International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)

Review of Optimal Selection of Turbines for Hydroelectric

Projects
Saurabh Sangal1, Arpit Garg2, Dinesh Kumar3
M.tech, Alternate Hydro Energy Systems, IIT Roorkee-247667
Abstract- The human demand for electricity and fresh The pressure drop in the water flow occurs at the nozzle
water is ever increasing. Due to the nature of hydropower and and the runner operates at atmospheric pressure [1].
its economic, social, and environmental benefits, hydropower Examples of impulse turbines include the Pelton wheel,
will be an important contributor to the energy mix of the Turgo wheel, and cross-flow (Banki-Michell) turbines.
future. Isolated areas, severely underdeveloped regions,
Impulse turbines generally operate best with medium or
disaster-stricken zones, and remote military outposts have one
common need: readily available and efficient means of power high head (above 10 m).
generation. The most effective manner to address these needs B. Reaction Turbines
involves the use of power generating modules that utilize the
locally available renewable energy resources. The general Reaction turbines operate under pressure in an internal
concept of a hydroelectric power plant to convert the kinetic flow regime. Water passes the stator, which takes the form
and potential energy of the water (mass) moving with some of spiral casings or guide vanes, to introduce swirl into the
speed (momentum) into a usable form of energy. Hydro power flow. The flow is then redirected by the runner blades. The
projects involve various considerations at different levels of angular momentum of the water forces rotation in the
project implementation. To harness the potential, new runner. In contrast to impulse turbines, the water pressure
turbines have been developed and commercially available. For drops at the stator and the runner [1]. Examples of reaction
the cost effective and efficient project we need to study the
turbines include propeller, Kaplan, and Francis, screw and
optimal selection of hydro turbine .The objective of this paper
is to review the selection of hydro turbine for hydroelectric hydro kinetic turbines (used for low head range less than
project. 5m). Reaction turbines often have complex blade
geometries and housings, which make them more difficult
Keywords- Hydro classification, Hydro turbines, Turbine to manufacture at smaller scales in a developing country
efficiency curve, Pico hydro technology, Selection charts. setting. However, as seen in Figure 1, reaction turbines can
perform well even in the low head range (less than 10 m),
I. INTRODUCTION making them more desirable since low head water sources
The turbine is an assembly consisting of a nozzle or are more accessible and closer to end-use locations [2].
stator, runner, and shaft that collectively convert
momentum and pressure in a water flow into rotational
mechanical work. The nozzle or stator directs the flow to
the runner it may be an orifice that creates a high speed jet,
or it may be a set of vanes. The runner is a mechanism that
converts the hydraulic energy into mechanical power by
redirecting fluid flow. The runner is typically equipped
with cups or blades that interact with the moving water and
cause the runner to rotate, the mechanical work is
transferred by the shaft to a generator.

II. T YPES OF T URBINE Fig.1 Schematic diagrams of typical hydraulic turbines [3]

Hydro turbines are classified into two categories which

III. SELECTION O F T URBINE
are being discussed below:
Hydro power designer has to make a choice on the type
A. Impulse Turbines of turbine that can be adopted for a particular project.
Pressurized water from the penstock is converted to
high-speed water jets that transfer the kinetic energy of the
jet by impacting the turbine blades or cups causing rotation.

