Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Hydro turbine prototype testing and generation of performance

curves: Fully automated approach


George A. Aggidis*, Audrius Zidonis
Lancaster University Renewable Energy Group and Fluid Machinery Group, Engineering Department, Lancaster LA1 4YR, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a technology that can accelerate the development of hydro turbines by fully auto-
Received 1 August 2012 mating the initial testing process of prototype turbine models and automatically converting the acquired
Accepted 20 May 2014 data into efciency hill charts that allow straight forward comparison of prototypes' performance. The
Available online 18 June 2014
testing procedure of both reaction and impulse turbines is illustrated using models of Francis and Pelton
turbines respectively. For the development of an appropriate hill chart containing no less than 780 points
Keywords:
the average duration of the fully automated test is 4 h while the acquired data les can be processed into
Renewable energy
descriptive standard efciency hill charts within less than a minute. These hill charts can then be used in
Hydropower
Turbines
research and development to quickly evaluate and compare the performance of initial turbine prototype
Turbine testing designs before proceeding to much lengthier and more expensive development stage of the chosen
Hill charts design.
Automation 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction reduce the time duration severe simplications of geometry

In a number of countries around the world including the UK, the
constant increase in fossil fuel energy prices together with a need
to improve their energy security by reducing the dependency on
imported fuel supplies is boosting the development of renewable
energy technologies [1e3]. The UK has an estimated untapped
green-eld small scale (capped to 10 MW) hydropower capacity of
1.5 GWs [4]. This paper describes the automation of a manual tur-
bine prototype testing facility (Fig. 1) manufactured by Gilbert
Gilkes & Gordon Ltd to enable very fast data acquisition and pro-
cessing into turbine efciency hill charts.
Ability to quickly assess the performance of a prototype turbine
at the initial stage of development is very important before moving
towards more accurate but much more time consuming and
expensive development phase. Depending on the conditions of a
particular application, different types of turbines are used [5] and
therefore different issues are to be addressed. Even though for
modelling of reaction turbines Computational Fluid Dynamics has
reached a feasible stage [6], numerical modelling of impulse tur-
bines (like Pelton [7] or Turgo [8]) is still a challenge. When
modelling a full geometry, time durations of up to 5 days per
simulation of one data point are reported [9,10]. Alternatively to
[11e15] or turbine working principle [16e19] are implied. On the
other hand, experimental model tests that use runner dimensions
and ow conditions that allow full scalability and ensure very high
accuracy are usually performed only as the last stage of develop-
ment because of its complexity and cost. That is why quickly pre-
testing of prototype turbine models might aid the research and
development process overall.
2. Background
The guaranteed efciency of a turbine (Eq. (1)) as dened by
the International Code for Model Acceptance Tests IEC 60193:1999
[20] is the ratio of the mechanical power provided by a shaft of a
turbine (Eq. (2)) to the power generator divided by the hydraulic
power (Eq. (3)):
Pm
h (1)
Ph
where h is the guaranteed efciency of a turbine, Pm is the me-
chanical power [J], Ph is the hydraulic power [J],
Pm u$T (2)

* Corresponding author. where u is the rotational speed of a turbine shaft [rad/s], T is the
E-mail address: g.aggidis@lancaster.ac.uk (G.A. Aggidis). torque provided by the turbine shaft [Nm],

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.05.043
0960-1481/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
434

G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441

Velocity pressure head is used only when calculating the net

pressure head on reaction turbines as the downstream water
ow does not affect the performance of the impulse turbines.
Physically the velocity head and the friction loss head are not
distances measured from water levels; however they can be
converted into adequate quantities expressed in metres (Eq. (6))
and then for the sake of convenience sketched on the diagram as
shown in Fig. 2.

v2
HV (6)
2g

where v is the mean velocity of downstream water ow [m/s].

