CE 322

April 16, 2019

Pelton Turbine
University of Idaho

Prepared By:

Kylie Cutler
 1

Introduction 2

Theory 2
Water Horsepower 2
Bucket Speed 2
Brake Horsepower 3
Efficiency of Hydraulic Machinery 3

Approach 4

Results 5
Flow Rate 5
Water Horsepower 5
Brake Horsepower 7
Efficiency of Hydraulic Machinery 8

Discussion 9
Flow Rate 9
Water Horsepower 10
Brake Horsepower 10
Efficiency of Hydraulic Machinery 11

Appendix 1: Raw Data 14

Appendix 2: Sample Calculations 15

Appendix 3: Excel Calculations 17

Appendix 4: Mathcad Calculations 18

 2

Introduction
The Pelton turbine lab demonstrates water horsepower, brake horsepower, and the efficiency of
hydraulic machinery. It will show how a Pelton turbine operates over a range of speeds at two
different jet velocities. This report will be arranged in the following order: theory, approach of this
lab, results, discussion on the results, and how they relate to the theory in this report, and a
appendices containing raw data, sample calculations, and Mathcad data analysis.

Theory

Water Horsepower
A Pelton turbine operates by using the kinetic energy in a water jet to turn a wheel. Buckets at
the circumference of the wheel come in line with the water jet. As the water strikes the bucket,
the energy is transferred from the water to the wheel. Water-horsepower is the power being
provided from the pump, or the input power. It is the theoretical maximum power that the turbine
can provide. This can be found using [Eq 1]:

𝑃𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 𝛾𝑄𝐻 [Eq 1]

With 𝛾being the specific weight of the water, Q being the flow rate, and H being the head.
Because Vjet cannot be directly measured, it is assumed that there is no loss in the spear valve
assembly. The kinetic energy of the water jet can then be equated with the head in the pipe
before the valve.

2
𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡
𝐻= [Eq 2]
2𝑔

This equation can be rearranged to find Vjet in [Eq 3], with g being gravitational acceleration.

𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡 = √2𝑔𝐻 [Eq 3]

Bucket Speed
The angular velocity can be converted from rotations per minute (rpm) to radians per second
with [Eq 4].

𝜔 = 𝑟𝑝𝑚∗2∗𝜋
60
[Eq 4]
 3

Next the bucket speed can be calculated using [Eq 5]

𝑢 =𝜔∗𝑟 [Eq 5]

Brake Horsepower
Brake-horsepower is the amount of real power going into the system, while horsepower is the
power being used/produced by the motor. Brake-horsepower is higher than actual horsepower
available, as it accounts for hydraulic, mechanical and volumetric losses in the turbine. Brake-
horsepower is more of a theoretical calculation, found under lab controlled conditions. One way
to find brake-horsepower is by placing a belt around a drum connected to the turbine shaft and
as the turbine turns, the torque being produced can be calculated by measuring the difference in
the force on either end of the belt and multiplying it by the radius of the drum [Eq 6]. The brake-
power can then be found by multiplying the torque by the angular velocity of the drum.

𝜏 = 𝛥𝐹 ∗ 𝑟 [Eq 6]

𝑃𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 = 𝜏 ∗ 𝜔 [Eq 7]

If we assume mechanical loss and friction are negligible, we can compute a theoretical brake
loss with the following equation:

𝑃𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 = 𝜌𝑄(𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡 − 𝑢)(1 − 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃)𝑢 [Eq 8]

For theoretical calculations of brake-power, an angle of 165 degrees for 𝜃 is close to the
standard for the deflection angle, according to Fundamentals of Hydraulic Engineering.

Efficiency of Hydraulic Machinery

Efficiency is the ratio of output to required input. For the purposes of this lab, efficiency will be
defined as the ratio of the brake horsepower to the water horsepower.

𝜂 = 𝑃𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑒 [Eq 9]
𝑃𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

Energy losses between the point before the spear valve and the output of the turbine can be
separated into hydraulic efficiency and mechanical efficiency. Mechanical efficiency accounts
for losses to heat, friction, and other things associated with moving parts. Because the details of
mechanical energy loss are outside the scope of this class, it will not be discussed further in this
report. Hydraulic efficiency is associated with the head loss in the spear valve and the transfer
of energy from the water jet to the buckets. Losses occur when energy is transferred from the
water jet to the turbine buckets. In an optimum system, all energy from the water jet would
 4

transfer to the bucket. Because the water falls after striking the bucket, all potential energy
associated with elevation head is lost. This just leaves kinetic energy to transfer to the turbine.
Using a moving reference frame centered around the bucket, the water jet comes in at a velocity
of 𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡 − 𝑢. If the water were deflected back in the direction it came, and ignoring friction, it
would eject out at the same relative speed. Moving back to a stationary reference frame, that
would make the outgoing velocity𝑉2 = 2𝑢 − 𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡 . Setting the outgoing velocity to zero and
solving for u, you find the optimum runner speed to be 𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡 /2.

