HYDRO POWERED TURBINE

Robert Knowlton
Mike Miller
Brett Gordon

April 5, 2010

Team 2D

Executive Summary
Our design team was presented with the task of creating an attachment to an everyday faucet that
would create hydroelectric power. With the given customer input and our findings during our
external search, our team conducted a brainstorming session to come up with initial design ideas.
Three design concepts were introduced to the group. After critiquing these designs and scoring
them against weighted criteria, we chose the best one which contained a horizontal turbine and
motor which would power a digital clock that is attached to the housing. With this system design
concept selected, we then proceeded to perform feasibility calculations and economic analysis
tests to see if this design would be possible. With our findings, this design concept is not only
possibly, but it is also profitable. This design could end up being a benchmark idea for years to
come.
Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................1

1. Introduction ............................................................................................3
1.1. Problem Statement .......................................................................3
1.2. Background..................................................................................3
1.3. Project Planning ...........................................................................3
2. Customer Need Assessment .....................................................................4
2.1. Gathering Customer Input ............................................................4
2.2. Weighting Customer Needs .........................................................4
3. Concept Development ..............................................................................5
3.1. External Search ............................................................................5
3.2. Problem Decomposition ...............................................................6
3.3. Ideation Methods .........................................................................6
3.4. Design Concepts ..........................................................................6
3.5. Concept Selection ........................................................................8
4. System Level Design ...............................................................................8
4.1. Description of Design ..................................................................8
4.2. Feasibility Calculations ................................................................9
4.3. Economic Analysis ......................................................................9
5. Conclusion ...............................................................................................9
6. Appendices ............................................................................................ 10

2
1. Introduction
1.1 Problem Statement
The problem that was presented to us is to develop and economically viable prototype of a hydro
powered system that can be attached to a home faucet. This hydro powered system will produce
electrical energy from the flowing water that can be used to power up an accessory attached to
the system. The limitations of this accessory are minimal. The accessory just has to have a
practical use. Along with developing this prototype, the prototype itself must be inexpensive,
easy to use, attractive, and efficient. With all of these factors to consider, our group plans to
build a working prototype that overcomes all of these barriers.

1.2 Background
Group 2D runs a company that specialized in water turbines for micro-hydro power systems for
residential homes, farmers, and ranchers. Our company looks toward the future when it comes to
energy supplies by using renewable resources such as water to power our systems. The supply
of the nation’s main form of energy consumption, oil, is slowly running and alternative energy
sources will be needed. Using renewable hydroelectric power is one way to solve this problem.
The target market that will become our biggest consumers will be homeowners that live in the
city or suburbs and rural farmers and ranchers who live far from power lines and would like to
produce their own power supply. This market will buy into the product because it will save them
money in the long run by reducing their electrical bills. The market for producing micro-hydro
power systems that can use renewable energy sources will continue to grow in the future, and it
will be a sector that will be looking for engineers that know fluids.

1.3 Project Planning

Coming up with a functional project plan was fairly simple. We used the engineering design
method in which we use 6 steps: planning, concept development, system level design, detail
design, testing, and production ramp up. Our team created a schedule using a Gantt chart. This
schedule is for the next month and a half and it details project step deadlines and milestones.
This gives us a time table for our team to work within. Every member in our group is
responsible for each of their designated tasks with the other members there for support. The
tasks will be discussed and handed out to the individual group members during our weekly
meetings. Organizing and distributing the tasks allows the team to run at optimal efficiency.
With the project plan in place and the predetermined deadline set, our group plans to have a
working prototype up and running within a month that will please our prospective customers.

3
2. Customer Needs and Specifications
In any product design process, the needs of the customer are always one of the most important
goals. If the customer's needs aren't satisfied, the product won't sell. For a faucet powered
generator, this is difficult to determine considering most customers have never had experience
with a faucet powered generator.

