HYDRO POWERED TURBINE

Robert Knowlton
Mike Miller
Brett Gordon

April 14, 2010

Team 2D

Executive Summary
Our design team was presented with the task of creating an attachment to an everyday faucet that
would create electric power by propelling a turbine. With the given customer input and our
findings during our external search, our team came up with several initial design ideas that 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. The clock will be built into the housing and
self contained from the water. 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.
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 ..............................................................................4
3.1. External Search ............................................................................4
3.2. Problem Decomposition ...............................................................5
3.3. Ideation Methods .........................................................................5
3.4. Design Concepts ..........................................................................6
3.4.1. Attachment Concepts ......................................................6
3.4.2. Turbine Concepts ............................................................6
3.5. Concept Selection ........................................................................7
4. System Level Design ...............................................................................8
4.1. Description of Design ..................................................................8
4.2. Feasibility Calculations ................................................................9
4.3. Economic Analysis ......................................................................9
5. Detailed Design .......................................................................................9
5.1. System Performance Predictions ..................................................9
5.2. Material and Material Selection Process ......................................9
5.3. Component and Component Selection Process ............................9
5.4. Materials and Fabrication Process .............................................. 10
5.5. Differences between Prototype and Production Model ............... 10
5.6. Test Procedure ........................................................................... 10
6. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 10
7. Appendices ............................................................................................ 11

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 accessory will be a digital clock that is built into the housing unit. The energy
produced by the turbine will be more than able to power this clock. Along with developing a
prototype of these items, 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. Alternative
forms of energy and power are currently gaining popularity in our county. Using renewable
hydroelectric power is one such alternative source. 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 allow them to power a clock without outside
energy.

1.3 Project Planning

Coming up with a functional project plan was then first step. 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 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 delegated out to the
individual group members during our weekly meeting which 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.

2. Customer Needs and Specifications

2.1 Customer Needs
It was determined ahead of time that the customers wanted high performance, low cost,
aesthetical appeal, water discharge to be vertically downward and easy attachment.
Along with those, they also would like the total length of the device to be minimal (under 4
inches), the device to be self-contained, the outlet of the product to terminate in a standard
3
internal pipe thread, the device to function reliably, and the Consumer Need Weight
ability to see the internal workings. The results from an AHP, High Performance 18.00%
shown in Figure 1, determined that the most important needs Low Cost 16.70%
were the ease of attachment, performance, and cost. The full Attractive 5.14%
AHP can be found in Appendix C.
Easy Attachment 23.60%
Vertically Downward
2.2 Specifications Discharge
2.20%
After receiving the customer needs, engineering
Small Size
10.60%
specifications were developed. The specifications are:
power generation, efficiency, cost, industrial design, Self Contained
3.53%
compatible threads, vertical height, water control, corrosion Reliable
9.30%
resistance, and housing transparency. The faucet powered Process Visualization
11.00%
generator must generate at least 1.5 volts over a 10 ohm Figure 1: AHP results
resistor. This product must not cost in excess of $50.
Competitive products cost only $40. 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.
Engineering Specifications

Transparent
Compatible
Generation

Corrosion
Industrial

Resistant
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
Material Material
Units Watts % $ N/A Gage in. in3/s
Selection Selection

Figure 2: QFD
3. Concept Development
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

4
temperature indicator lights which will appear blue if the water is cold or red if the water is hot.
This product is relatively small; measuring about 24 cubic inches.
A faucet generator patent was also 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, many designs were shown, and 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.
Patent number 6210113 was issued April 3, 2001 for a water wheel turbine for pumping stations
[ref 3]. This patent is design for larger scales but the concept can still be used for small scale
applications. The design allows the flow of water to rotate the turbine and generate power. The
water flows into buckets which are closed by a spray of water. The buckets are then opened at
the bottom of the wheel by the force of the water.
At the start of the project, a turbo machinery chapter on hydraulic turbines was provided [ref 4].
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
similar to the ECOlight turbine design. The Kaplan turbine design is very similar to boat
propeller. This design is thickest at the top of the turbine, where the impact force of the water
would be the greatest.
The team learned that there were many turbine designs to choose from. There is no single turbine
design that can be used in every application. Also, with the design patents that have already been
issued, the team may have trouble patenting our design since the overall concept of generating
power from running water does not change. New claims would need to be developed so that we
could receive our own patent.

