had
already installed large scale and high output hydropower sites. The focus now has been
shifted in the installation of small hydropower, with power outputs beneath 10 MW [1].
The targeted sites for such activities are the sites with 'very low head' where the vertical
distance through which flowing water falls over structures or terrain is less than 5 m [1].
The research shows the usage of Pelton turbine under the high head of 50 m to 1500 m,
Francis turbine under the presence of high head and moderate discharge, Kaplan turbine
when we have low head and high discharge and cross flow turbine in case of moderate
head and moderate discharge [2].

Demand

Figure 1.1 Turbine Selection based on Head and Discharge [3]

But it has been found that the site with low head and the low discharge has not been
utilized in commercial level till now. It is found that people are unaware about the
potentiality of such a site. Thus concern now, is regarding the best use of low head and
low discharge running water in the rivers on which our project has been primarily
focused upon. It had always been the need of the time for the research of this kind as

1
our country Nepal possess adequate number of such a sites and we had been running
out in the limited supply of energy. The leading attempt of the remedy is the use of
Ultra-low head (ULH) Turbine to exploit the potentiality of such sites. ULH turbine is
simply the system that can exploit the sites of low head and low discharge for the
purpose of power generation. It has simple structure with limited Hydraulic and
Mechanical Components and can be installed in irrigation canal, navigation canal, and
waste-water treatment plant and also in the manmade water flowing system. It has been
now essential to get research on the blades profile along with the exploration for the
purpose of installation with the best efficiency. Though practical verification is the best
way it has been found to be time consuming and expensive. So the use of commercial
software ANSYS CFX tool for simulation and analysis process is important before the
actual operation of turbine as it helps to optimize the design according to flow velocities
and operation condition. Thus the project is focused on the simulation part for the
optimization of blade profile.

1.2 Status and Current Research

Few research has been in the field of ULH turbine till date. Such research has been
mainly localised in the country like Germany, Italy, U.K. where small rivers and canal
are present in abundant amount along with the successful installation. Focusing on the
optimization of the blades profile required for the best efficiency purpose, almost no
research had reached to the conclusion yet. Studying the effects of profile of the blades
of ULH turbine is an immature field and very little directly related research has been
performed to date. Information available in the open literature regarding the blades
system is mostly due to the fundamental research performed in University of
Southampton, U.K. by James A. Senior (till 2008) and some other University of
Germany and Italy. These studies are the results of ongoing efforts to improve the
performance and the efficiency of the turbine optimizing the profile of the blades
mounted in the hub. As no exact solution to the profile of the blades has been found yet
the research is still going which is based on computational and the experimental
analysis. Thus, the objective of our project was to find the best profile among different
blade profiles.

2
As mentioned in the previous chapter, the present research is primarily directed towards
the understanding of flow characteristics of ULH turbine with different blades profile
mounted on the hub at different time. It is believed that the parameters that affect the
efficiency of the turbine is mainly the profile of the blades as this ULH system possess
no other important parts affecting the efficiency than the blades.
In context of Nepal, large number of such sites are found distributed throughout the
country but no attempts were taken forward for the utilization. Research in this issue
was proved feasible but no any study was done in the field regarding to the profile of
the blades needed for efficient purpose.
Considering the presence of such a rivers and canal in large number in our country, it
was the demand of the time to develop a suitable model that can be installed in man-
made canals, irrigation canals, navigation canals and water treatment plant. Hence, steps
were taken forward for the development and improvement of such turbine. In first phase,
the development of the suitable turbine model was done for the purpose of testing the
theory and in second phase testing of the turbine making the test set up for the torque
measurement had been accomplished. Three models were prepared for the purpose of
testing of the working principle. The latter one was successfully tested to observe the
working of “Static Pressure Difference principle”.
Figure below shows the successive improvement in the turbine model.

Figure 1.2 Successive modification of turbine model

3
1.3 Objectives and scope of study
This portion contains objectives of our project and scope and limitations of our project.

1.3.1 Objectives
The main objective of this study was to inspect the profile of the turbine blades so as to
optimize the performance of the turbine by selecting suitable blade profile. In order to
achieve the main objective the following specific activities had been carried out during
the study period:
 Perform the simulation on the ULH turbine blade design and describe the flow
visualization thereby choosing the suitable optimized blade design in context of
efficiency.
 Fabrication of the turbine from thus obtained blade design referring to design criteria
as required for ULH turbine.
 Develop and build a test setup that can facilitate testing of the turbine for torque and
efficiency calculation.

1.3.2 Scope of study

Initially, attention was confined towards the simulation of turbine model with different
blade profiles to find out the best effective profile. The scope and limitation of our
project were:
 Flow Visualization through simulation in ANSYS CFX but no velocity triangle
analysis.
 Simulation on different blades profile done at varying angle but result of alteration
of angle other than 20 degree for testing purpose was beyond our study.
 The process of design optimization had been limited to blades profile only,
optimization of canal system was not in the scope while doing simulation.

4
1.4 Methodology
The method implemented in carrying out this project is discussed in the section below:
 Literature Review: Literature review was one of the most important parts of this
research. Only limited research paper in the field of ULH turbine are available and
no research paper of simulation of ULH turbine has been found. A lot of research
had been done in the simulation of the other type of turbine as a whole which had
been found very fruitful for the project. Adequate literature review was done before
starting the project and it continued along with the project works.
 SolidWorks Modeling: As per the design guide of the ULH turbine, model and set
up design was made on SolidWorks.
 Model and set up preparation: Physical model was prepared as per the design
made on SolidWorks using poly vinyl pipe. The attachment of the parts were done
using M-seal, nuts and bolts. Canal set up for fixing the physical model was built in
the workshop using available resources.
 Testing: The turbine was assembled with canal set up that had been built using
wooden plank and the test was performed in the irrigation canal located on the way
to the Khopasi hydropower. The requirement of the flow was maintained in that
canal and the testing was successfully done.
 Result Analysis: The result obtained from the experimental testing was be analyzed
and the comparison was done with the result from the computational process. The
stopping torque was calculated on the loaded condition to find out the power output
and the efficiency.

5
 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW: ULH OVERVIEW

This Chapter provides an introduction as to what ULH is and the principle behind its
operation and the demand that exists to exploit it. The aim of developing a novel and
viable technology that operates at very low head differences is justified, and the
principle requirements of this new technology are identified with the detail design
requirements. Also this parts describes the current hydropower technology that exists
for exploiting very low head hydropower.