Because the bucket cannot eject the water at 180° without hitting the incoming bucket, it must
be deflected at an angle. This creates a velocity vector component normal to the water jet that
cannot be zeroed out, only minimized. Friction between the bucket and the water jet can be
taken into account using the coefficient k. This is the theoretical maximum power after
accounting for loss in the buckets.

2
𝜌𝑄𝑉𝑗𝑒𝑡 (1−𝑘 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃)
𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = [Eq 10]
4

There is another source of head loss in the spear valve assembly. Because we have no direct
way of measuring this loss, it will be combined with the loss in the turbine.

Approach
The turbine lab was done using a hydraulic bench and a model Pelton impulse turbine. A sump
tank is located at the bottom of the bench. A centrifugal pump brings water from the sump up to
a spear valve and discharges it directly at the blades of the turbine. The water drains through a
volumetric measuring tank and back into the sump.The spear valve assembly controls the flow
of water. A pressure gauge allows for the measurement of the head of the water as it
approaches the valve. A load is then applied to the turbine through a tensioning device attached
to the frame of the hydraulic bench. It is made of a belt attached to two spring balances which
acts as a braking mechanism on the turbine. Load is applied by raising and lowering the device.
The difference of the two forces multiplied by the radius of the drum produces the torque of the
wheel.The angular speed of the wheel was measured by a digital tachometer. The tachometer
was aimed at a white dot on the wheel shaft.

First the pump is turned on and the spear valve is adjusted so the head in the system before
entering the valve is at 20 meters. The tensioning device was removed from the drum so the
turbine is turning at runaway speed with no braking force applied. The RPM of the wheel at the
brakeless point was measured. The time for the volumetric tank to fill five liters was also
measured. The tension device was applied and readings were taken again. The process was
repeated until a minimum of 15 points were taken between runaway speed and full stop with
varying amounts braking force being applied.The spear valve was adjusted again to 10 meters
of head leading up to the valve. All of the previously stated steps were repeated with all the
 5

corresponding measurements recorded in terms of RPM’s, force readings, and time intervals
required to for the tank to fill five liters.

Results

Flow Rate
In order to find the power being produced by the water jet, first flow rate in the system has to be
established.

𝑉
𝑄= [Eq 11]
𝑡

This was done by taking the recorded volume data and dividing it by the time taken to reach the
volume, using [Eq 11], with V in 𝑚3 and t in units of time. For 20 meters of head, the flow rate
was found to be 0.0002266𝑚3 /𝑠 and 0.0004676𝑚3 /𝑠 for 10 meters of head. Both the volume
and time component in the flow rate equation have error associated with them, thus the error of
both components were used to find the overall error from the flow, using [Eq 12].

1 −𝑉
𝑑𝑄 ≤ | 𝑡 ∗ 𝑑𝑉 | + |𝑡 2 ∗ 𝑑𝑡 | [Eq 12]

The error for time was determined to be 0.1 seconds for human reaction error, and the error for
volume was determined to be 0.2 𝐿 or 0.0002 𝑚3 for human visual error, giving an overall error
bound of ±0.00001𝑚3 /𝑠 for both heads.

Water Horsepower
Using the flow rate calculated with [Eq 11], the power from the water jet was able to be
calculated in Watts using [Eq 1].

𝑤 𝑃
𝑃𝐻𝑃 = 745.7 [Eq 13]

Using [Eq 13], the water jet power was converted into horsepower. The error for water-
horsepower was resultant from flow rate error and error in the set spear valve head. The error
value for the set spear valve head is 0.25 meters higher for trial with 20 meters of head. This is
because during the lab the needle presenting system head fluctuated from 20 meters to about
20.75 meters of head during the course of the lab.

𝑑𝑃 ≤ |𝛾 ∗ 𝐻 ∗ 𝑑𝑄| + |𝑄 ∗ 𝛾 ∗ 𝑑𝐻| [Eq 14]

 6

[Eq 14] was used to calculate the error in power, and then subsequently divided by 745.7 to
convert the error into units of horsepower, identical to the process completed by [Eq 13]. The
results for water horsepower and the error bounds are shown below.

𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝐻𝑜𝑟𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 20 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑: 0.059529 ± 0.004883 𝐻𝑃

𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝐻𝑜𝑟𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 10 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑: 0.061432 ± 0.004397 𝐻𝑃

In order to calculate bucket speed, first the recorded rotations per second (rpm) must be
converted into to radians per second using [Eq 4]. The error for the rpm measurement is 1 rpm
from 1000 to 6000 rpm, and 0.1 for 10 to 1000 rpms. For each trial, the rpm measurement was
measured three times, and averaged out to improve accuracy.