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 velocity of water towards the turbine.
A larger velocity will increase the force on the turbine blades and provide a greater torque. The
turbine design 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

5
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 Pelton, Francis, and Kaplan turbine
designs discussed in the external search section above. In addition to these three designs the team
could design a basic water wheel. Each design had its advantages and disadvantages but the
designs are still able to convert kinetic energy into rotational energy.
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

3.4.1 Attachment 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 battery
will be replaceable and rechargeable. 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 would Figure 3: Clock design
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. This design would require a small pump to
dispense the soap that may require more power that can be supplied.

3.4.2 Turbine Concepts

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.
The second design is called the ‘gears on top’ Figure 4: Pelton design
and featured a turbine design similar to the
Francis turbine. The inlet pipe would bend and

6
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

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 rating 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? combine combine none develop none

Figure 7: Concept Selection chart

7
The Pelton design received the highest score because the energy generation process 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 Francis turbine design was the best design generated by the team. It would require less
redirection of flow and could be positioned vertically. The design would allow gravity and
pressure to be the driving forces of the design. The design would also satisfy our size restrictions
and our power generation requirements.

Due to the size constraints, the design would need to use gears over a pulley system. Gears are
better used when the distance between the shafts are relatively small. Also, a pulley system
would require belts that are subject to more wear and tear than gears.
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 40 o 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 0.079 inch diameter shaft and the
diameter of the generator is 0.96 inches. The length of Figure 8: Turbine Design
the generator is 1.21 inches and the full length (including
the shaft) is 1.69 inches. The approximate weight of the generator is 1.8 ounces.

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.

8
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 rotational inertia, the mass and radius of the turbine were estimated
to be .1 kg and .0254 meters, respectively. Meanwhile, the gear ratio, to help maximize
efficiency, was determined to be about 10. This will produce .73 Watts. Finally, the diameter of
the nozzle was determined to be 0.005 meters for an increased output velocity.

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 and estimations for the manufacturing process, the price of the entire
design will be about $20 to manufacture and $45 to sell. This cost is competitive to that of the
Sylvania ECOlight.

5. Detailed Design
5.1 System Performance Predictions
The team believes that the design will convert 30% of the total kinetic energy of the water into
rotational energy in the turbine. With a gear ratio of 5.6, the team believes that the rotational
speed of the generator will be approximately 26600 rpm. The generator will then create .68 W of
useful power and operate at an efficiency of 5% with a 10 ohm resistor attached to the system.
The resulting current and voltage across the resistor will be .26 A and 2.6 V respectfully. A
detailed outline of our predictions can be found in appendix F.

5.2 Material and Material Selection Process

The next step towards production of these micro-turbine power supplies is to choose the
materials that they will be built from. Our team has decided to use a mix of plastic and steel.
The housing will be made out of a translucent plastic in order to allow the customer to witness
the process of energy production. The 2 gears will also be made out of plastic in order to keep
the product low cost and light weight. We will use a standardized generator which is pre-
assembled so we don’t have to worry about material selection for that case. The shaft that
connects the turbine to the gears will be lightweight steel. Finally, the turbine will be a
composite plastic material to ensure stability.

5.3 Component and Component Selection Process

With the knowledge of what materials to use, our team has progressed to selecting the
components for mass production. The turbine was designed to be reasonably small and efficient.
The 1/8” diameter steel shaft was selected by its size compared to the turbine shaft hole. The
shaft size allows the turbine to be press fitted. The gears were selected to accomplish a gear
ration of 5. We chose a 56 tooth gear and a 10 tooth gear which gives us the proper gear ratio for
power production. The motor was a standard RF-370CA-15370 motor so there was no in depth
selection process. The nozzles that were selected are 3/8"-18 NPS INTERNAL PIPE THREAD
in order to attach to the faucet properly. The digital clock face will be built into the housing, and
the wires will run from the faceplate and the motor. Finally, the turbine housing will be built in

9
order to contain the turbine and prevent water from disrupting the motor. Appendix G contains
the designed parts as well as the assembly view. The Bill of Materials for all of these
components can be found in appendix H.