2.1 Structure of Ultra Low Head (ULH) Turbine

Ultra-low head turbine is the simple in regards of the component it possess hydraulically
and mechanically. As it has only few component in it, it is believed that the parameters
that affect the efficiency of the turbine is mainly the profile of the blades as this ULH
system possess no other important parts affecting the efficiency than the blades. The
ULH has critically two components in it.
 Central hub: This is a horizontal cylinder which spans the width of the machine,
and hub diameter equal to the head of the site (H) upto 1.25*H [5]. The top of the
hub is level with or just above the upstream water surface and the bottom of the hub
is level with the downstream water surface.
 Blades: The blades are the surface on which the water’s energy is extracted. In the
ULH, they have almost same length as the diameter of the hub or head of the site
[1]. They extend radially from the hub, whilst twisting as they progress across the
width of the wheel. The blade can also be made airfoil in order to increase lift in the
turbine that increases the speed of the turbine.
Also depicted in figure 2.1 are the main components of the wheel support structure,
including:
 Shroud: This curved section of river bed ensures that at least one entire blade is
enclosed within a close fitting channel. This prevents any leakage flow of water
between and along the diagonally mounted blades, entering from beneath the wheel.

6
 Side walls: These not only provide a
mounting for the wheel’s bearings, but
also prevent any leakage flow of water
between the blades entering from the sides
of the wheel. Importantly, the side walls
do not extend up to the water surfaces or
along the entire length of the wheel.
Instead the sides of the wheel remain Figure 2.1 Components of ULH turbine [3]
exposed to allow water to enter the
compartments between the blades from the side of the wheel as well as the front.
They also allow air to ‘ventilate’ the compartments from the side of the wheel [3].
This process allows the water to drain from the compartments with ease once they
have reached the downstream.

2.2 Operational Principles

Among the various operating principles of the turbines, we are dealing with the theory
of operation of middle shot turbines, being one of the most effective and applicable too.
The ULH turbine and its channel bed have geometric similarities with stream wheels
and this has often created confusion. It is to be noted that no similarities exist in their
operation; a stream wheel extracts kinetic energy from fast flowing water by
decelerating it. Its blade speed is approximately equal to the velocity of the downstream
which is lesser than the upstream velocity. The ULH turbine also has a blade speed
approximately equal to the downstream velocity, which unlike the stream wheel is
greater than the upstream velocity.
The ULH turbine rotates because of forces generated on the blades as they pass
underneath the hub. The largest force is generated by the difference in hydraulic pressure
either side of the wheel, resulting from the dissimilar depths of water. This is partially
counteracted by a reaction force to the acceleration of the water as it is forced underneath
the hub, acting similar to a nozzle. These two forces are assessed below using the
following idealized model which illustrates the working principle namely “Static
Pressure Difference principle” [1].

7
Starting from first principles, the Pressure, P at a depth of water, h with density, ρ of
water, under the influence of gravity, g is:
P = hρg (1)

Figure 2.2 Showing pressure acting on a simple vertical plate [3]

Referring to the figure above, consider a simple vertical plate which separates two
dissimilar depths of water, d1 and d2. The triangles represent the hydrostatic pressure.
The forces on either side of this plate of width, W, are F1 and F2:
d1 2
F1 = ρg W (2)
2

d2 2
F2 = ρg W (3)
2

It can be seen that the force on the plate acting from the deeper water, F1, is greater than
that acting from the shallower water, F2, and the total force acting on the plate, F, is:
d2 2 −d2 2
F = ρg W (4)
2

If it is now imagined that the plate moves laterally with velocity, v, the power at the
plate, P, is:
d2 2 −d2 2
P = (ρg W) v (5)
2

The above example illustrates the most important principle behind the ULH operation:
that two dissimilar depths of water acting across a vertical plate result in a force from
which power can be extracted. In reality, it is not practical to have a vertical plate which
moves laterally and indefinitely. Instead it is proposed that the plates, or blades, are
mounted about an axle. This configuration adds additional complexity to the analysis as
the water must flow from the deeper side of the turbine to the shallower side.

8
 Figure 2.3 Static pressure difference in Ultra low head turbine [3]

2.2.1 Force due to Hydraulic Pressure Difference

Referring to Fig. 4, head difference between the upstream and downstream water levels
is d1 - d2. The flow rate Q and thus the speed v2 are proportional to the rotational speed
of the wheel. With the wheel stationary, both v1 and v2 equal zero. As the wheel starts
to rotate v2 becomes greater thanv1 , and in accordance with continuity we get
d
v2 = d1 v1 (6)
2

Assuming that 𝑣2 is achieved beneath the hub, this acceleration of the water leads to a
drop in water level by
(v22 −v21 )
Δdu = (7)
2g

The force on the blades due to the hydraulic pressure FP acting on the blade therefore
drops
(FP= Pressure × Area of blade, A):
Fp = ρg (d1 − d2 − Δdu )A (8)

2.2.2 Counter-acting Acceleration Force

The reaction force to the nozzle effect under the hub, FA is equal to the mass flow rate
times the acceleration. The acceleration is calculated assuming that the known velocity
change took place over length l equal to twice the diameter of the hub.
FA = Qρ(v2 − v1 ) (9)

9
2.2.3 Idealized Output Power
The idealized power output is the total force acting on the blade under the hub (FP – FA)
multiplied by its velocity:
Pout,ideal = (Aρg(d1 − d2 − Δdu ) − Qρ(v2 − v1 ) )v2 (10)

2.2.4 Efficiency
The idealized efficiency of the turbine is the ratio of ideal output power to input power,
as given below:
Pout Pout
η = = (11)
Pin (d1 −d2 )ρgQ

It has been shown that the head difference across the machine reduces with increasing
flow rate resulting from the acceleration of the water beneath the hub, which also results
in an inertial reaction force. As a result the efficiency of these machines is related to the
flow rate, as shown by Equation 11. This decreasing efficiency is plotted along with Pin
and Pout versus increasing flow rate in figure below, ULH operating with a constant head
difference between the upstream and downstream.

Figure 2.4 Variation of efficiency and power with discharge [4]

2.3 Demand for New Very Low Head Technology

Figure 1.1 revealed the current status of hydropower technology implemented in the
industrial level. Indicated on the graph, is the area of demand which must be targeted if
the power output and economics of very low head hydropower are to be improved. This
constitutes head differences under 5 m (range from 1 m in prototype) with flow rates

10
greater than 1 m3/s per unit. Although traditional waterwheels have been included to
implement in this sites no proper outcomes had been found recorded.
A close gazes on the country’s status signifies that we had adequate number of the sites
available throughout the country. Also the financial aspect and the geographical
condition highly favours the demand of very low head technology as implementation of
very low head technology excludes the need of the civil components and the highly
sophisticated mechanical parts. The financially feasible and technologically acceptable
technology of ULH turbine has been found to be demand of the time as it is independent
of the geography and can be employed in small sites possessing low head despite it may
be Terai or the hills.