424
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)
After the range of head to be handled by a turbine has
been evaluated by stream flow analysis and the installed
capacity determined from the analysis of the power-
generating capacity of the proposed plant, the task of the
designer is to choose an optimum turbine type and series,
the number of power generating units, the runner diameter,
rotational speed, and runner axis elevation. Knowing the
total installation at the power station, the number of units
can be decided depends on the load requirement of that
particular area. The capacity of the plant should be fixed as
high as possible with adequate care on efficient running
and low initial costs, and available transport and shipping
facilities and should not be so high so that turbine would
not run at low efficiency at the time of lean season.
Basically there are two methods which help in selection of
turbine are following:
1. Thumb Rule:
Different types of turbines can be selected to best suit
given head and flow conditions. Figure 2 shows the typical
application ranges of various turbines.
Fig.2 Turbine selection chart based on head and flow rate [1]
2. Scientific Method:
Given the complexity of designing a new hydro turbine
for a particular location and application, initial turbine
technology selection should be based on not only technical,
but also social, environmental, and economical factors
conventionally; turbines have been mainly selected based
on the specific speed.
One of the important parameters of a turbine is the
Specific Speed denoted as ns, which and defined as the
speed in r.p.m. at which a turbine of homologous design
would operate, if the runner were to reduce to a size which
would develop one metric horse power under one meter
head. It is given by the following relation:
425
(1)
Where,
ns = Specific speed of turbine in revolutions per minute
(r.p.m.)
n = Rated speed of turbine in revolutions per minute
P = turbine output in kW, and
H = Rated head in meters
Once the specific speed (ns) is determined, the chart
given in Figure 3 may be used to determine the type of
turbine that may be adopted for the particular project.
Fig.3 Chart for determining the selection of turbine [4]
While this narrows the options down to the most
technically applicable turbine types, it does not address the
qualitative factors surrounding the successful adoption and
long term sustainability of the resulting system. The
rationale used for the preliminary selection of turbine
technology type for this project informally followed the
multi-criteria analysis proposed by Williamson, Stark &
Booker (2011)[5].The formal analysis employs a point
system for both quantitative and qualitative factors that are
normalized and combined with an applied weighting
defined by the stakeholders. A point system was not
employed in the selection process for this project, but
strengths and weaknesses were identified to eliminate less
preferred technologies. The factors used for the technology
selection for this system expand on the ones used by
Williamson et al. and include:
 Efficiency – the efficiency under design and off-
design conditions.
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)
 Constructability – the degree of complexity to build
the components and assemble the system. This
involves the required materials, tooling, and labor and
the allowable tolerances during manufacture.
 Cost – the monetary cost to produce the system.
 Maintenance and Serviceability – the level of repair
and continuous maintenance required for the system
to properly operate and the complexity involved in the
maintenance process.
 Portability – the volume for manageable construction
and transport. The sites will be situated near water
arteries and typically involve steep terrain in rural
areas where road infrastructure is, for the majority,
non-existent.
 Scope of Modularity – the ability to break up the
overall system into smaller components to allow for
the replacement of parts in the field and for
troubleshooting breakdowns.
This is not prescribed by the technology type, but is a
function of the design.
Fig. 4 Turbine efficiency curve [6]
IV. T URBINE E FFICIENCY CURVE
Typical efficiency curves of various types of turbines are
shown for comparison in Figure 4. These curves are shown
to illustrate the variation in efficiency of turbines operated
at heads above and below design head are discussed.
Approximate efficiencies at rated capacity for the reaction
turbine are shown with a throat diameter of one foot. Rated
efficiency will increase as the size of turbine increases .The
efficiency curves shown are typical expected efficiencies.
Actual efficiencies may vary with manufacturer and design.
To find the approximate efficiency for a reaction turbine,
determine the approximate throat diameter from figure 4
and 5 and find the size set up factor in the bottom curve.
Add this value to the rated efficiency values given for the
appropriate turbine type. Size step up efficiency factor do
not apply to impulse or cross flow turbine. The values as
shown may be used. Note that this curve can only be used
when the head on the turbine does not vary and less precise Fig. 5 Francis turbine throat diameter [6]
results are warranted.

426
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)
V. LITERATURE ON SELECTION P ROCEDURE
It is a necessary task to select a turbine for a hydro
power site. The scales of hydropower schemes cover a
broad range and are generally classified by power output.
Larger schemes generally require damming to create
storage capacity and regulate water flow. Given the greater
amount of power generation, they are typically grid
connected to supply high levels of demand. In India,
depending on the capacities, hydropower projects are
categorized as Pico, Mini, micro, Small and large hydro
projects as under given in table 1.. Depending on the head,
SHPs may be further classified as low head (below 3
meters) medium head (from 30 – 75 meters) and high head
(above 75 meters).
TABLE I
CLASSIFICATION OF HYDRO PLANTS IN INDIA [26] Fig.6 Off-grid generation cost [7]

CLASSIFIACATION POWER OUTPUT 1. High head:

For high head and low flow applications, Pelton turbines
Large >25 MW
(figure 7) are typically used due to ease of manufacture and
small 2 MW TO 25 MW maintenance and the adaptability to some variations in head
and flow. Thake (2000) [10] published a comprehensive
Mini 100 kW TO 2 MW manual for micro scale Pelton turbines covering theory,
Micro 5 kW TO 100kW design, manufacture, installation, and maintenance. Maher
(2001)[11] in collaboration with Nepalese and Colombian
Pico <=5kW manufacturers extended this work for the Pico hydro scale
with the “Pico Power Pack” design. The initial bucket
A. Pico Hydro Turbine Technology design was based on Thake’s design and optimized the
Pico hydro is recognized as a viable option to electrify thickness of material and the number of buckets using flow
remote areas, considering economic. analysis and laboratory testing [12] .
Environmental and social perspectives. Recent studies
by the World Bank Energy Unit [7] found Pico hydro
yielded the lowest generating costs amongst off-grid energy
options (Figure 6). Maher et al. (2003) [8] compared Pico
hydro systems to solar photovoltaic systems in Kenya and
determined that the former was more cost effective on a
per-household basis with a 15% lower cost per kWh. With
lower material costs and careful consideration of
distribution and power management, Pico hydro was found
to be affordable for most low-income households. These
findings were consistent with average annual costs in
Vietnam (Energy Sector Management Assistance
Programmed, 2005) and Laos [9].