3. Afnity laws

Fig. 1. Fully automated turbine prototype tester. When designing a hydropower station it is possible to calculate
the performance of a known turbine design if the performance of
its model is known. Performance scaling can be done by using the
Ph rQ $gDH (3) afnity or so called similarity laws [22e24]. The afnity laws
mathematically relate the same turbine at different speeds or
where r is the density of water [kg/m3], Q is the volumetric ow
geometrically similar turbines at the same speed. Equations (7)e(9)
rate [m3/s], g is the gravitational acceleration constant taken as
show the relationships when the diameter of the runner is kept
9.81 m/s2, DH is the net pressure head [m].
constant, whereas Equations (10)e(12) are used when the rota-
Calculating the mechanical power provided by the shaft is
tional speed is constant:
trivial, however nding the hydraulic power is more complicated as
the net pressure head DH consists of more than one component Q1 n1
[21], i.e. the gross pressure head, the head of pressure loss in a if D const: (7)
Q2 n2
penstock and the velocity head. Moreover, the components differ
when calculating the net head for impulse or reaction type tur-
2
bines. Fig. 2 presents general schematics of a hydropower plant. DH1 n1
(8)
First of all, it is important to understand how the gross pressure DH2 n2
head is measured in each case. The gross pressure head for reaction
turbines is simply the difference between the upstream and the
3
P1 n1
downstream water levels. However, for impulse turbines the gross (9)
pressure head is measured as the distance between the upstream P2 n2
water level and the level of a jet impact point which is always
where n is the rotational speed [rpm],
higher than the downstream water level. Equations (4) and (5)
show how the net pressure head is calculated for impulse and re-
Q1 D1
action turbines respectively and what terms are important for each if n const: (10)
Q2 D2
of them:

Impulse turbines DH HG  HL (4)
2

DH1 D1
(11)
DH2 D2
Reaction turbines DH HG  HL  HV (5)

3
where HG is the gross pressure head [m], HL is the friction loss head P1 D1
(12)
[m] and HV is the velocity head [m]. P2 D2

where D is the runner diameter [m].

In general, these laws are expressed as:
p
Qt DHt D2
p$ 2t (13)
Qm DHm Dm

p
nt DHt Dm
p
$ (14)
nm DHm Dt

where indexes t correspond to the industrial turbine and m to the

Fig. 2. Schematics of a hydropower station.
laboratory model. Therefore by choosing DHt 1 m and Dt 1 m
and rearranging Equations (13) and (14) to express Qm and
nm, the formulae to calculate quantities known as the unit
speed n11 [rpm] and the unit (specic) discharge Q11 [m3/s] are
derived:


G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441
Fig. 3. Schematics of the turbine tester (impulse turbines).
n$D
n11 p (15)
DH
Q readings are taken and then converted into Q and DH. The ow is
Q11 p (16)
D2 $ DH
Combinations of n11 and Q11 providing constant efciency h
form iso-efciency curve. Set of such iso-efciency curves form a
hill chart (example shown in Fig. 15).
For scaling to be possible, care must be taken to ensure that the
model dimensions and test conditions meet the criteria provided in
the IEC 60193:1999 testing standards [20].
4. Methodology
The Gilkes turbine tester can be treated as a small scale model of
a real hydropower station which has all the corresponding features
as the real power plant would have. Fig. 3 shows a schematic dia-
gram of the tester with an impulse turbine mounted on. A cen-
trifugal pump powered by a motor provides the ow and the
pressure, which can be converted into the pressure head, and
therefore they can be treated as the gross pressure head and the
river ow in the real power station which was described in previous
section. The tester has a turbine which is coupled to a load to
simulate the load applied by the generator.
Fig. 4. Schematics of the turbine tester (reaction turbines).
435
Fig. 5. Projections of a 3D efciency curve: turbine efciency vs n11 (left) and Q11 vs n11
(right).
4.1. Impulse turbines
To calculate the range of efciencies of an impulse turbine
model the quantities shown in the diagram (Fig. 3) are measured.
The readings for both u and T can be taken directly off the shaft
[25] of a turbine as it would be in a real power station (the rota-
tional speed and the torque supplied to the generator). However, to
be able to use the hydraulic power formula (Eq. (3)), indirect
measured by using a triangular prole weir [26,27], measuring the
head on the weir, Z:


 8 p 90
90 triangular profile weir Q Cd 2g tan Z 2:5 (17)
15 2
where Cd is a coefcient of discharge and equals to 0.6.
The conventional way of measuring the net pressure head DH
for impulse turbines and reaction turbines is explained in Section 2
Background. Therefore, for impulse turbines mounted on the tester
(Fig. 3), the gross head can be calculated from the pressure drop
between the nozzle inlet pressure and the atmospheric pressure:
p
HGI  ZI (18)
r$g
where HGI is the gross head of an impulse turbine [m], ZI is the
distance of a pressure measurement point below the level of jet
impact [m] as shown in the diagram (Fig. 3).
Since p is measured below the point of the jet impact, the head
seen by the nozzle is lower and has to be corrected by subtracting
ZI. For simplicity pipe friction loss head is neglected in this tester as
it is expected that the prototype designs would be compared at
identical operating conditions (or performance envelopes) there-
fore the losses in the pipeline would cancel out. Then DH HGI and
the equation for impulse turbines mounted on the tester (Eq. (19))
can be derived from Eq. (4):
p
DHI  ZI (19)
r$g
Fig. 6. Projections of 3D efciency curves: turbine efciency vs n11 (left) and Q11 vs n11
(right).
436