2.4 Hydropower Technologies for low head utilization

Concerning about the low head utilization attention is always paid towards the
waterwheel technology. But if we reviewed the technological behind the power
generation many machine had been used differing in the operational principle to extract
the power from low head.

2.4.1 Water wheel technologies

Water wheel is the established technology from the ancient time to extract energy from
the flowing water. Three forms of waterwheel are commonly defined along with simple
explanations of their working principles. These are the undershot, overshot and middle-
shot (or breast-shot) waterwheels.

Figure 2.5 Water Jet direction of different type of waterwheel [3]

11
Undershot: The water enters beneath the wheel, which is predominantly driven by
impulse, resulting from a difference between the lower peripheral velocities of the wheel
and the faster velocity of the water.
Overshot: The water enters from above the wheel, which rotates in the opposite
direction to undershot and middle-shot waterwheels. These are predominantly driven by
the water's potential, resulting from gravity.
Middle-shot: The water enters around the same height as the axle. These require a
curved section of channel bed called a breast or shroud, and extract energy from the
water through impulse and potential, lowering the water through a vertical distance
under the influence of gravity.

2.4.2. Established Technologies: Turbines

Though the turbine system need complete civil structures and the developed mechanical
parts cross flow turbine and the Kaplan turbine and other small bulb turbine had been
used to extract low head differences in most of the sites.

2.4.3 Comparison of conventional turbines with Ultra Low Head turbine

Different types of turbine are used for the utilization of water resources on the basis of
head and discharge.
Table 2.1 Comparison of hydropower technology with Ultra low head turbine

Type of Working Working Range of Significant characteristics

turbine Principle Head range RPM
Pelton Impulse 50m to High rpm High speed water jet through a
1000m in 500 to 2000 nozzle hits buckets of Pelton
industrial wheel; it induces an impulsive
level force. This force makes the turbine
rotate.

12
Francis Reaction 40 to 600 m 83 to 1000 Working fluid comes to the
with turbine under immense pressure
moderate and the energy is extracted by the
discharge. turbine blades from the working
fluid. Both PE and KE extracted.
Cross Impulse 2-200m 200 to 1500 Numerous blades on a plate is
flow stroked by jet. twice sticking
Kaplan Reaction 2 to 75m 60-600 Similar to Francis but with low
head
Water Impulse or 1.75 to 22m 2(undershot) Either undershoot, middle shoot or
mills potential to 8 overshoot.
energy (overshot)
Bulb Reaction Usually 2m 100 to 400 Structure completely submerged
to 15m in water. All the component
connected within.
ULH Static 1 meter and 10 to 25 No civil components. Partial
pressure above with submerged to hub level.
difference low flow
rate

13
 CHAPTER 3 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS

This chapter deals with the theory of numerical analysis performed by CFD software in
ANSYS 15. This chapter also focuses on the governing equation, procedure, turbulence
modeling related to the project.

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is the branch of fluid dynamics providing a cost
effective means of simulating real flows by the numerical simulation of the governing
equations [4]. Such computational technique reduces the flow governing equations that
cannot be solved analytically into a system of algebraic equations that are much easier
to solve using computers. The main governing equation is the Navier- Stokes equation
which is replaced by computational techniques with the systems of algebraic equations
that are easier to solve. Hence it provides a cheaper means of full scale testing of fluid
flow systems even for the extremely difficult experiments [4]. Among different
commercial CFD packages, ANSYS 15 CFX was used in this project to compare the
flow through the different turbine models used in ultra-low head purposes in order to
choose high efficient blade profile.

3.1 Governing Equation

The governing equations include the various conservational laws of physics. The
principle of conservational law is the change of properties, for example mass, energy,
and momentum, in an object is decided by the input and output.
 Conservation of mass: It is also called continuity equation.
𝑑𝑀𝑠𝑦𝑠
=0 (12)
𝑑𝑡

 Newton’s second law: It is also called momentum equation.

The change of momentum equals the sum of forces on a fluid particle.
𝑑(𝑀𝑠𝑦𝑠 ∗𝑣 )
𝐹= (13)
𝑑𝑡

 First law of thermodynamics (conservation of energy): It is also called energy

equation.
Rate of change of energy equals the sum of rate of heat addition to and work done on
fluid particle.

14
 𝑑𝐸
=𝑄−𝑊 (14)
𝑑𝑡

Navier-Stokes equations are the governing equations of Computational Fluid Dynamics.

It is based on the conservation law of physical properties of fluid. The general Navier-
Stokes equation basically based on conservation of momentum which is
∂(ρū)
+ ∇. (ρūū) = −∇p + μ∇2 ū + ρfb (15)
∂t
∂ρ
+ ∇. (ρū) = 0 (16)
∂t

3.2 Finite volume method and finite element method

This method is quite a popular method in CFD as it is flexible, allows easier solution of
flow problems of complicated geometry. 80% of the commercially available CFD
program apply FVM as energy is always conserved [8]. The starting point is integral
form of conservation equations. The solution domain is subdivided into finite number
of contiguous control volumes (CVs), and the conservation equations are applied to each
CV. At the centroid of each CV lies a computational node at which the variable values
are to be calculated.

A
O 2
1

Figure 3.1 Finite Volume Discretization

As in above example, the volume is divided into 4 sub-volumes. The flux through the
internal subdivisions cancels out. That is, the flux going through boundary OA of
volume 1 is equal in magnitude and opposite in sign to the flux going through boundary
AO of volume 2. By working out the fluxes through all boundaries on each sub-volume
in terms of the field variable either at the volume center point or at the vertices, a system
of algebraic equations is constructed which can be solved for the unknown field
variables [6]. CFX uses FEM for the discretization into subdomains. In FEM,
discretized equation from FVM is multiplied by weighted function.

15
3.3 Stages in CFD
A CFD process includes three steps to be completed listed below:
i) Pre-processing: The governing equation to be solved is determined in this stage.
Also, the boundary conditions are specified and suitable computational domain is
specified. The input parameters depends on the output required and solver capacity.
ii) Solver: In the solver phase, the quality of an acceptance solution in terms of the
convergence criteria must be defined.
iii) Post processing: Post processing is to analyze the quality of the solution. Analysis
of the final simulation results gives information about flow, concentrations,
temperatures, pressure distribution, torque etc.