2.1 Customer Needs

It was determined ahead of time that the customers wanted Consumer Need Weight
high performance, low cost, aesthetical appeal, water High Performance 18.00%
discharge to be vertically downward and easy attachment. Low Cost 16.70%
Along with those, they also would like the total length of the Attractive 5.14%
device to be minimal (under 4 inches), the device to be self- Easy Attachment 23.60%
contained, the outlet of the product to terminate in a standard Vertically Downward
internal pipe thread, the device to function reliably, and the 2.20%
Discharge
ability to see the internal workings. The results from an Small Size 10.60%
AHP, shown in Figure 1, determined that the most important Self Contained 3.53%
needs were the ease of attachment, performance, and cost.
Reliable 9.30%
The full AHP can be found in Appendix C.
Process Visualization 11.00%
Figure 1: AHP results
2.2 Specifications

After receiving the customer needs, engineering specifications were developed. The
specifications are: power generation, efficiency, low cost, industrial design, compatible threads,
vertical height, water control, corrosion resistance, and housing transparency. The faucet
powered generator must generate at least 1.5 volts over a 10 ohm resistor. This product must not
cost in excess of $50. Consumers must find this design appealing so an industrial design is
required for the design. This device must be no larger than 4 inches in vertical height and the
design must be as corrosion resistant as possible because the design will be in a wet
environment. The engineering specifications were related to the customer needs in a QFD shown
in Figure 2.

4
 Engineering Specifications

Compatiable

Transparent
Genertion

Corrosion
Industrial

Resistent
Efficient

Housing
Vertical
threads

Control
Water
Design
Power

length
Total
Cost
Customer Needs
High Performance x x x
Low Cost x x x
Aesthetically Pleasing x
Easy Attachment x x x
Vertical Discharge x x
Small Size x x
Self Contained x x x
Reliable/Endurance x x
Process Visualization x
3 2
Units Watts % $ N/A Gage in. in /s in hue
Figure 2: QFD

3. Concept Development
Concept development is a critical part of problem solving. In this section, the team will describe
external search results of similar products and concepts. The team will also break down the
problem into smaller sub-problems with potential solutions. At the end of this section, design
concepts will be described and concepts selection will be shown.

3.1 External Search

The external search revealed a similar concept: the Sylvania ECOlight. This product attaches to a
shower head and powers a LED light [ref 1]. The ECOlight allows water to pass through a
turbine which will rotate a generator and power the LED light. The product also has water
temperature indicator lights which will appear blue if the water is cold or red is the water is hot.
This product is relatively small; measuring about 24 cubic inches.
Later in the search, a faucet generator patent was discovered. US Patent number 7608936 was
issued October 27, 2009 [ref 2]. This faucet generator is completely self contained and vertical.
In the issued patent, a final design did not stand out, but a turbine design was included. The
turbine design had rotor vanes that aimed the water perpendicular to the turbine blades. The
patent did not specify an added feature in its claims or how much power would be produced.
Also, the patent did not specify how or where the device would attach to the faucet.
At the start of the project, a turbo machinery chapter on hydraulic turbines was provided [ref 3].
The chapter introduced three basic turbine designs which are the Pelton, Francis, and Kaplan
turbines. The Pelton design is very similar to water wheels. The turbine design had cup shaped
blades that would collect the energy. The shaft would be completely horizontal so the design
would be used on rivers or streams. The Francis turbine design has curved blades that collect the
force of the water. This design has a flat bottom with blades that extrude up. This design is very

5
similar to the ECOlight turbine design. The Kaplan turbine design is very similar to boat
propeller. This design is thickest where the impact force of the water would be the greatest.

3.2 Problem Decomposition

In order to meet the customer needs, the team was able to break down the problem into three
smaller sub problems. These sub problems are the inlet, the turbine design, and transmitting
energy from the turbine to the generator. Each sub problem was broken down into design
specifications that the design must include. The inlet problem was broken down into connecting
to the existing faucet, directing the flow and increasing the exit velocity. The turbine must
convert kinetic energy to rotational energy and it must be able to transmit the torque to the gears.
To transmit the energy, the rotational speed of the gears must be increased to increase the
generator efficiency.