Fig.7 Pelton turbine [2]

427
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)
Tesla turbines (Figure 8) are often touted as high
efficiency turbines that are easy to manufacture and
maintain, and also less vulnerable to debris [13]. The
design consists of several, closely-spaced rigid disks set in
parallel on a shaft. The co-rotating disks are centered and
locked to the shaft. Located near the centre of the disks are
orifices that allow for fluid exhaust in the axial direction.
The disk-shaft assembly is set on bearings and enclosed
within a cylindrical casing. Water flows through an inlet
into the casing and is directed approximately tangentially
onto the disks (Tesla, 1913). To date, however, prototype
Tesla turbines have not been able to achieve the claimed
Fig.9 Turgo turbine[2]
high efficiencies. Simulations by Ho-Yan (2011)[14]
employing Rice’s idealized model [15] have found that the Cross-flow (Banki-Michell) turbines (Fig. 10) are
Tesla turbine designs are better suited towards high head cylindrical in shape with two end plates connected by a
applications and yield very low power densities, or output circular array of blades. A rectangular nozzle directs the
power-to-turbine-volume ratios. Increased volume tends to flow to contact the entire length of the cylindrical runner.
increase cost and also greatly impact portability. The flow contacts the blade array at different locations on
entrance and on exit. Cross-flow turbines yield relatively
high part-flow efficiency which can be achieved by
channeling the flow over a portion of the runner.
Mockmore and Merryfield (1949)[16] translated Banki’s
design publication and constructed a turbine in accordance
to this design procedure for performance testing which
yielded 68% efficiency. Totapally and Aziz [17] reviewed
additional experimental performance tests and determined
optimal blade number in the vicinity of 35 blades, optimal
blade angles of attack between 22° and 24°, and increases
to efficiency when using nozzles narrower than the length
of the runner.

Fig.8 Tesla turbine[2]

2. Medium head:
Turbines used for Pico hydro in the medium head range
include Turgo and cross-flow turbines and pump-as-turbine
(PAT).
Turgo turbines (Figure 9) are similar to Pelton turbines;
however nozzles are angled with respect to the runner
directing water flow to enter on one side and to exit the
other to avoid interference between flows. This translates to
smaller runner diameters and higher rotational speeds when
compared to Pelton turbines. The higher speeds make it
more feasible to directly connect the turbine shaft to the
generator and therefore eliminate the need for transmission
systems in medium head environments [1].
Fig.10 Cross-flow turbine [2]
Pump-as-turbine (PAT) involves passing water through
pumps in reverse, to turn the pump impellor, which turns
an attached generator to generate electricity. The main
advantage of this alternative is increased accessibility due
to availability of mass produced pumps and widespread
distribution networks in some locations. Case studies of
applications in developing countries are presented by
Maher et al. (2003) [8] and Pascale et al. (2011) [18].