3.4 Turbulence modeling

Turbulent flows are characterized by fluctuating velocity fields in which there exist
small-scale and high-frequency fluctuations. An enormous amount of information is
required to describe turbulent flows and hence they are computationally expensive to
simulate in detail. Instead of simulating the exact governing equations, manipulation is
done to remove such small scale high frequency fluctuations, resulting in modified set
of equations that is computationally less expensive. Such modified equations contain
additional unknown variables that can be determined by turbulence model [9].
Among different types of inbuilt turbulence model in ANSYS CFX, we are using k-
epsilon model. It is most commonly used turbulence model. This model uses two new
variables, k and ε to define the turbulence viscosity. The relationship between turbulence
viscosity,  t and new variables is

k2
 t   c (17)

This turbulence model easily converges and can predict many flows.

16
 CHAPTER 4 NUMERICAL PROCESS AND RESULTS

The focus of the project, being mainly targeted to computational and experimental
analysis is initially confined to the simulation on various profile of the blades and
selection of suitable one through the analysis of the result. Thus it requires various steps
and methods in sequential order. Such analysis processes are technical and
computational, thus it becomes mandatory to perform the simulation task to view the
performance.

4.1 Design of the three different ULH turbine models in SolidWorks

As the selection of suitable blade profile with appropriate blade number and appropriate
blade inclination with the hub axis has been the prime objectives of the project, at first
three different turbine model were designed in SolidWorks. All of which were later
performed CFD analysis. The design of the blades in relation with the hub is controlled
by the design guide for the best flow. Appendix 1 shows the design guide and the
procedure of the design of the turbine system. Three models were straight, twisted and
curved blade profile one. The former two are the existing design whereas the latter one
is selected as it resembles the blade configuration similar to the cross flow turbine and
the curved profile may create enough pressure difference generating the concept of lift
too. The three model of the turbine differ from each other in the manner of blade
configuration mounted on the hub. These models were computationally analyzed for
flow visualization and the comparison of the performance was made through pressure
and velocity distribution, torque variation and efficiency calculation. The consecutive
design of domains and models with the feature is summarized below.

17
Table 4.1 Showing features of different turbine model

S.N. Profile SolidWorks design Features

Design Straight  Rotor consists of hub tube to

1 blade which 8 blades are attached
profile forming an assembly free to
model spin along its axis.
 Hub diameter = 9 cm
 Blade width/ height = 8 cm
 Angle of blades = 200 with hub
axis
Design Twisted  Similar to straight one in
2 blade dimension except the blades are
profile twisted on both ends.
model  Difference appears in the
profile of blades that the aim of
generating the concept of the
lift, smooth fluid motion and
less vibration.
Design Curved  The length of hub and the
3 blade length of blade almost equal to
profile above.
model  The blade is of curved profile
having same radius as of hub
that favors the streamline flow.

18
4.2 Domain
Domain is the area of analysis over which the flow of fluid is discretized and computed.
In this project two fluid domains necessary for fluid flow were designed on SolidWorks,
stationary and rotating domains being the two domains required for computation. The
former is the one over which the fluid flows and latter is the one over which the model
rotates.

Figure 4.1 Rotating (left) and stationary (right) domain in Design Modeler

The rotating domain of radius 13.5 cm and extrude thickness of 15 cm was made using
the Boolean (subtract) command. Similarly, the stationary domain of 150 cm was
imported in the Workbench Design Modeler.

4.3 Workflow
Figure below shows the complete workflow of the simulation process. This includes
importing of separate domain for rotating and stationary components in Design Modeler.
These imported components were then discretized to generate small units in ANSYS CFX
Meshing. The meshing of rotating and stationary domain were then combined to give
compete setup meshing. The set up was prepared in CFX preprocessor, then problem was
solved in CFX solver and finally the result was analyzed in post processing. Figure below
shows the workspace of steady state simulation.

19
 Figure 4.2 Workflow of CFD for different turbine model

4.3.1 Mesh Generation

The domain creation in workflow process was then followed by meshing process in
Workbench Meshing. For this, physics preference was set as CFD and solver preference
as CFX. Both the domains were meshed with advanced features being turned off. Hex
dominant meshing was done on both the domains. The rotating domain of each of the
turbine model was meshed with element size 0.004 m whereas the stationary domain
was meshed with element size 0.005 m with free face mesh type set to “All
Quadrilaterals”. The table below shows the number of nodes and elements resulted from
meshing.
Table 4.2 Showing number of nodes and elements for different domains

S.N Types of Types of domain Number of Nodes Number of Elements

turbine
models
1. Straight Stationary 280852 272132
Rotating 144535 172988
2. Twisted Stationary 280852 272132
Rotating 141967 174721
3. Curve Stationary 294614 282302
Rotating 159242 191413

20
Figure below shows the hex dominant meshing in both domain type with enlarged view.

Figure 4.3 Meshing in rotating (left) and stationary (right) domain

4.3.2 Preprocessing
The preprocessing was done in CFX PRE where initial and boundary conditions for the
flow are defined with analysis type set to steady state.

4.3.2.1 Domains
Two different fluid domains were inserted; rotating and stationary. As multiphase
domain is to be created, fluid and particle definitions was inserted with fluid 1 being
water and fluid 2 being air at 250C.
The domain motion for rotating domain was changed to rotating type with angular
velocity set to 12 rpm in anticlockwise direction. Different boundaries were inserted in

21
the rotating domain. Eight different blades were marked as boundary with boundary
type as wall and frame type as rotating. The designation of blade was given for the ease
of torque calculation by summing up all torques obtained from each blades.
The domain motion for stationary domain was given stationary type. Inlet and outlet
boundaries were inserted. At interface, frame change was set to frozen rotor with pitch
ratio value of 1. Figure below shows the set up in CFX-Pre.

Figure 4.4 Setup of stationary and rotating domain

4.3.2.2 Boundary conditions

The inlet boundary condition for the stationary domain was set to bulk mass flow rate
with flow direction normal to boundary condition. Similarly, outlet condition was set to
static pressure. The complete boundary condition is inserted in the table below.
Table 4.3 Showing the boundary conditions
Turbulence model k-Epsilon
Inlet condition for stationary domain
Bulk mass flow rate 6 kg per sec
Fluid values Water = 1, Air at 25oC = 0
Outlet condition for stationary domain
Static pressure 1 atm
Opening condition in rotating domain
Opening Pressure and Direction 1 atm
Fluid values Water = 0, Air at 25oC = 1

22
This selection of the turbulence model k-Epsilon was made because such model offers
great analysis in fully developed flow, easy to implement and is suitable for initial
iterations, initial screening of alternative designs, and parametric studies.