3.3 Ideation Methods

After the team broke up the entire design into sub problems, basic ideas were generated to solve
our design problems. In order to meet the design requirements for the inlet, the team found two
possible solutions. A nozzle could be used to increase the velocity and direct the flow towards
the turbine blades. The team could also choose not to use a nozzle and position the turbine
directly under the inlet.

To solve the turbine sub problem, the team looked into the three main turbine designs discussed
in the external search section above. Each design had its advantages and disadvantages. The
Pelton wheel could be used if the team did not redirect the water flow. The Kaplan and Francis
turbines allowed the group to stay within the height requirement and still achieve the power
requirements
The team came up with different combinations of gears or pulleys to transmit the energy from
the turbine to the generator. Gears or pulleys would be used to increase generator rotational
speed to its optimum efficiency. Some considerations for gears were bevel, helical, spur and
worm gears. The type of gear to be used will depend on what is available and the placement of
the generator.

3.4 Design Concepts

When the team met to discuss attachment ideas, two
possible designs were produced. The first was a digital
clock. The power generated from the generator would
power the LED display and the time would be kept and
powered by a battery. The clock would also feature 4
buttons that would adjust the time and light up the
clock. A basic design for the clock is provided in
Figure 3.

The second attachment design is a soap dispenser that Figure 3: Clock design
would only dispense soap when the customer pressed a
button. The soap would be stored below the generator
in a tank. This tank would store about the same amount of soap as a small bottle of liquid soap.

6
This design would require a small pump to dispense the soap that may require more power that
can be supplied.

When the concept development meeting

switched to the turbine generator design,
three designs were created. The first design
features a basic Pelton turbine design. A
nozzle would increase the speed of the
water and direct it towards the turbine.
After the water was used, it would flow
through the outlet at the bottom of the
design. Gears would be attached to the
back of the turbine housing and connect to
the generator. A sketch of the Pelton design
is provided in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Pelton design

The second design is called the ‘gears on top’ and featured a turbine design similar to the Francis
design. The inlet pipe would bend and a nozzle would be attached to the pipe to direct the flow
towards the turbine blades. The water would discharge under the turbine and out the pipe at the
bottom. Gears would be attached to the top side of the turbine housing and connect to the
generator. The generator would be placed vertically due to its small size and connect to the
attachment. This design is provided below in Figure 5.
The final design is called the ‘gears below’ design and featured a Francis or Kaplan turbine. The
inlet would have a nozzle that directed the flow but does not bend. Similar to the second design
concept, the water would discharge out the pipe which was located under the turbine. This design
also placed the gears beneath the turbine housing and the generator would be placed on side of
the turbine housing. This design was the most compacted design of the three design concepts.
The ‘gears below design’ is featured in Figure 6.

Figure 5: ‘Gears on Top’ Design Figure 6: ‘Gears Below’ Design

7
3.5 Concept Selection
The design concepts were given a rating of 1-5 on how well they met each customer need. They
were then given a weighted score based on their ranking and the weighted value of the customer
needs. The weighted values were then summed for a total score. Each design concept was then
given a ranking of 1-3. The design with the highest total score would be ranked number one and
the lowest total score would receive the lowest ranking. A summary of the concept selection
chart is shown below in Figure 7 and the full concept selection chart can be found in appendix D.

Pelton Gears above Gears below Soap

Design design design Clock dispenser
Total Score 3.5187 3.4967 3.3067 3.5352 1.7678
Rank 2 1 3 1 2
Whats Next? none Develop none develop none
Figure 7: Concept Selection chart

The Pelton design received the highest score because the process view would be seen in its
entirety. This design was also larger than the other two concept designs so this design received a
lower score, but it would not prevent the downward water discharge as much and the other two
designs. This design was thought to be as reliable as the ‘gears above’ design and more reliable
than the ‘gears below’ design because very few parts would be exposed to water. Since the
generator was above the turbine and behind the gear, there would be a smaller chance that water
would reach the generator and damage it.

The attachments were not rated against a few of the customer needs because the needs were not
relevant to the attachment designs. The team chose the clock over the soap dispenser for many
reasons. The clock is smaller and would require less power to operate. The clock would also
require less consumer maintenance over time.

