Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
net/publication/259264538
CITATIONS READS
13 1,365
4 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Rajeev Jain on 06 January 2014.
Abstract: Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis is very requirement of the prevailing site conditions, a unique
useful tool for predicting hydraulic machinery performance at performance prediction has to be made for a separate turbine.
various operating conditions. For designers, prediction of This can be done either by theoretical methods, experimental
operating characteristics performance is most important task. methods or by computational method (i.e. CFD). Among all
All theoretical methods for predicting the performance merely
methods CFD stands its unique importance, since by this
gives a value, and one is unable to determine the root cause for
the poor performance. Due to the development of CFD code, method study of the flow inside turbine space can be made.
one can get the performance value as well as observe actual Flow pattern in intricate portions of the component can also
behaviour of flow in the domain. Analysis and variation of be analysed and variation of the results can be known with
performance can be find out by using CFD analysis. the varying conditions. CFD method consumes less money,
less gestation period in comparison to the experimental
In the present work 3-Dimensional (3-D) real flow analysis is
done for experimentally tested turbine and the characteristics method which requires model fabrication and test rig set up.
of prototype turbine were predicted in actual operating regimes. CFD approach is a combination of numerical technique and
Aim of the work is validation of CFD results with the computational power. With the help of CFD technique even
experimental output .The operating conditions considered are complex flow pattern inside hydraulic turbine parts can be
in accordance with that, where actual prototype turbine is to be analysed in detail and modifications can be implemented.
installed. Flow structure inside the machine is analysed and it It can be used for increasing the efficiency by making
showed the scope of improvement in the design (for example necessary modification in the design of hydraulic turbine
casing tip portion). Results obtained by Computational tool were and checking relevancy of alternate optimizatimised design
very close to experimental results. This provides confidence on
before the turbine is finally manufactured. However in
Computational tools. Present paper elaborates model selection
for prototype turbine, details of methodology used, visualization order to check the reliability of selected optimized design,
of results in CFX-post & then validation of Computational validation of the results is to be done with experimental results.
results. CFD technique has lead to significant enhancement in
efficiency of hydraulic turbine. CFD can also be used to check
Keywords: Computational fluid dynamics (CFD), francis turbine,
efficiency of alternate design of hydraulic turbine for
Efficiency, Head, Unit discharge, unit speed, unit power, pressure,
unit discharge, specific speed, flow parameter. optimization before final testing is done. To improve reliability
of CFD technique, validations of results are required with
experimental results. In present work Francis turbine
I. INTRODUCTION considered with Horizontal axis. CFD analysis is done on
Among all hydraulic turbine machines used for energy varying working conditions and tabulations of results are done
conversion, vast operating regime of Francis turbine enables to get the clear picture of changes in the results.
it to be used for varying range of small to large hydro power In the present paper emphasis is given on predicting the
plant. This makes Francis turbine most popular and hence it turbine performance in actual condition for a prototype turbine
is used in maximum number of hydro power plants. In order and then to validate the results. Hydraulic turbine which is
to develop a reliable machine for this highly demanding considered for validation of results is a actual turbine which
operation, the behaviour of the flow in the entire turbine is to be manufactured and installed at the site. For this turbine
regime has to be predicted by a reliable computational method head and discharge available are known. With the help of
like CFD which is very economical method. The prediction these known quantities other necessary parameters for study
of prototype turbine performance in actual prevailing like power available, specific speed, diameter of runner, unit
conditions is very important for engineers. In order to know speed, unit power and scale ratio are calculated. These
the feasibility of the turbine, it is essential to project the results quantities are useful for final modelling of prototype hydraulic
in advance. Since turbines are tailor made as per the turbine components. Feasibility of working turbine at actual
MIT International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Vol. 1 No. 2 Aug 2011, pp 93-100 94
ISSN No. 2230 – 7699 © MIT Publications
Table 2: Turbine specification site condition where prototype turbine is to be installed. For
the selection of prototype turbine, first of all model turbine is
Turbine model Francis Turbine selected (satisfying specification as per Table 2) which is
Shaft alignment Horizontal Axis homologous to the prototype turbine. Based on these data,
efficiency of prototype turbine is calculated. Also all the
Ns of turbine 266.19 m-kW
parameters are calculated for the prototype turbine based on
Model selected F280 the selected model. For present study conditions available at
Desired P generator output 3000 kW the actual site conditions are given in Table 2.