4.3.3 Solver Control

The convergence control and convergence criteria that are defined in this phase is shown
below.
Table 4.4 Solver control for CFX solver
Convergence control
Minimum iteration 1
Maximum iteration 300
Convergence criteria
Residual type RMS
Residual target 1.E-4

4.4 Simulation result

This section deals with the actual comparison of the parameter for the selection purpose
of the blade profile on the basis of the result of the CFX analysis. The flow distribution
along the flow path form inlet to the outlet along with the variation of the pressure at
the different point of the turbine is also interpreted in this section. Also, torque variation
in each of the blades of each turbine was noted down in order to calculate the total power
output that is used to calculate the efficiency for each model. Viewing the flow pattern
in each model, pressure variation in pressure and suction side and comparing the
efficiency calculated, a suitable blade profile was chosen.

23
4.4.1 Streamline flow
Focus was concentrated on the volumetric losses that could minimize the efficiency of
the model. Also, flow pattern was viewed to check the turbulence of the outlet flow that
could also be the hindrance for the larger power output. The figure below shows the
fluid flow pattern in each of the turbine model.

a)

b)

24
 c)
Figure 4.5(a-c) Flow along straight, twisted and curve blade profile respectively

The streamline flow in different model has discharge loss as above when the flow just
strikes the turbine blades. This splash loss can be decreased by making the cover in the
canal i.e. stationary domain. This decrease in splash loss is shown in figure below which
directly aids to the efficiency. As obtained from figure the loss is smaller in curved one
whereas larger in twisted one. The larger loss in the twisted profile is due to the
oppositely twisted blade on two ends due to which streamline tends to rotate the model
in clockwise direction at far end.

Figure 4.6 Decrease in splash loss by the use of cover in canal

25
4.4.2 Velocity Distribution
The resulting solution of the CFX analysis shows the increment of the velocity at outlet
that matches our theoretical concept. From the simulation, the velocity of water when it
just strikes the turbine model is about 0.436 m/s which is quite less as compared to 1.744
m/s when it just leaves the turbine. The reason behind this outcome is the decrease in
the cross-sectional area form inlet to outlet as the turbine in the intermediate is playing
the role of the nozzle.

Figure 4.7 Increase in velocity of downstream flow

4.4.3 Pressure distribution

The analysis result of the CFX shows that the pressure is largest at the blade profiles
facing towards the upstream of the flow. The pressure was found to be 1.026e+005 Pa
at the side of the blade facing the upstream water. Similarly, the pressure on the back
side of the blade was found to be 1.023e+005 on average for the curved blade. This
matches with the theoretical concept. The reason for greater pressure is low velocity at
upstream and the dominancy of static force.

26
 Figure 4.8 Showing pressure and suction side of the curved blade

4.4.4 Mesh independent test

It is the test required to show the simulation is independent of further decrease in
meshing size i.e. the efficiency of the simulation does not vary by much if it is mesh
independent. For this, simulation was done by decreasing the element size from 7 mm
in the interval of 0.5 mm. And, the set-up is found to be mesh independent for size 5
mm. The error percentage is calculated:
present reading−previous reading
Error (%) = ∗ 100% (12)
previous reading

Discharge given, Q= 6 lps

Power input = 3.532 W
Table 4.5 Variation of efficiency with decrease in element size

Element size Torque obtained Power Efficiency Error

S.N. (mm) (Nm) output(W) (η) (%)
1 7 2.225 2.797 79.198 -
2 6.5 2.295 2.885 81.694 3.15
3 6 2.36 2.966 83.989 2.81
4 5.5 2.42 3.042 86.137 2.557
5 5 2.44 3.067 86.836 0.811
6 4.5 2.454 3.0846 87.03 0.223

27
Conclusion drawn:
On comparing the efficiency obtained for different elemental sizes, the error obtained
for elemental size 5 mm was within the tolerance limit (i.e. error less than 1 %), hence
the solution was said to be independent of mesh resolution.

Mesh independent test

88 87.03 86.836
87 86.137
86
Efficiency (η)

85 83.989
84
83 81.694
82
81
80 79.198
79
78
4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
Element size (mm)

Figure 4.9 Graph of Element Size Vs Efficiency

4.4.5 Torque comparison

The efficiency of the turbine is the result of the torque produced in the direction along
the axis of rotation of the turbine. The comparable parameter for the selection of the
blades profile for the best efficient purpose is thus directly depending on the torque. The
torque produced by the turbine with the straight, twisted and the curved blade profile
was compared as it was one of the criteria for the selection of suitable blade profile. The
calculation for the torque of the turbine was done by summing up the torque produced
by each blades mounted on the hub and the hub itself. The torque produced was then
used for the calculation of the efficiency by multiplying it with the angular velocity to
get power output.

28
The tabular comparison of the torque and the efficiency can be summarized as:
Table 4.6 Calculation of torque and efficiency in each model

Profile of the blade

Straight Twisted Curved

Torque Blade 1 0.712 0.512 0.915

acting Blade 2 0.1325 0.134 0.292
on Blade 3 0.0035 0.005 0.0007
different Blade 4 0.0025 0.0035 0.0005
blades Blade 5 0.0046 0.0056 0.0166
along Blade 6 0.003 0.002 0.001
hub axis Blade7 0.65 0.25 1.04
(Nm) Blade 8 0.223 0.123 0.174
Hub 0.002 0.001 0.003
Torque (Nm)
1.736 1.036 2.445
Power (W)
2.182 1.302 3.074
Efficiency 61.78 % 36.87 % 87.03 %

The result obtained showed that the curved profiled turbine with efficiency 87.03% is
the best one in comparison with straight blade and twisted. The efficiency of straight
blade turbine and twisted blade turbine were 61.78% and 36.87% respectively. The
torque and power output variation of straight, twisted and curved blade profile are given
below.

29
 Torque and power output variation
3.5 3.074
3
2.445
2.182

Value
2.5
2 1.736
1.5 1.302
1.036
1
0.5
0
straight twisted curved
Blade profile

Torque (Nm) Power output (W)

Figure 4.10 Variation of torque and power output for different profiles
Figure showed that the curved blade profile produced highest torque as compared to
other profile and as a result power production is also maximum.

4.4.6 Conclusion drawn

The result obtained is quite satisfactory as it matches with theoretical concept of impacts
of free jets on different profiled blades. The curved profile blade is best one as it has
high pressure side to impinge the flow and low pressure side to increase velocity of
water. The straight profile is less efficient because it has no high pressure and low
pressure side but has uniform cross section. Also, the variation, if occurs is quite less
nearly equal to about 100 Pa as compared to 300 Pa that occurs in curved blade profile.
The twisted profile blade is least efficient amongst three because of varying high
pressure side and low pressure side along the same face of the blade profile. Thus,
viewing the pressure variation in the blade profiles and torque obtained from the
simulation process, curved blade profile is selected as best blade profile for the ULH
turbine.

