Dimensional Analysis for Determining Optimal

Discharge and Optimal Penstock Diameter in

Impulse and Reaction Water Turbines
Arturo Leon1 and Ling Zhu2
SchoolofCivilandConstructionEngineering,OregonStateUniversity
2
DepartmentofCivilandEnvironmentalEngineering,LouisianaStateUniversity
1

X Congreso Latinoamericano de Estudiantes de Ingenieria Civil - XXII Congreso

Nacional de Estudiantes de Ingenieria Civil del Per, August 4-8, 2014.

Acknowledgements:
Financial support:
Bonneville Power Administration of the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under
award number TIP#258.

Presentation outline

Background/Motivation
Dimensional analysis
Application
Conclusions

Hydropower systems
Three Gorges hydropower
plant, China

Hoover Dam, US

www.hdrinc.com

www.water-technology.net

www.power-technology.com

Karkamis hydroelectric power plant, Turkey

Background/Motivation
16% of global electricity production came from
hydropower in 2007

Development of all the remaining hydroelectric

potential could not hope to cover total future world

demand

Hydropower due to its associated reservoir

storage, can provide flexibility and reliability for

energy production in integrated systems. Other
diffuse and variable renewable energy sources
(wind, wave, solar) can play a larger role in
providing electrical power of commercial quality

Background/Motivation (Cont.)
Implementation of remaining hydroelectric potential

can make a vast contribution to improving living

standards in the developing world (South America, Asia
and Africa), where the greatest potential still exists.

Minimizing water consumption for producing

hydropower is critical given that overuse of flows for

energy production may result in a shortage of flows for
other purposes such as irrigation or navigation

Theoretical framework for determining optimal design

flow and optimal penstock diameter for impulse and
reaction turbines is NOT available in literature

Electrical power (P) of impulse and

reaction turbines (Cont.)
P Q H g hL
t g const
H g : grosshead
hL : totalheadlosses

: specificweightofwater= g
: waterdensity
g : accelerationofgravity
Q : flowdischarge
t : turbineefficiency
g : generatorefficiency

Electrical power (P) of impulse and

reaction turbines (Cont.)
P QH g hL

Q
hL
2 CL
2gA2

A2
L
f
k1 2 k N

D
A

2
N

CL

A2
L
f
k1 2
D2
Ad

L : length

for an impulse turbine

for a reaction turbine

Ad : draft tube cross-sectional area at outlet

D2 : diameterofpenstock

A2 : cross sectionareaofpenstock

1-2

: sum of local losses in penstock

due to entrance, bends, penstock fittings and gates

k N : nozzle head loss coefficient

AN : nozzleareaatexit
f : frictionfactor

kN

1,
C
:
0.98
~
0.99

V
CV2

A dimensionless relationship between

power and flow discharge (Cont.)
Choose reference power (Pr) and reference discharge (Qr)
Choose Pr as the maximum power can be generated with
fixed CL and of 100%

Q2
P Q H g CL
2
2 gA2

dP dQ 0

1
4
1
Qr
2A3
gH g ,Pr H g A3
gH g
3
3
3
AN foranimpulseturbine
A3
Ad forareactionturbine

A dimensionless relationship between

power and flow discharge (Cont.)
P P Pr , Q Q Qr

Q2
P Q H g CL
2
2 gA2

3
3
P Q Q
2

with
A3 2
CL
f L,D2 ,f , k,A3 A2
A2

1 D2
0.01, 1.0 for impulse turbines
In applications,

10, 1000 for reaction turbines

10

Dimensionless discharge versus Dimensionless Power

Impulse turbines ( = 0.8)

11

Dimensionless discharge versus Dimensionless Power

Reaction turbines ( = 0.8)

12

Determine optimal Q and optimal D2 (Cont.)

Minimizing water
consumption
dP

dQ

Achieving large P+
with small Q+

Maximize P+ / Q+
3
3

2
3 Q 0,
2
2

P+ / Q+ = 0 achieve maximum P+
however, not optimal!
13

P max

1
1

, Q max
2
2

Determine optimal Q and optimal D2 (Cont.)

Minimizing water
consumption

Achieving large P+
with small Q+
Maximize P+ / Q+

dP
3
3

2
3 Q 0,
dQ
2
2

14

P+ / Q+ = 3/2
Ideal condition to
save water but power
produced is small

Dimensionless discharge versus Dimensionless Power

Impulse turbines ( = 0.8)

15

P+/Q+ is small
in [0, 0.8]

Dimensionless discharge versus Dimensionless Power

Impulse turbines ( = 0.8)

P+/Q+ is more or
less linear in [0.8,
1.5]

optimal limit of
P+ / Q+ is set
to 0.8

16

Determine optimal Q and optimal D2 (Cont.)

dP

0.8
dQ opt

Q optupper

30

19
7
P optupper 15 30
2
7 gH g
Qoptupper A2
3
10 CL
Poptupper

76
7 gH g

H g A2
135
10 CL

optimal head loss hL+ (= hL / Hg) 15.6%

17

Influence of changing penstock

diameter on power variation
P
3
Q

3
3
P Q Q
2

18

Q Q3
2

Q3

Influence of changing penstock

diameter on power variation
Impulse turbines (Q+ = 3)
P+/P+ increases as
+/+ decreases

Turbine design with P or Q specified

P specified
Qoptupper
Poptupper

2
7 gH g
A2
3
10 CL
76
7 gH g

H g A2
135
10 CL

Qopt

45 P

38 H g

CL opt

A22

Q specified Popt

14 gH g

45 Q2

38
H g Q
45

Example: Impulse Turbine design

Conditions:
Gross head H g 200 m

Penstock length L 500 m

A2
16
AN

Nozzle velocity coefficient CV 0.985

1 2

1.5

Roughness height of penstock material 0.045 mm

Kinematic viscosity 106 m 2 /s

Turbine efficiency t 82%

Generator efficiency g 90%

Impulse Turbine design (Cont.)

Case A1: design an impulse turbine with Q = 0.6 m3/s

CL opt
2
2

14 gH g
-4

1693.8
m
45 Q 2

1
k N 2 1 0.0307
CV
0.25
f

5.74

log10 3.7 D Re0.9

500 f
2
CL
1.5 k N 16
D2

D2 0.3968m

Impulse Turbine design(Cont.)

Case A1: design an impulse turbine with Q = 0.6 m3/s
Assuming that a schedule 80 steel pipe is required due to structural
considerations, a 18 in outside diameter pipe would be selected.
wall thickness = 0.938 in
internal diameter = 16.124 in (409.5 mm)
CL 25.35
dimensionless head loss hL +

Q2
CL
0.134 (13.4%) < 15.6%
2
2 gH g A2

electrical power P 0.82 0.90 1000 9.8 0.6

0.62
=751421 W=751.4 kW
200 25.35
2
2 9.8 0.1317

MATLAB toolbox for turbine design

http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~leon/Codes.html

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis resulted in various

dimensionless relationships between P, Q and hL for
determining optimal design flow and penstock
diameter for designing impulse and reaction turbines

The derived relationships were used to withdraw

general insights on hydropower optimization. For
instance, it was found that for minimizing water
consumption, the ratio of head loss to gross head
(hL/Hg) should not exceed 15%.

To facilitate the calculations, a MATLAB hydropower

toolbox was developed.

Many thanks for your attention!

Contact:
Arturo Leon
School of Civil and Construction Engineering,
Oregon State University
E-mail: arturo.leon@oregonstate.edu
Research Web page:
http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~leon
26