Rated head available 48 m The integrated and cross sectional view of assembled hydro
Desired P turbine output 3142 kW turbine is shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3.
Rated flow 7.25 m3/s
Rated N of turbine 600 rpm
Prototype runner diameter 1.01 m
Model runner diameter 0.35 m
Scale up ratio 2.88
Site elevation EL 143 m
Turbine overload 10 % Prated
V. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Experimental tested results of turbine at reduced scale
(CRED-KBL) are projected w.r.t. model whose specific speed
resembles with the prototype turbine. The geometrical
specifications of experimentally tested Francis turbine model
are given in Table 2.
There is a vast number of iterations available depending
upon the guide vane opening of the turbine. Initially for best
guide vane opening results are calculated which are tabulated
in the Table 2. These Data are obtained by scaling up the
models results of various parameters obtained after conducting
the experimental wind tunnel testing.
Runner diameter of prototype turbine is calculated
satisfying the specifications mentioned in Table 1, depending
upon the diameter of prototype turbine, scale ratio is
calculated. Respective model drawings are scaled up as per
scale up ratio. Obtained results for prototype turbine are
tabulated in Table 3. An iterative method is used to find that Figure 5: Variation of head & efficiency wrt
optimum efficiency can be obtained when diameter of runner discharge of prototype turbine
is 1010 mm which is duty point. For duty point and rated
turbine speed of 600 rpm, value of N11 is 87.50. Head and Table 4: Model details
efficiency variations wrt discharge for prototype turbine are
shown in Figure 5. For broader visualisation of results, Axis of turbine vertical
experimental and CFD investigation is done at design and Type of draft tube elbow tube
off-design points.
Model head 28 m
Table 3: Experimental results of prototype Specific speed of turbine 266.19 m-kW
Sl. N11 P11 hexp. H Pr. P Q Q11 Runner diameter 0.35 m
No. % (m) (Pa) (kW) (m3/s) No. of runner blades 13
1 70 9.00 89.00 74.95 735221.46 5956.75 9.10 1.03 No. of guide vanes 18
2 80 9.30 92.80 57.38 562903.93 4123.57 7.89 1.02 PCD of guide vanes 0.40 m
3 87.5 9.28 93.10 47.97 470541.74 3144.74 7.18 1.01
No. of stay vanes 18
4 90 9.22 93.00 45.34 444763.60 2864.98 6.93 1.01
Best efficiency 92.10 %
5 100 8.70 89.50 36.72 360258.52 1975.06 6.13 0.99
N11 at best efficiency point 83.8
P11 at best efficiency point 8.85
From Tables 5 and 6 it is seen that for maximum efficiency can be used for investigating the actual performance of
total losses is minimum. Pressure contour and velocity contour prototype turbine, to get possible sources of improvement in
shown in Figure 12 and 13 respectively describes the flow the design geometry with cost effective technique in lesser
structure inside various components of francis turbine. time. Validation of results done by this method will lead to
Velocity profile from Figure 12 inside the turbine assembly become very good source of optimization technique for
indicates that casing and runner domain has smooth velocity hydraulic turbine performance.
profile whereas as soon as water enters draft domain velocity Results from experimental evaluation and Simulation
starts decreasing and profile becomes non uniform. Similarly performed at different unit speed range for optimum guide
from Figure 13 it becomes clear maximum energy conversation vane opening and at rated speed of runner 600 rpm. Results
takes place inside the casing domain where pressure is highest show that optimum turbine performance at actual site will
and as water moves further its pressure decreases gradually. occur when the unit speed of turbine is near 87.5 working
The best operating regimes, losses and flow pattern can be under a head of 48 m and accordingly other parameters are
investigated from the calculated flow parameters of numerical available. On the basis of computational results design
simulation. Thus it can be concluded that CFD simulation analysis of prototype turbine can be done accordingly.
results is due to error in discretising the governing equations Reports on Turbine Testing Problem Oriented Research
and flow domain. Losses not considered very precisely. There Laboratory (Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulic Mechanics Lab)
can be human and instrumental error in experimental Bhopal, India.