30
4.5 Optimization of curved profile
For optimizing the performance of the curved profile, simulation was done by varying
the blade angle along the hub surface, changing the number of blade. The angle of the
blade with respect to hub axis was changed and efficiency for the corresponding angle
was calculated. The table below shows the value of efficiencies at different blade angles.
Table 4.7 Variation of parameters with respect to blade angle

S.N 15 degree 18 degree 20 degree 22 degree 25 degree

Torque Blade 1 0.6025 0.7429 0.9148 0.7436 0.5498

acting Blade 2 0.2374 0.2012 0.2923 0.1717 0.1392
on Blade 3 0.901 0.9496 0.0007 0.8214 0.575
different Blade 4 0.0005 0.0018 0.0005 0.00004 0.0032
blades Blade 5 0.0011 0.0069 0.0166 0.0203 0.027
along Blade 6 0.0011 0.002 0.0010 0.0005 0.0014
hub axis Blade 7 0.0002 0.0021 1.0424 0.0004 0.0001
(Nm) Blade 8 0.361 0.302 0.1738 0.2199 0.1463
Hub 0.0017 0.0012 0.0032 0.0018 0.0063
Total torque 2.1065 2.2098 2.4454 1.98 1.4483
Power output 2.648 2.777 3.0738 2.4887 1.8205
Efficiency (%) 74.969 78.645 87.029 70.462 51.544

Torque for each blade at different angles was obtained. It was then used to calculate the
efficiency. This variation in efficiency is shown below in figure.

31
 Variation of efficiency with blade angle

100
87.029
80 74.969 78.645

Efficiency
70.462
60
51.544
40
20
0
15 18 20 22 25
Blade Angle
Figure 4.11 Showing efficiency variation with blade angle
The above figure shows the blade angle of 200 has highest efficiency among others
which is in accordance to ULH turbine for other blade profile as ULH turbine with
straight blade is best efficient for 200 [2]. Lesser the blade angle below 200, the depth of
downstream flow cannot be maintained to up-to hub diameter on regular basis, hence
desirable head could not be achieved. Greater the blade angle above 200, the condition
of turbulence may occur and state of stall may arise.

32
 CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTAL TESTING AND RESULTS

The experimental data required for comparing the result of simulation is obtained from
the physical testing of the scaled down prototype. A scaled down model following
geometric, kinetic and dynamic similarity was be prepared in the workshop and the
testing procedure was facilitated by the preparation of setup canal for testing in reduced
discharge. The experimental setup includes turbine model, canal preparation and
measuring equipment while required to measure different parameters while testing. The
setup preparation and testing procedure is explained below:

5.1 Model design and preparation

In order to fulfil the aim of the project, i.e. to compare the performance of full scale
ULH turbine to the simulation result, a model unit was designed and set up was then
tested in sufficient condition required for the testing. For the testing of curved turbine
model, turbine model preparation was done initially. For this, first poly vinyl pipes were
cut into desired shapes for hub and blade preparation. Then slots were cut on the hub in
order to attach the blade profile. After getting desired blade profiles, they were attached
to the slots of the hub using M-seal. This model was then attached to the shaft by using
nuts and bolts.

Figure 5.1 Turbine model prepared at workshop

33
5.2 Canal setup design and preparation
This section consists of the details of canal setup design and its preparation in the
workshop.

5.2.1 Setup design

The design of the set up for the testing of the model was made on Creo Parametric 2.0.
The canal set up consists of wooden planks with bearings to be fitted with the shaft
attached to the turbine hub. Figure below shows the complete design of the set up for
the testing purpose.

Spring
balance

Load

Figure 5.2 Complete set up for electricity generation using ULH turbine

5.2.2 Setup preparation

The canal setup was built in TTC using plywood. Hinges were provided in the inlet to
form a door like structure in order to overcome the varying discharge. Also, the same
structure was made at outlet too to make optimized canal system that decreases the
energy loss by reducing the outlet velocity. A small pulley was attached to the shaft in
order to measure load that could stop the rotating turbine by using spring balance. The

34
load measured was used to calculate the stopping torque owing to its distance between
its application and pulley axis.

Figure 5.3 Complete test setup

5.3 Testing of the model

The model prepared was attached to the canal setup. The complete setup was then tested
in an irrigation canal on the way to “Khopasi”. Different parameters like velocity of the
water flowing, width, depth of the canal, head difference etc. were measured by using
different instruments.

5.3.1 Instruments used

Instruments like measuring tape, tachometer and spring balance were used to measure
the aforementioned parameters.

35
5.3.1.1 Measuring tape
A measuring tape is a common measuring tool
that acts like flexible ruler. Its design allows for
a measure of great length easily. It was used to
measure the distance between two fixed points
while measuring the velocity of the flowing
water. Figure 5.4 Measuring tape

4.3.1.2 Tachometer
A tachometer is an instrument used for measuring the rotational
speed of a shaft or disk, as in a motor or other machine. This
device usually displays the rotational speed in terms
of revolutions per minute (RPM). In our case, it is used to
measure the rotational speed of the hub.
Figure 5.5 Tachometer

5.3.1.3 Spring balance

A spring scale or spring balance is a type of weighing scale. It
consists of a spring fixed at one end with a hook to attach an object
at the other. We have used a digital spring balance to measure the
load that stopped the rotating turbine. From the load measure,
stopping torque was calculated in order to find out the efficiency.

Figure 5.6 Digital spring balance

5.3.1.4 Scale
Scale is used to measure the upstream and downstream level of the water. The difference
in level gives the head difference required for the input power.

5.3.2 Parameters measured

Parameters like velocity, width, depth etc. were measured to calculate the discharge.
Also upstream and downstream level were measured to find out the head difference
provided.

36
5.3.2.1 Discharge calculation
At first, velocity of the flowing water was measured using the flotation method. For this,
a plastic bottle (filled 2/3rd portion with water) was released to flow with water stream.
Two points were marked and time taken by the bottle to reach final point from initial
point was noted down. Figure below shows the marked points for the floatation method.

Figure 5.7 Velocity measurement using floatation method

From the calculation, the discharge obtained was 6.385 lps. Detailed calculation for the
discharge is shown in appendix 5.

5.3.2.2 Head measured

The difference in upstream and downstream level was measured using scale. The head
difference was found to be 5 cm.

Outlet Inlet

Figure 5.8 Head difference between inlet and outlet

37
5.3.2.3 Revolution measured
The rotational speed of the turbine was measured using tachometer. The rotational
speed was found to be 15 rpm.