2𝜋
𝑑𝜔 ≤ | 60 ∗ 𝑑(𝑟𝑝𝑚)| [Eq

15]

The error for angular velocity was found using [Eq 15], using the previously stated error
parameters for rpm. Finally, bucket speed can be calculated using [Eq 5]. Bucket speed was
found to be at its highest with the lowest amount of torque being applied to the system, and
decreased as the torque increased. 20 meters of head’s bucket speed peeking at 13.6𝑚/𝑠 and
10 meters of head peeking at 10.6𝑚/𝑠. The two sources of error for bucket speed was the error
in angular velocity, and the human measurement error for the distance measured between the
center of the turbine, and the middle of the buckets, which was determined to be 0.002 meters.
This error was calculated using [Eq 16].

𝑑𝑢 ≤ |𝑟 ∗ 𝑑𝜔| + |𝜔 ∗ 𝑑𝑟| [Eq

16]

The bounds for bucket speed are unique to each phase of torque, but on average the error for
bucket speed is ±4%of the bucket speed.Both the bucket speed, water horsepower and the
corresponding error bounds can be seen graphically in Figure 1(next page), with more detailed
results shown in Appendix 4.
 7

Figure 1: Water-Horsepower vs Bucket Speed

Brake Horsepower
The first step in finding the brake-horsepower was to find the difference in the two forces applied
to the drum, and multiply the difference by the radius of the drum, a value of exactly 0.03
meters. This calculation was done using [Eq 6], and is the magnitude of torque being applied by
the resistance belt. The torque for 20 meters of head ranges from 0 to 0.219 Joules. The torque
for 10 meters of head ranges from 0 to 0.409 Joules of torque, twice as high as with 20 meters
of head. The error in torque comes from human recording error of the forces being presented on
the resistance belt, which is determined to be 0.25N.

𝑑𝜏 ≤ |𝑟𝑑 ∗ 𝑑𝐹 | [Eq 17]

The error in torque is found using [Eq 17]. Brake power was then found using [Eq 7], and then
converted into horsepower using [Eq 13]. The brake-horsepower for 20 meters of head ranged
from 0 to a high of 0.0321 and then went back down to 0.0072 𝐻𝑃. The brake-horsepower for
10 meters of head went from 0 to a high of 0.047, and then went back down to a low of 0.014
𝐻𝑃. Both curves of brake horsepower dropped faster than they rose. These results are more
clearly seen in Figure 2, with the details of each trial being shown in the Appendix 4. The brake
power has two sources of error, one from the torque and the other from the error in angular
speed.
 8

𝑑𝑃 ≤ |𝜏 ∗ 𝑑𝜔| + |𝜔 ∗ 𝑑𝜏| [Eq 18]

The error for brake power was calculated using [Eq 18], and then converted into horsepower by
dividing the error by 745.7. The error for brake horsepower averaged at about ±5.6% of the
brake horsepower for each trial of 20 meters of head, and an average of ±4% 𝐻𝑃of the brake
horsepower for each trial of the 10 meters of head. This varying error can be seen in Figure 2
on each data point. For more details see Appendix 4.

Figure 2: Brake-Horsepower vs Bucket Speed

Efficiency of Hydraulic Machinery

Using [Eq 9], the efficiency of the turbine is found at both states of head, and at each state of
resistance. The efficiency for 10 and 20 meters of head had similar patterns to brake power, as
the efficiency began low, rose to a peak, and then fell back down, all in a parabolic fashion. The
efficiency for 20 meters of head peaked at 53.9% at a bucket speed of 8.388𝑚/𝑠, and the
efficiency for 10 meters of head peaked at 76.5% at a bucket speed of 6.912𝑚/𝑠. The two
curves can be seen in Figure 3. The error for system efficiency had two sources, one from the
error brake horsepower, and the other from error in water horsepower, both already discussed
previously.
1 −𝑃
𝑑𝜂 ≤ |𝑃 ∗ 𝑑𝑃| + |𝑃2 ∗ 𝑑𝑃𝐻𝑃 | [Eq 19]
𝐻𝑃 𝐻𝑃
 9

[Eq 19] was used to find the error in efficiency, which was approximately 14% for each efficiency
term for 20 meters of head, and slightly lower at 11% for each efficiency term for 10 meters of
head. Both the system efficiency percentages and their corresponding errors can be seen in
Figure 3, with more details show in the Appendix 4.