calculations. Prediction of turbine performance by CFD gives [3] P. Krishnamachar, Dr. V.V. Barlit (Russia), M.M. Deshmukh,
the idea to know the flow behaviour inside the turbine Manual on Hydraulic Turbine (MANIT, Bhopal).
model and get the information about the intricacy of flow [4] Guoyi Peng, Shuliang Cao, Masaru Ishizuka, Shinji Hayama
pattern, since the flow inside the turbine in actual is very (2002); Design optimisation of axial flow hydraulic turbine
complicated. CFD results gives the qualitative information. runner: Part II-Multiobjective Constrained Optimzation
It provides the tool to simulate the flow conditions with Method, International Journal for Numerical Methods in
different geometries in lowest possible time, thus providing Fluids, Vol. 39, Issue 6, pp. 533-548.
reduction in design analysis and yet developing robust [5] Guoyi Peng (2005): A practical combined combined
technology along with aiding in reducing gestation computation method of mean through-flow for 3D inverse
period. design of hydraulic turbine machinery blades, ASME Journal
of fluid engineering.
NOMENCLATURE [6] V. Prasad, CFD approach for design optimization and
validation for axial flow hydraulic turbine, Indian J of Eng
H = Net head (m)
and Materials Sciences, Vol. 16, August 1999, 229-236.
Q = Discharge through turbine (m 3/s)
[7] Bernard M., Maryse P., Robert M. and Anne. M. G., Proc.
N = Rotational speed of turbine (rpm) ASCE Water Power Conference, Las Vegas, USA 1999.
h = Mass density of water (kg/m3) [8] Peng G., Cao S., Ishizuka M. and Hayama S., Int. J. Numer
g = Gravitational acceleration (m/s 2) Methods Fluids, 39(6) (200) 533-548
P = Turbine power (kW) [9] Daniel B, Romeo R., and Sebastian M, Proc. Int. conf. on
CSHS03, Belgrade, (2003) 29-36.
Prated = Power output of turbine at rated condition (kW)
[10] Liplej A., Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Pt. A. J. Power and Energy,
Pgeneratoroutput = Power output of generator (kW) 218 (2004) 43-50.
EL = Elevation level wrt mean sea level. [11] Guoyi P., J. Fluids Eng., 27 (2005) 1183-1190
PCD = Pitch circle diameter (mm) [12] C.A.J. Fletcher, Computational Techniques for Fluid
N11 = Unit speed Dynamics Vol. 1, Springer Pub. 1991.
Q11 = Unit discharge [13] Lewis RI, Turbo machinery performance analysis (Arnold,
P11 = Unit power Londan), 1996.
Pr. = Pressure (Pa) [14] CFX 11, User Manual, Ansys Inc. 2004.
Hexp. = Head by experimental testing (m) [15] Liplez A., Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Pt. A. J. Power and Energy,
218 (2004) 43-50.
Hcfd = Head by CFD testing (m)
[16] Guoyi P., J. Fluids Eng., 27 (2005) 1183-1190.
hexp. = Efficiency obtained by experimental testing
[17] Shukla M., CFD Analysis of 3-D flow and it's validation for
hcfd = Efficiency obtained by CFD testing francis turbine, 34th National Conference on FMFP, BIT
Mesra (2007) 732-737.
ACKNOWEDGEMENTS [18] Wu J., Shimmel K., Tani K., Niikura K. and Sato J. J., Fluid
Author would like to express sincere gratitude towards all Engg., 127(2007) 159-168.
related to MANIT, Bhopal and KBL Pune, for continuous [19] Rao, V. Shrinivas, Tripathi, S.K. (2007): Role of CFD analysis
encouragement and cooperation made available to do the in hydraulic design optimization of hydro turbines, Proceeding
associated paper work. of National Seminar on CFD-The 3rd Dimension in Flow
Analysis & Thermal Design, Bhopal(India), pp.196-201.
REFERENCES [20] Vishnu Prasad; V.K. Gahlot, P. Krishnamachar (2009) CFD
[1] Kirloskar Brothers Limited Data for Francis turbine model, approach for design optimization and validation for axial flow
Corporate Research and Engineering Division (CRED-KBL), hydraulic turbine, Indian Journal of Engineering and
Pune, India. Material Sciences, pp. 229- 236 .
[2] Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Project