G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441

Fig. 8. Stepper motor coupled to the inlet nozzle spear of the Pelton turbine model.

neglected because of analogous reasons to the explained before

that these losses would cancel out if the prototype turbine models
are compared at identical operating conditions. Therefore, by
Fig. 7. 3D data covered with a mesh of tetragon elements.
substituting the assumptions listed above and the reaction turbine
gross head expression (Eq. (20)) into Eq. (5), formula for the net
Temperature uctuations can induce unwanted errors therefore pressure head seen by a reaction turbine mounted on the tester is
it is suggested to monitor the temperature during the testing so derived:
that the density value can be corrected.
p
DHR  ZR Z (21)
r$g
4.2. Reaction turbines
Again, monitoring the temperature throughout the testing to
A method to calculate the net pressure head on reaction tur- correct the density is suggested.
bines is slightly different because of the gross head being measured Since all the quantities required for calculating n11, Q11 and h are
as the total distance from the upstream level to the downstream measured or calculated, it is possible to process the acquired data
level. Again, the pressure sensor p is lower than the downstream into a three-dimensional efciency hill chart.
level and has to be accounted for in a similar fashion as with the
impulse turbine. However, this time the level difference between
4.3. Test control
the pressure sensor and the downstream level is combined of two
components (Fig. 4) ZR and Z.
The formulae provided above describe methodology of
ZR is the distance from the level of the pressure sensor to the
measuring turbines' performance under various conditions. How-
level of a tip of the triangular prole weir, i.e. the distance to the
ever, to be able to acquire all the efciencies in the range of n11 and
downstream level when no ow is present. The component ZR is a
Q11 available by the turbine prototype model the inlet ow and the
constant gure once the pressure sensor is mounted. However,
load on the turbine have to be controlled. By increasing the load on
there is a varying component Z, which is varying with the ow.
the turbine output shaft a rotational speed is decreased. By varying
Therefore, the gross head on reaction turbine mounted on the
the rotational speed, the unit speed n11 is varied proportionally if
tester as shown in the schematics can be expressed as:
DH and D are constant (Eq. (15)). Therefore, by varying load, ef-
p ciency vs. n11 curve can be acquired. However this is not entirely
HGR  ZR Z (20) true for reaction turbines as DH is slightly varying because of
r$g
variation in Z. Moreover, in the setting of the tester as described
As explained in Section 2 Background, the velocity head is to be
subtracted from the gross head for the reaction turbines. However,
for simplicity the velocity head and pipe friction losses are

Table 1
List of sensors used in the automation of the turbine tester.

Sensor Manufacturer (model) Total error Variable

Pressure sensor Keller (Series 21 SR/MR) 0.50% P

Optical speed sensor Compact Instruments 0.75% n, ua
(VLS/DA1)
Ultrasonic sensor PepperFuchs (UB500- 1.00% Z, Qb
F42S-I-V15)
Single point load cell Tedea-Huntleigh (1042e3 kg) 0.05% Tc
a
n is acquired in rpm, whereas u has to be in rad/s so that it could be used in Eq.
(2). Therefore unit conversion takes place.
b
The ultrasonic sensor is measuring the water head Z on the triangular prole
weir, which is then converted to the ow Q (Eq. (17)).
c
Applied brake torque T on the turbine shaft is calculated by multiplying the
brake arm radius times the load force measured by the Single Point Load Cell. Fig. 9. Stepper motor coupled to a guide vane control of the Francis turbine model.


G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441 437

Table 2
Test plan for the Francis turbine model.

Angular velocity of the stepper motors 5 rpm

Total revolutions on the ow valve 3.5
Number of the ow rate samples 15
Diameter of the turbine runner 0.08 m
Total revolutions on the load control nut 1.5
Number of the load samples 50
Extra revolutions on the load control nut (to reach 3
a complete stop)
Number of samples per channel 500
Delay time before taking readings 5s
Brake (load) arm radius 0.17 m
ZR 0.175 m