Figure 3: System Efficiency vs Bucket Speed

Discussion

Flow Rate
The average flow rate for a pressure head of 10m at the spear valve was found to be more than
double that of the average flow rate from 20 meters of head. The flow rate doubles when the
head in the system is decreased by half because the pipe is discharging twice as much fluid.
With time and volume being the only variables in [Eq 11], the accuracy of the flow rate
measurement could be increased by taking more trials initially, before the resistance to the
turbine was applied. During the lab, flow rates were continually taken to account for the
unexpected fluctuation in head that was observed when the head was set to 20 meters, but the
fluctuations found were determined to be minimal and were accounted for in the error bounds.
Unfortunately, the error caused by the turbine system was not preventable because it was a
system error and not a human error.
 10

Water Horsepower
With the water-horsepower that is found using [Eq 1], the horsepower being produced for both
10 meters of head and 20 meters of head should be the same value. This is because for 20
meters of head, the calculated flow rate is half that of 10 meters of head, and for 10 meters of
head, the head is half of 20, but the flow rate is twice as high. Therefore the water-horsepower
should be identical, are were found to be almost identical in lab, with only a difference of a little
less than 0.002 𝐻𝑃, a value well within the established error bounds for water horsepower.

Brake Horsepower
In Figure 2 the actual brake-horsepower is shown with error bounds for both heads. What is not
shown is the theoretical brake-horsepower at both heads. Figures 4 and 5 allow for a
comparison of actual and theoretical brake-horsepower over the range of bucket speeds
measured in the lab, using a bucket angle of 165 degrees for the theoretical calculations.
Figure 4 displays the results from a pressure head of 10 meters and and Figure 5 displays it at a
pressure head of 20 meters. The gap between actual maximum horsepower and theoretical
maximum horsepower occurs because it is simply not possible for the buckets to collect every
single drop of water that is discharged into them, as well as their is air drag caused by the
buckets. The overall design is based on principles to minimize water loss and create a
maximum energy transfer, but inevitable water is in fact lost, resulting in a loss in energy and a
drop in horsepower from the reduced energy transferred to the turbine.

Figure 4: Actual vs. Theoretical Brake Horsepower at 10m of head

 11

Figure 5: Actual vs. Theoretical Brake Horsepower at 20m of head

Efficiency of Hydraulic Machinery

For the system with a pressure head of 20 meters, the maximum efficiency was about 53.9%.
When the system pressure head was changed to 10 meters and reevaluated, the maximum
efficiency was approximately 76.5%. Figure 3 displays the system efficiency corresponding to
the different values of bucket speed. From the figure, it is evident that the system never reaches
100% efficiency, and the higher the head, the lower the maximum efficiency is. Reasoning for
this is detailed out in the theory, but the deficiency results from hydraulic, volumetric, and
mechanical efficiency. Figure 3 displays this concept visually and validates the theory
discussed, behind it.

In Figures 6 and 7, the theoretical efficiency is presented in comparison with actual efficiency at
pressure heads of 10 meters in Figure 6 and 20 meters in Figure 7. The theoretical calculations
allow for a potential of 100% efficiency in both pressure heads when maximum power is being
generated, but this is not attainable. The buckets on the turbine fail to collect and absorb all of
the discharged water, meaning that some quantity of water is refracted off the buckets upon
initial contact from being discharged. In order for the water to refract and fall to a different
location in generates a velocity which requires energy. This energy takes away from the energy
the turbine theoretically absorbs from the water discharge, creating a loss in energy for the
turbine. The loss is what accounts for the differences between maximum theoretical efficiency
and maximum actual efficiency seen in the figures below.

When analyzing efficiency in this system, there is a large margin of error and a lot of places and
components where it occurs. If this experiment were to be done again with intentions of
increasing overall efficiency, the mechanical efficiency of the pipe system could be analyzed.
 12

Specifically, the roughness of the pipe and friction could be analyzed along with the effects of
frictional flow from contact with the inside of the pipe. Other components of mechanical
efficiency could be factored in as well for a further analysis of overall efficiency. The best
ramification to address the losses in water between discharge and the turbine buckets is to
compute more values of turbine speed at different force values. A large data collection taken
over a smaller interval of turbine speeds would allow for a more accurate trajectory of efficiency
when comparing the efficiency to the calculated bucket speed in a plot. This would yield a more
accurate estimate of the actual maximum efficiency.

Figure 6: Actual vs. Theoretical Efficiency at 10m of head

 13

Figure 7: Actual vs. Theoretical Efficiency at 20m of head

 14

Appendix 1: Raw Data

 15

Appendix 2: Sample Calculations

16
 17

Appendix 3: Excel Calculations

 18

Appendix 4: Mathcad Calculations

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
 35

Bibliography
Prasuhn, Alan L. Fundamentals of Hydraulic Engineering. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1987.