4. System Level Design

4.1 Description of Design
The chosen design of the turbine is one similar to a Francis
turbine (Figure 8). It has 8 blades, each 40o separated from
the next. The whole design has a 2” radius and is .5” wide.
There is a .12” diameter hole through the center for the shaft.
There is also a .1” lip at the bottom for stability.

The generator was chosen to be a RF-370CA-15370 model.

This motor has a 2mm diameter shaft and the diameter of the
generator is 24.4mm. The length of the generator is 30.8mm
and the full length (including the shaft) is 43mm. The
approximate weight of the generator is 1.8 ounces. Figure 8: Turbine Design

8
For the housing of the turbine, the outer diameter is 2.8” with a 1” width. A .75” inlet nozzle
enters a .2” diameter inlet hole of the housing to power the turbine. The water then flows to the
bottom where it exits through a .375” diameter outlet into the sink. Attached to the turbine
housing is additional space for the gears and motor. The additional housing is 2.8” tall, 3” thick,
and 4” long. This would make the height of the entire housing complex 4” tall and 4.5” wide.
These specifications will allow this product to fit comfortable onto an average sink faucet
without getting in the way of normal day-to-day activities.

4.2 Feasibility Calculations

Before testing can begin, the feasibility of producing the power required must be calculated. The
feasibility calculations can be found in appendix E. Based off of the given assumptions, we
found the following. To find optimum Rotational inertia, the mass and radius of the turbine had
to be 1 kg and .0254 meters, respectively. Meanwhile, the gear ratio, to help maximize
efficiency, was determined to be about 56:1. Finally, the diameter of the nozzle was determined
to be 0.005 meters for a reasonable volume flow rate.

4.3 Economic Analysis

To determine what the entire design should sell for, it was very vital to find out how much the
motor cost. The price of the motor was found to be $4.25/motor when sold in bulk [ref 4].
Using this information, the price of the entire design process was determined to be one that is
affordable to households of average incomes in the United States.

5. Conclusion
Team 2D believes that this design fulfills the consumer needs extremely well. The design is
small and its process is visible from many angles. Also, the design will be easy to attach to
existing faucets and discharge the water downward. The device will also be reliable and self
contained so that the product will last a couple years. This product will have high performance
and its cost will be under $50. Although there are existing patents for the faucet generator, the
team believes that it will not infringe on any of the patents because the design is not similar to
the existing patents. Overall, this design concept is not only feasible; it is also economically
marketable. If the team continues with the production of this design, the company stands to make
a substantial profit with the production of this model.

9
Appendix A: References
[1] "ECOLIGHT." Oshram Sylvania. Sylvania, 2009. Web. 25 Mar 2010.
<http://assets.sylvania.com/assets/documents/Eco%20Light%20LUMI064R1.21f94898-
8b21-4bac-9475-c329a9b0bec0.pdf>.

[2] Shimizu, Takeshi. "US Patent 7608936 - Faucet Generator." Patent Storm. Patent Storm, 27
Oct 2009. Web. 27 Mar 2010. <http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/pdfs/
patent_id/7608936.html>.

[3]Dixon, S.L.; Eng, B. Fluid Mechanics, Thermodynamics of Turbomachinery (5th Edition).

(pp: 290-322). Elsevier. Online version available at: http://knovel.com/web/portal/
browse/ display?_EXT_KNOVEL_DISPLAY_bookid=2071&VerticalID=0
[4] "RF370CA-15370 ." Jameco Electronics IC's and Semiconductors. Jameco Electronics,
2009. Web. 3 Apr 2010. <http://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/
ProductDisplay?langId=-1&productId=238473&catalogId=10001&freeText=RF-370CA-
15370&app.products.maxperpage=15&storeId=10001&search_type=jamecoall&ddkey=
http:StoreCatalogDrillDownView>.

10
Appendix B: Project Management
Bob Knowlton – Team Leader, Turbine designer, Writer
Mike Miller – Housing Designer, Writer
Brett Gordon – Writer, Design Sketcher

11
Appendix C: AHP

12
Appendix D: Concept Selection Matrix

13
Appendix E: Feasibility Calculations

14