5.4 Materials and Fabrication Process

For the production model, precision is very important. With such a small object, there are only
so many methods to assemble it. The group has decided that the housing will be put together
using snap on parts. The turbine will be pressed onto the shaft and then placed into the housing.
Next the gears and motor will be assembled to fixed positions on the housing. The nozzle will be
attached and then the turbine housing will be closed. This entire assembly will them be placed
into a larger housing to isolate the electronics.

5.5 Differences between Prototype and Production Model

While the mass production units will be made exactly to scale with perfect precision, the alpha
prototype will differ. The prototype will be cheaper and more hastily assembled. The prototype
will resemble the mass production but not all of the features will be exactly the same. Only
available parts will be used for the alpha prototype, whereas the production unit will only be
assembled with required parts. The prototype only needs to prove the concept works so it does
not need to be as aesthetically pleasing as the mass produced unit. The alpha prototype turbine
housing will also be square to easily assemble where as the production unit will be round. The
inlet and outlet of the turbine housing will not be produced to specifications for the prototype.

5.6 Test Procedure

To test the systems performance, the team will measure the speed of the of the generator shaft.
The speed of the shaft will predict a more accurate power output from the generator. If the power
does not meet the requirements, a larger gear ratio will be used to increase the generator shaft
speed and power output. The team will also measure the pressure at the nozzle. The pressure at
the nozzle will determine how much force is exerted on the turbine blades. This information will
be used to determine the required thickness of the turbine blades using finite element analysis.

6. 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 retail price will be around $45. The design will be assembled with quality parts and
assembled quickly. Testing will need to be completed in order to optimize the systems
performance. 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 feasibly; 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.

10
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] Ihrenberger, Adolf. " US Patent 6210113." Patent Storm. Patent Storm, 03 Apr 2001. Web. 8
Apr 2010. <http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/pdfs/patent_id/6210113.html>.

[4]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
[5] "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>.

11
Appendix B: Project Management
Bob Knowlton – Team Leader, Turbine Designer, Writer, Manufacturer
Mike Miller – Housing Designer, Writer, Manufacturer
Brett Gordon – Writer, Design Sketcher, Manufacturer

12
Appendix C: AHP

13
Appendix D: Concept Selection Matrix

14
Appendix E: Feasibility Calculations

15
Appendix F: Performance Calculations

16
Appendix G: Parts and Assembly

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Appendix H: Bill of Materials

BILL OF MATERIALS
ITEM
# PART NAME PRICE QUANTITY COST
1 1/8" STEEL SHAFT $2.49 100,000 $249,000.00
2 56 TOOTH PLASTIC GEAR $1.11 100,000 $111,000.00
3 10 TOOTH PLASTIC GEAR $1.02 100,000 $102,000.00
4 RF-370CA-15370 MOTOR $4.25 100,000 $425,000.00
5 3/8"-18 NPS INTERNAL PIPE THREAD NOZZLE $1.52 100,000 $152,000.00
6 3/8"-18 NPS EXTERNAL PIPE THREAD NOZZLE $1.44 100,000 $144,000.00
7 TURBINE $10.00 100,000 $1,000,000.00
8 TURBINE HOUSING $4.69 100,000 $469,000.00
9 GEAR HOUSING $5.04 100,000 $504,000.00
10 VOLTAGE ADAPTER $2.71 100,000 $271,000.00
11 DIGITAL CLOCK $2.12 100,000 $212,000.00
12 ASSORTED WIRES (3 COLORS/20' PER COLOR) $3.00 10,000 $30,000.00

24