FINAL PRESENTATION

ON

Study of Ultra Low Head Turbine for Nepal

TEAMWORK

NISCHAL POKHAREL (32102)

PRADEEP PARAJULI(32098)
PRATIK KOIRALA(32117)
REJIT DULAL(32081)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Project Supervisor
Prof. Dr.- Ing. Ramesh Kumar Maskey
Department of Civil and Geomatics Engineering
Project co-supervisor
Dr. Hari Prasad Neopane
Associate Prof. & EnPe-MPPOES
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Project Co-ordinator
Mr. Anup K.C.
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Project overview
Background
Objectives
Ultra low head(ULH) turbine : Introduction
Scope of work
Methodology
Operational principle
Work accomplished
Problem faced
Conclusion

BACKGROUND
Hydropower

Status of Nepal

Problem and Solutions

Small projects and

affordable cost

Project concern

Sites of
possibility

OBJECTIVES

Design of the test rig and testing of the

turbine and data analysis

Design and the installations arrangement of

the ultra-low head turbine
Findings regarding the aesthetics of the ultra-low head turbine,
its reliability, functionality and selection of sites and future
proceedings for the design.
Investigate the existing hydropower and identify core issues for
very low head hydropower

Ultra low head(ULH) turbine : Introduction

Ultra low-head turbine

Head : less
than 5 m

Applicable in
even natural or
man-made
rivers and
canals with
little or no
water storage
capacity

Reaction
principle

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

Study of possibility of Ultralow

head turbine and the possible area of installation
(Terai and man made canals)

Electrical components (generator).

Study of metallurgical properties of blade
and hub material for turbine

Simple prototype design and design

consideration of the canal required(no velocity
triangle analysis)

METHODOLOGY
Literature review

Consultation

Site visit
Model preparation

Web search

Panauti canal

Email

First model
(discharge
measurement and Second model
posibility of
Third model
applicationn)

Books

Model testing
Test at irrigation canal
nearby roshi khola
(panauti)

CONTD..
Counteracting force due to
acceleration

Force due to pressure

difference
= (1 2 )
Where, =

F = (2 1 )

(22 12 )
2

which is drop in water level due to velocity.

2 =

2 1

Q= flow rate

v2=(d1/d2)v1
v2= downstream velocity
V1= upstream velocity

Thus power output,

= (1 2 ) (2 1 ) 2

And the efficiency, =

(1 2 )

WORKS ACCOMPLISHED
Visit to Rossi khola Canal

Model preparation and testing

(along design)

CONTD..

Third Model
Second Model
First Model
Fig :Successful modification of our model

Discharge and head measurement at Rossi Khola canal

Discharge obtained by Floatation method= 1.093 3 /
Depth of canal= 1.305
Both head (below 5 )and discharge ( 10 3 / ) are
within the required range for ULH turbine
Concluded site to be favorable for it.

Development of the model design

First Model
o Tested in Rossi khola canal
o Rotates in anticlockwise direction
with 20
o But deviation in static pressure
difference principle due to lack of
hub

Second Model
o Deviation corrected by putting hub in
it and blades attached to it
o Expected to test it in front of Fluid
Mechanics Lab and assembly for
testing was done
o But not tested

Fig Isometric view of second model

Testing of model :
Consultation with Associate. Prof. Dr.
Dimitar Kisliakov ,Dept. of Hydraulic
engg,Bulgaria about design parameter.
Inability to test due to the problem of:
1. Presence of side plate that block
water passage.
2. Inaccurate ratio of blade and the hub
3. Also, leakage problem

Fig Assembly arrangement for second model testing

 Design of third Model:

Fig: Isometric view of third model

Fig: Different views of third model

CONTD..
Third Model:
o Small model was prepared with some design considerations
o Both hub and blades made up of PVC pipe
o Slots was made on hub to attach blades to increase strength
o Sealing done by M-seal
o Geometric specifications:
Consists of 8 curved blades with a preferred angle of 20
degrees.
The blade depth, T = 10.6 cm
The hub diameter, D =15.24 cm
The projected blade length (L) parallel to the axis of hub
=23 cm [to maintain the relation (L<2D) ]

Fig: Attaching blades to hub

CONTD..
Also following assumptions are to be made while testing it
Hub diameter = 1.2 to 1.25 times head
difference (to reduce the turbulence losses
during blade entry upstream)
d2= blade depth T but not less than 0.7 T (to
make significant efficiency)
The projected blade length parallel to hub axis
not less than 0.7 times the canal width to allow
water from sides.

Fig: Top view of third model

Site Selected for testing

jn
Canal

pump

Direction of flow of water

reservior

In front of Fluid Mechanics

Lab
Closed loop water system
Pump (18 L/s)

THEN

Failure of testing in the planned

site at nearby fluid lab due to
insufficient discharge .

Planning of fabrication of
own canal for the purpose
of testing (in the canal
nearby Roshi khola )

CANAL SEPCIFICATION
Use of wooden plank.
Width of base of the canal= 35 cm
Height of the side planks of the canal= 42 cm
Length of each wooden planks= 220 cm

Bearing (SKF 6205) was used to adjust the shaft(diamater 2.4cm) on

the canal wall
Turbine fitted at distance of 150cm from intake.

TURBINE HUB

TEST SETUP
SIDEWAYS LOSS BLOCKAGE

INTAKE WATER
LEVEL

TURBINE BLADE

OUTLET WATER
LEVEL

SHAFT
BEARING

MODEL TESTING AND RESULT

Tested on the site nearby roshi khola .
Discharge varied by varying the area of
intake of canal.

Upstream velocity noted

Upstream height noted
Rpm noted

No torque measureent
(due to difficulty in
arrangement in natural
flowing canal)

Efficiency and ideal power output calculated

Data analysis
v2

d1

Fp

Fa

Po

Pi

Graph showing the relation of

discharge and output power

efficiency

0.14

0.07

0.016

12.8

5.2

5.0

11.00

45.14

0.70

0.15

0.08

0.017

14.4

6.4

5.6

13.47

41.81

0.75

0.16

0.09

0.018

16.0

7.7

6.2

16.15

38.48

0.79

0.17

0.10

0.019

17.5

9.1

6.7

19.07

35.15

0.84

0.18

0.11

0.021

19.0

10.6

7.1

22.20

31.82

0.89

0.19

0.12

0.022

20.4

12.2

7.3

25.56

28.49

0.93

0.2

0.13

0.023

21.7

13.9

7.3

29.15

25.16

0.98

0.21

0.14

0.024

23.0

15.7

7.2

32.96

21.83

Po

1.03

0.22

0.15

0.025

24.3

17.6

6.8

36.99

18.50

The torque calculated for the head difference of 12 cm is

N= 12 rpm, H= 12 cm
T=

gHQ

= 39.71 Nm

output power

0.65

8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000

0.016 0.017 0.018 0.019 0.021 0.022 0.023 0.024 0.025

5.0

5.6

6.2

6.7

7.1

7.3

7.3

7.2

6.8

Problems Faced
Very few source of
information
Insufficient discharge at the
planned cannel to test

Solutions
Design of own canal
selecting the testing site.
Testing at the irrigation
canal near Roshi khola

GANTT CHART
S.N
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.

7.

8.

Activity
Concept
development
Literature review
Model preparation
for testing
Site Selection for
testing
Progress
report
and
midterm
presentation
Material
collection and test
rig preparation
Testing of the
model and data
analysis
Final
Presentation

March

April

May

June

July

CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATION

Learned about design criteria of the ULH turbine
Universal test rig needed to be prepared

THANK
YOU