5.3.2.4 Stopping torque calculation

A spring balance was used to measure the load that could stop the rotating turbine. From
the load measured owing to the distance of its application, stopping torque was
calculated in order to find out the efficiency.

Figure 5.9 Loading for stopping torque measurement

The spring balance measurement was found to be 0.91 kg. Thus, the stopping torque
obtained was 1.28 Nm.

38
5.4 Experimental test result
From the experiment, following date were noted down
 Discharge = 6.385 lps
 Head difference = 0.05 m
 No. of revolution = 15 rpm
 Load applied, mweight = 2 kg
 Spring balance reading, mcounterweight = 0.91 kg
From the above data, calculation of power input, power output and efficiency was done.
 Angular velocity= 1.571 rad/s
 Power input, Pin = 3.132 W
 Power out, Pout =2.016 W
 Efficiency, ղ= 64.36 %
The power output is calculated by using the formula,
Pout = ( mweight − mcounterweight ) ∗ g ∗ r ∗ 2π ∗ f (18)
The load that is applied to the pulley to stop the rotating turbine is mweight and the spring
balance reading is mcounterweight.
The value of 64.36 % is satisfactory as most of the ULH turbine (mainly straight blade
and twisted blade profile) installed in different parts of the world have efficiency quite
similar to this value.

5.5 Model Scaling

It refers to the theory and art of predicting prototype conditions from model observation.
Various experimental tests can be conducted on the scale down model and similitude
concept can be used to relate with the large prototype. For e.g. for a prototype of hub
diameter 1 m, a scaled down model can be prepared. Scaling down of the prototype is
important to reduce the time consumption and to ease the computational processing in
normal computers. It is difficult to simulate with the actual condition in CFD. The
performance of model can later be assumed to predict the performance of the prototype.

39
For the testing where flow occurs through open channels and where gravitational force
is most significant Froude number governs the dynamic similarity. From the
equivalence of Froude number
Vm Vp
= (19)
√gLm √gLp

Scale factor of model and prototype is

Lm
= LR (20)
Lp

Thus,
Scale factor for discharge is
Qm
= L2.5
R (21)
Qp

Scale factor for power is

Pm
= L3.5
R (22)
Pp

Power output can also be calculated for different specified discharge by using scale ratio
as below.
Pm Qm
= LR ∗ (23)
Pp Qp

Table 5.1 Full scale estimation

S.N Head difference, Hub diameter, Discharge, Power output,

m m m3/s kW
1. 0.05 0.1 0.00638 0.002016
2. 0.25 0.5 0.356 0.56
3. 0.5 1 2.01 6.375
4. 0.75 1.5 5.49 25.89
5. 1 2 11.42 72.12

The table for different prototypes shown above gives good approximation. Under 1 m
head difference we can get approximate output power of 72 kW but the thing is we need
plenty of discharge for that case. But instead of such large power generation, we can
play on discharge of the site, and design turbine from discharge point of view, rather
than head.

40
 CHAPTER 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From the simulation result, viewing pressure variation and torque obtained for different
models, curved model was found to be best efficient one with efficiency percentage of
87.03 %. The testing result shows the acceptance of curved model with efficiency
percentage of 64.36 % as leakage accounts for 8 – 10% of efficiency value, although it
has a negligible effect once rotor speeds reach peak power and above [10]. Here is the
comparison of different parameters from simulation and experimental testing result.

6.1 Torque comparison

From the simulation, the torque was calculated by summing up the torque on each blade
and the hub. The torque obtained was more for curved blade profile than the other two
profiles. The greater torque is due to the profile that favors the streamline flow and gives
rise to the concept of lift that tends to rotate the turbine along the hub axis. The overall
torque obtained was 2.445 Nm for 6 lps discharge. Similarly, the torque obtained from
the experimental testing is as a result of the load applied and counterweight obtained
from the spring balance reading. As a result, the torque obtained was 1.283 Nm for
discharge of 6.385 lps. This difference in torque output is due to the several problem
that occurred while model testing like leakage loss, bearing loss etc.

6.2 Power comparison

The power obtained from the simulation was 3.074 W. This was obtained by multiplying
the torque obtained and angular velocity of the rotating domain which is 12 rpm. While
testing, the output power was found to be 2.016 W for the angular velocity of 15 rpm.
Though the angular velocity is greater, power output is less due to lesser torque obtained
from the testing owing to different losses that occur during the testing.

6.3 Efficiency comparison

Efficiency was calculated owing to the output power. Model tests showed that the
efficiency of the machine was 64.36 % as compared to 87.03 % obtained from the
computational analysis. We can observe little deviation of efficiency of testing from that

41
obtained from the simulation. The deviation of testing efficiency from the computational
efficiency can be viewed by calculating the error percentage as below:

ηtesting −ηsimulation
Error (%) = ∗ 100% = 26.05 %
ηsimulation

This deviation in the efficiencies is mainly due to:

6.3.1 Flow Acceleration

Flow accelerates as it passes into the machine from v1 to v2 resulting in a loss of head
and therefore force available for power extraction. Since there will be nozzle effect due
to decrease in the cross-sectional area of flow, the velocity at the outlet had been
increased. This increase in velocity case counteracting force to increase more than
significantly cause to decrease efficiency as per expectation.

Expected level drop

Inlet

Outlet
V2’>V2
Actual level drop

Figure 6.1 Level drop due to flow acceleration

As it can be seen from the figure that the expected drop in level is small compared to
actual drop. This actual drop was increased due to increase in counteracting force that
was cause due to increase of outlet velocity than expected.(i.e v2’>v2, where v2 is
expected and v2’ is actual).

42
6.3.2 Increase in revolution
The desired rpm in our computational analysis was 12 rpm but the experimental testing
shows the increase of rpm to 15.This increase in rpm also compensated in the decrease
in the efficiency that was observed from the simulation.

6.3.3 Leakage
Clearance gap was present in between the turbine system and the blades. This clearance
gap had been proved one of the spot of leakage. Not only in the setup apparatus the
leakage had been experienced in the testing sites also as there was flow of water beyond
the canal system through the gap present between the canal entry and the water flowing
canal walls. This leakage from the walls cause slight volumetric loss. This volumetric
loss cause greater impact in efficiency of system and power output.

6.3.4 Turbulence
Turbulent losses are caused by both the disturbance of flow as it passes through the
machine and the difference in behaviour of a real liquid compared with the ideal fluid
considered in the analysis. For simplicity, it is assumed that these turbulence losses
result in a force applied to the area of the blade in the opposite direction to rotation.