another efciency curve that has been moved in the direction of Q11.
By repeating the acquisition of efciency curves at different ow
Fig. 10. Schematics of the turbine shaft torque applying arm. rates varying from the maximum ow rate to 0 ow rate a complete
set of efciency curves is acquired (Fig. 6).
When the data is acquired in the form of multiple curves lying
above, for a reaction turbine there is a relation of head and load on
on the surface of a turbine efciency hill, data processing to stan-
the turbine because higher load means more resistance to the ow
dard 2D hill charts takes place. Firstly, 5th order polynomials are
and provided that the pump is working at constant power, the
tted on every single efciency curve [28]. Then data points are
pressure head increases with the load being applied to the turbine
evenly spaced by interpolating the efciency and Q11 within the
shaft. This is where the afnity laws become extremely useful and
curves in equally spaced steps of n11. When every efciency curve is
allow the control of the test conditions to be simplied and the test
processed to have the same amount of evenly spaced data points,
duration reduced. Moreover, it corrects any unwanted instabilities
the points are connected to the same index data point of the
if all the readings are taken at the same time because the data is
neighbouring curve. This procedure provides a surface mesh of
collected in 3D, i.e. x, 'y' and 'z' axes being n11, Q11 and turbine
tetragon elements (Fig. 7). Finally, when the surface is meshed, it
efciency respectively. This way a result of variation in the load
can be sliced at chosen heights like in an isobaric map by inter-
with a ow control position being constant (i.e. angle of guide
polating the borders of the quadrants that intersect with chosen
vanes, nozzle opening distance, etc. is not moved) is a turbine ef-
efciency plane. The intersect points are then connected by a closed
ciency curve ranging from n11 min to n11 max and being slightly
curve (in some cases open, if the area within that curve is outside
inclined in a direction of Q11 (Fig. 5).
the tested range of the turbine model) and represents single ef-
To be able to acquire more of such efciency curves, preferably
ciency in the hill chart, i.e. Q11 vs. n11 graph.
parallel or close to parallel ones, so that a surface of turbine's per-
formance is completely covered and then standard 2D hill charts
can be produced, inlet ow has to be controlled. Q11 is varied 5. Implementation
proportionally by varying the inlet ow Q, provided that DH is
constant (Eq. (16)). Again, DH is varying with restrictions being The methodology described in the previous section was
applied to the ow but this is not a problem as the 3D curve does implemented by fully automating the turbine tester which was
keep all the information of the variations. In general, even if the originally designed and manufactured by Gilbert Gilkes and Gordon
lines would be not parallel but intersecting, they would be still Ltd. Both functions: data acquisition and test control is automated
lying on the surface of the performance hill, which is the data that is and operated by a Virtual Instrument (V.I.) that is programmed in
essential. Therefore changing the inlet ow after a range of loads LabVIEW. A separate V.I. is programmed to process acquired data
(free spin to a complete halt) has been tested, allows acquisition of

Table 3
Example of Francis turbine results.

Flow index Load index P [bar] N [rpm] Z [mm] F0 [g]

0 0 2.34 4657 80 68
0 1 2.37 4678 81 70
0 2 2.35 4670 81 70
0 3 2.36 4686 80 73
0 4 2.34 4660 81 65
0 5 2.33 4657 81 72
0 6 2.34 4656 81 69

0 49 1.35 1742 100 1334
0 50 1.35 1713 100 1338
0 51 1.37 0 100 1396
1 0 2.36 4694 81 57
1 1 2.35 4677 81 67
1 2 2.36 4667 82 66
1 3 2.36 4685 81 68
1 4 2.37 4682 81 69
1 5 2.36 4683 81 72
1 6 2.36 4679 81 72