428
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)
Arriaga (2010) [19] provides a review of PAT
development while applying selection frameworks for a
concept PAT application in Laos. Williams (2004) [20]
provides a practical guide to PAT selection.
3. Low head:
Recent research has moved towards improving low head
Pico hydro designs, since low head sites are much more
common than high head sites. These section documents
prior efforts to design, build, and test low head Pico hydro
turbines.
Development Technology Unit (DTU) (2010) of the
University of Warwick developed a “simple to make” low
head propeller turbine, claimed to produce 200 W with 2.5
m head and 0.04 m3/s flow rate (20% overall efficiency).
The stator, shaft, and runner components are illustrated in
Fig.10. The stator consists of welded mild steel flat plate
and circular tube. The shaft is an assembly of threaded rod,
nuts, and circular tube. The runner is fabricated from a
series of nuts with welded steel flat plate as blades. The
design incorporates standard materials, but relies heavily
on welding for the assembly. The trueness of stock material
is also relied on, which may lead to misalignment issues
and hinder performance. The published reference manual
did not include sufficient information for fabrication,
lacking key information such as blade angles for the stator
and runner.
Fig.11 DTU propeller turbine design - stator (top left), runner
(bottom left), and shaft (right) [21]
A 5 kW low head propeller turbine with an overall
efficiency of 67%, designed to operate at 850 rpm with 5 m
head, was developed at the Department of Civil
Engineering at the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore
[22], [23] & [24]. The propeller consisted of 8 helical
blades of constant thickness. Disadvantages of this design
included low speeds, the difficulty of manufacturing a
complex helical blade shape, and nonstandard dimensions
[25].
429
Williams et al. (2000) [25] conducted a review of low
head hydroelectric equipment including novel designs and
several conventional propeller designs. It was concluded
that propeller turbines match well to low head Pico hydro
applications mainly due to high rotational speeds allowing
for direct driven connections to the generator. This results
in compact designs with improved efficiency and lifespan,
and reduced costs and maintenance.
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper reviews the optimal selection of hydro
turbines for hydroelectric projects. The turbine selection is
the first phase of the project which will look at developing
the network technology requirements. This paper can be a
guideline for the developers in selection of hydro turbine
for available operating conditions.
REFERENCES
[1] Fraenkel, P., Paish, O., Bokalders, V., Harvey, A., Brown, A., &
Edwards, R. (1991). In Fraenkel P., Stockholm Environment
Institute. (Eds.), Micro-hydro power : A guide for development
workers. London: Immediate Technology Publications in association
with the Stockholm Environment Institute.
[2] Paish, O. (2002). Micro- hydropower: Status and prospects.
Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers part a-journal
of PO, 216, 31-40.
[3] Robert W. Fox, Alan T. McDonald, Philip J. Pritchard. Fluid
Machinery. Introduction to Fluid Mechanics Sixth Edition. s.l. :
Wiley, 2004, p. 84.
[4] Williamson, S. J., Stark, B. H., & Booker, J. D. (2011). Low head
pico hydro turbine selection using a multi-criteria analysis. World
Renewable Energy Congress, Linkoping, Sweden.
[5] The World Bank Group Energy Unit, Energy, Transport and Water
Department, 2006
[6] Maher, P., Smith, N. P. A., & Williams, A. A. (2003). Assessment of
pico hydro as an option for off-grid electrification in kenya.
Renewable Energy, 28(9), 1357-1369
[7] Smits, M., & Bush, S. R. (2010). A light left in the dark: The
practice and politics of pico hydropower in the lao PDR. Energy
Policy, 38(1), 116-127.
[8] Thake, J. (2000), “The micro-hydro pelton turbine manual : Design,
manufacture and installation for small-scale hydropower. London:
ITDG Publishing.”
[9] Maher, P. (2001), “The pico power pack”
[10] Williams, A. A., & Simpson, R. (2009). Pico hydro – reducing
technical risks for rural electrification. Renewable Energy, 34(8),
1986-1991.
[11] Rice,W.(2003).Tesla turbomachinery. In E. Logan, & R. Roy (Eds.),
Handbook of turbomachinery (2nd ed., pp. 861–874). New York,
USA: Marcel Dekker.
[12] Ho-Yan, B. (2011). Tesla turbine for pico hydro applications.
Guelph Engineering Journal, (4),1-8.
[13] Rice, W. (1965). An analytical and experimental investigation of
multiple-disk turbines. ASME Transactions: Journal of Engineering
for Power, 87(1), 29–36.
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2013)
[14] Mockmore, C. A., & Merryfield, F. (1949). The banki water turbine. [19] DTU-Development Technology Unit. (2010). SIMPLE LOW-HEAD
Corvallis, Engineering, Experiment Station, Oregon State System of MICRO-HYDRO TURBINE. Coventry, UK: University of
Higher Education, Oregon State College, 1949. Warwick.
[15] Totapally, H. G. S., & Aziz, N. M. (1994). Refinement of cross-flow [20] Rao, G. J. (1986). Investigation on a hydraulic turbine with helical
turbine design parameters. Journal of Energy Engineering, 120(3), bladed runner for micro power development. (M.Sc., Indian Institute
133. of Science).
[16] Pascale, A., Urmee, T., & Moore, A. (2011). Life cycle assessment [21] Rao, G. J., Prasad, R., & Kulkarni, B. S. (1988). Simplified turbine
of a community hydroelectric power system in rural thailand. runner shows good cavitation resistance. Water Power and Dam
Renewable Energy, 36(11), 2799-2808 Construction,
[17] Arriaga, M. (2010). Pump as turbine “A pico-hydro alternative in lao [22] Rao, G. J., Prasad, R., & Rao, J. K. S. (1988). Investigations of an
people's democratic republic”. Renewable Energy, 35(5), 1109- axial flow runner for microhydro power development. 8th Fuid
1115. Machinery Conference, Budapest, Hungary. pp. 616-23.
[18] Williams, A. (2004). Pumps as turbines: A user's guide. London, [23] Williams, A. A., Upadhyay, R., Demetriades, G. M., & Smith, N. P.
UK: Practical Action A. (2000). Low head pico hydropower: A review of available turbine
technologies. Brighton, UK.

430