Download - Ultra low head turbine for Nepal
FINAL PRESENTATION ON
Study of Ultra Low Head Turbine
for Nepal
TE
AM
WO
RK
NISCHAL POKHAREL (26)
PRADEEP PARAJULI(30)
PRATIK KOIRALA(36)
REJIT DULAL(42)
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
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Background
Objectives
Literature review
Ultra low head(ULH) turbine : Introduction
Operation principle
Methodology
Work accomplished
Problem faced
Conclusion
BACKGROUND
Introduction
Problems
Solutions
Hydropower
Nepal is known to be top nation of the world in terms of water resources.
More than 6000 flowing rivers.
Yet Energy Crisis
CONTD…
Introdution
Problems
Solutions
Insufficient no. of
hydropower
Topographicsal condition(mostly
in hilly)
High cost of installation of
big hydropower
Few in Terai
BACKGROUND
Introdution
Problems
Solutions
Increase in number of hydro
powers
Proper distribution of hydro
powers
Micro hydropower and ultralow
head hydropowers
OBJECTIVES
Investigate the existing hydropower and identify core issues for very low head hydropower
Findings regarding the aesthetics of the ultra-low head turbine, its’ reliability, functionality and selection of sites and further proceedings.
Design and the installations arrangement of the ultra-low head turbine
LITERATURE REVIEW OF
NEPAL
FRANSIS69%
KAPLAN7%
PELTON24%
0%
Turbine type distribution in major hydro powers
constructed
FRANSIS58%KAPLAN
26%
PELTON16%
0%
Turbine type distribution in hydro powers underconstruction
The status of type of hydropower turbine distribution
For more info . . .
List location or contact for specification (or other related documents)
Head : 1m to 5 m
Applicable in even natural or man-made
rivers and canals with little or no
water storage capacity
Static pressure difference principle
Ultra low-head turbine
OPERATIONAL PRINCIPLE
Static pressure difference principle
Fig: static pressure difference in ultra low head turbine
CONTD …
Different form conventional approach
• Difference lies in principle . Velocity driven and pressure difference driven
Geometrically similar to middleshot waterweel
Velocity incensement unlink conventional
CONTD..
Force due to pressure difference Counteracting force due to accleration
METHODOLOGY
WORKS ACCOMPLISHED
I. Visited to Rossi khola canal: Rectangular with uniform cross section
width 201.5 cm and depth 130.5 cm
Discharge calculation:
Floatation method
Total distance travelled= 630.5cm = 6.305m
Average time taken = 11.223 sec
Surface velocity, Vsurface= 0.5618 m/sec
Mean velocity= k*vsurface =0.74 * 0.5618= 0.4157m/sec
Discharge obtained, Q=A * Vmean =1.093 m^3 /sec
Discharge suitable for ultra low head turbine
CONTD.
II. First Model Preparation: Model overview:
Cylindrical
Made up of wooden plank and tin
Model specification:
Diameter of the faces= 24.5cm
Length of the blades= 38cm
Height of cylinder= 38cm (with faces of thickness 1cm each)
Width of each blade= 3cm
Acute angle made by a blade with the face is given by,
Sinβ= (36/38)
=> β= 70º (approx.)
*(The model is just to understand the “static pressure difference principle”)
CONTD..
Testing of the model
o Tested in Rossi Khola canal
o Speed of 20 rpm in anticlockwise direction.
o Not according to our operating principle.
o Reason for this deviation.
CONTD…
CONTD....
CONTD…..
Testing of the model
To be tested in canal nearby Fluid Mechanics
laboratory
Design of the model and assembly
Bearing and labyrinth used
Fig: Design of the turbine and its assembly
Fig : Isometric view of the turbine (vertical) Fig : Front view of the turbine
Fig : Isometric view of the turbine (inclined)
Totally new concept resulting in very
few reference material
Problem in understanding the operating
principle; failure of our first model as
per operating principle proves this
EXPECTED WORK SCHEDULE
S.N Activity September October November December Janaury
1. Literature review
2. Proposal Submission and
proposal defence
3. Site visit status analysis of
Hydropower
Progress report and
midterm presentation
5. Site selection and
preliminary work for
design
6. Final Presentation
ACTUAL WORK SCHEDULE
S.N Activity September October November December Janaury
1. Literature review
2. Proposal Submission and
proposal defence
3. Study of lawn blades and
site visit
Model Preparation
5. Progress report and
midterm presentation
6. Testing of the model and
design and new model
preparation
7. Final Presentation
CONCLUSION
Ultra-low head turbine works could be the icing on the cake
Hope to continue in this path for the detail design and simulation
of this ultra-low head turbine for economic and reliable hydro
energy prospects
THANK
YOU