The difference in simulation and experimental testing result is mainly due to no leakage
loss in ANSYS CFX. Also, there may exists error in the measurement like measured
head errors, flow rate measurement errors etc. Water level readings contain potential
errors due to reference level setting, scale resolution and difficulties in making readings
in turbulent flow conditions. All these factors account for about 2% of measured head
error. Also, flow rate measurements are likely to contain errors of around 5% for
carefully conducted experiments under good conditions [10]. The leakage error can be
minimized by using the labyrinth seal between blades and side plates. Though there may
exists certain errors, these errors could be minimized in prototype building and testing
and larger amount of power output is expected as indicated by the model scaling table.

43
 CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

ULH turbine is a novel energy converter for very low heads below 5 m. Theory and
practical analysis suggests that it is driven directly by the pressure difference between
two dissimilar depths of water on either side of the installation. CFD analysis in three
different profile of the blades showed that curve blade profile is best suitable in the case
of ULH turbine among straight, twisted and the curve. The best angle between hub and
the blades was found to be 20 degree. This result can also be compared to the theory of
impacts of free jets on different profiled plates which says that curved profiled plates
are the best one in context of efficiency. The theory of impact of free jets also says that
curved profiled plates are the best one in context of efficiency. Further validation of the
result was provided by grid independent test. The results were obtained using only k-
epsilon model; the further work can be done in different turbulence modeling to achieve
different results.
The experimental testing was satisfactory. There was reasonable deviation in efficiency
and the output power generated by the turbine was 2 W. Model test showed that the
efficiency of the machine was 64.36 % and scaling of the model data suggests that power
output of 6 kW can be generated for hub diameter of 1 m. Prevention of leakage and
removal of setup flaws can produce high quality result.
This is just the initiation of research as it is new concept for Nepal. The research up to
here only concerns about the mechanical efficiency of the turbine. The research for
electrical power generation for this turbine can still be topic of interest for near future.
The turbine was made with PVC pipe. But for the manufacturing concern, the other
materials can be taken. For the students interested in low head turbines, if we are able
to set up universal test rig for this type of turbine, the research would be quite easier.

44
 REFERENCES

[1] Senior, J., Wiemann, P., & Muller, G. “The rotary hydraulic pressure machine for
very low head hydropower sites”, University of Southampton, U.K.
[2] Harvey, A, & Brown, A (1992). Micro-Hydro Design Manual.Stockholm: ITDG
Publishing.
[3] WIEMANN, P. (2006) Neue wirtschaftliche und technische Möglichkeiten der
Stromerzeugung durch innovative Kleinwasserkraftwerke (New economic and
technical possibilities for energy generation with innovative small hydropower
converters, in German), Diplomarbeit, Universität Kalsruhe/ University of
Southampton.
[4] Sayma, A. (2009) Computational Fluid Dynamics.Abdulnser sayma & Venus
Publishing Aps.
[5] Andersson, B.& Co.( 2012) Computational Fluid Dynamics for Engineers,
Cambridge University Press.
[6] Ferziger, H.&Peric,M,.(2002) Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics.3rd, rev.
edition.
[7] Rygg, J.( 2013) CFD Analysis of a Pelton Turbine Using OpenFoam,NTNU.
[8] Bakker, A. (2002) "Solution Methods, Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics.
[9] Bakker, A. (2006) "Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics," Fluent Inc.
[10] Müller, G. & Kauppert, K. (2004), “Performance Characteristics of water wheels”,
Journal of Hydraulic Research, 42, 451 -460.

45
 APPENDIX 1
Design basis of turbine model during simulation
 Head of the turbine model, H = 6 cm = 0.06 m
 Hub diameter, D = 1.65*H = 1.65*6 = 10 cm = 0.1 m
 Blade width = 0.9*D = 0.889*10 = 9 cm = 0.09 m
 Length of the model, L = 1.5*D = 1.5*10 = 15 cm = 0.15 m
 Rotational speed = 12 rpm (anticlockwise)

46
 APPENDIX 2
Efficiency calculation
 Input power, Pin = ρgQH = 1000 ∗ 9.81 ∗ 0.006 ∗ 0.06 = 3.532 W
 Output torque is calculated as,
Torque, τ = summation of torque on each blade and hub
For curved blade profile, output torque is obtained as
τout = 2.445 Nm
 Output power is calculated by multiplying output torque with angular velocity
12
Angular velocity, ω = 2π ∗ f = 2π ∗ = 1.257 rad/s
60
Thus, output power is
Pout = τout ∗ ω = 2.445 ∗ 1.257 = 3.07 W
 Efficiency calculation for curved blade profile
Pout 3.07
η= = = 87.03 %
Pin 3.532

47
 APPENDIX 3
Mesh independent test
 Error calculation:

present reading − previous reading

Error (%) = ∗ 100%
previous reading
Error calculation for element size 5 mm with respect to 5.5 mm,
86.836 − 86.137
Error (%) = ∗ 100% = 0.81 %
86.137

48
 APPENDIX 4
Design of model

49
Design of shaft

50
Design of canal

51
Design of spring balance stand

52
 APPENDIX 5

Testing of the model

 Discharge measurement
Calculation of velocity of the water flowing is done
Distance taken, D= 3 m
Time (sec), t1 = 9.53; t2 = 9.64; t3 = 9.58; t4 = 9.48; t5 =9.68
Average time = 9.582 sec
Thus,
3
Velocity of flowing water, v = = 0.313 m/s
9.582

Width = 0.17 m
Depth (Average) = .12 m
Discharge, Q = A ∗ v = (0.17 ∗ 0.12) ∗ 0.313 = 6.385 lps

 Head difference measurement

Upstream water level= 14.5 cm
Downstream water level= 9.5 cm
Head difference, H = 14.5 – 9.5 = 5 cm = 0.05 m

 Angular velocity measurement

No. of revolution obtained, f = 15 rpm
15
Angular velocity, ω = 2π ∗ f = 2 π ∗ 60 = 1.571 rad/s

 Power input calculation

Pin = ρgQH = 9.81 ∗ 6.385 ∗ 0.05 = 3.132 W

 Power output calculation

Spring balance reading, mcounterweight = 0.91 kg
Load, mweight = 2 kg

53
 Stopping torque, τ = ( mweight − mcounterweight ) ∗ g ∗ r
 τ = (2 − 0.91) ∗ 9.81 ∗ 0.12 = 1.283 Nm
Thus, the output power is
Pout = τ ∗ ω = 1.283 ∗ 1.571 = 2.016 W

 Efficiency calculation
Pout 2.016
Efficiency, η = = = 64.36 %
Pin 3.132

54