Fig. 11. Francis turbine prototype model.
438

G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441
Fig. 12. Raw results of the Francis turbine prototype model test in 3D.
into graphs and efciency hill charts shown in Figs. 5e7. Four
electronic sensors are installed on the turbine tester and connected
to a data acquisition card made by National Instruments (NI USB-
6008) to allow instant acquisition of all readings required. Table 1
presents all the sensors installed and links them with a variable
that is measured by that sensor.
n,2P
u (22)
60
By using all the sensors provided in Table 1, a single data point is
acquired, provided that the testing facility is at a steady state (i.e.
turbine shaft brake torque T and ow Q are kept constant). How-
ever, as explained in Methodology section, T and Q have to be varied
to test the entire performance range of a turbine and construct the
complete efciency hill chart.
The control of the ow valves and the torque applying brake arm
is automated by installing two unipolar stepper motors with an
internal step down gearing ratio of 25:1, providing 1 Nm holding
torque and 0.3 step angle. The motors are connected to the
standalone PC driver boards controlled by the LabVIEW V.I. via the
data acquisition card. Figs. 8 and 9 present photographs of the ow
controlling stepper motor coupled to the Pelton and Francis ow
valves respectively.
The schematics of the brake arm used to apply the torque load
on the turbine shaft and measure it is shown in Fig. 10. A rotating
disc is mounted on the shaft to increase the diameter of the shaft at
the place where the load is applied. The brake arm is causing fric-
tion on the surface of the rotating disc. It is done by pushing two
self-lubricating pads mounted on the brake arm to the disc. The
Fig. 13. Processed results of the Francis turbine prototype model test in 3D: turbine
efciency hill surface meshed with tetragonal elements.
Fig. 14. Francis turbine efciency hill chart with the mesh.
brake force is adjusted by tightening the control nut which is
directly coupled to the stepper motor and hence driven by it. The
Single Point Load Cell is measuring the load F applied by the brake
arm which multiplied by the brake arm radius r gives the torque T
applied to the turbine shaft:
T F$r (23)
where F is the force [N] applied to the load cell by the brake arm, r is
the brake arm radius [m].
6. Test results
Results of the automated tests performed on the horizontal axis
Francis and Pelton turbine prototype models are provided in this
section.
6.1. Francis turbine (reaction)
A photograph of the horizontal axis Francis turbine model that
was tested is shown in Fig. 11. The transparent pipe seen in the
picture is the draft tube. Six guide vanes that control the ow rate
and the feed angle to the runner can be seen behind the transparent
wall. The guide vanes are controlled by the ow controlling stepper
motor as described in Section 5 Implementation.
Table 2 contains the information about the chosen test plan and
important runner dimensions.
A large volume of numerical data (780 rows containing 6
readings) is collected. An example of the format of the acquired
numerical data is shown in Table 3.
Fig. 15. Normalised to 100% 2D efciency hill chart of the Francis turbine model.


G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441 439

Table 5
Example of Pelton turbine results.

Flow index Load index p [bar] n [rpm] Z [mm] F0 [g]

0 0 1.71 2438 93 32
0 1 1.71 2445 95 28
0 2 1.71 2435 93 30
0 3 1.71 2444 92 30
0 4 1.71 2380 92 38
0 5 1.71 2435 92 33
0 6 1.70 2431 93 29

0 48 1.71 469 94 2655
0 49 1.71 398 93 2683
0 50 1.72 333 93 2694
0 51 1.72 0 93 2838
1 0 1.73 2525 91 39
1 1 1.74 2536 90 35
1 2 1.72 2537 93 31
1 3 1.72 2530 90 42
1 4 1.73 2526 92 45
Fig. 16. Pelton turbine prototype model.

These numerical results are automatically processed into graphs

Following the same steps as for the Francis results, the numer-
by the V.I. programmed in LabVIEW and mentioned in Section 5
ical Pelton results are automatically processed into the graphical
Implementation. The formulae used for data processing are given
format. The 3D graphs of the raw results plotted by the V.I. are
in Sections 2, 3 and 4. The 3D graphs of the raw generic results
shown in Fig. 17.
plotted by the V.I. are shown in Fig. 12.
Again, the surface of the raw results is automatically meshed.
The raw results are automatically meshed as described in Sec-
The 3D graph of the processed results is shown in Fig. 18.
tion 4 Methodology. The 3D graph of the processed results is shown
Same as with the Francis turbine results, the 2D efciency hill
in Fig. 13.
chart is automatically constructed by interpolating the mesh at
The 2D efciency hill chart is automatically constructed by
chosen efciencies and then plotting the acquired iso-efciency
interpolating the mesh at chosen efciencies and then plotting the
curves on the n11eQ11 plane. Fig. 19 presents the efciency curves
acquired iso-efciency curves on the n11eQ11 plane. More detailed
together with the top projection of the mesh.
description of this technique is provided in Section 4 Methodology.
The absolute best efciency of the automatically tested Pelton
Fig. 14 presents the efciency curves together with the top pro-
prototype model was calculated and the nal generic efciency hill
jection of the mesh.
chart normalised to 100% is shown in Fig. 20.
The absolute best efciency of the automatically tested Francis
prototype model was calculated and the nal generic efciency hill
chart normalised to 100% is shown in Fig. 15. 6.3. Comparison of the data

The automatically obtained results are compared to the original

6.2. Pelton turbine (impulse)
results provided in the operating manual of the Gilkes Tutor GH5
1967 [29]. However, since the Gilkes turbine tester and the proto-
A photograph of the horizontal axis Pelton turbine prototype
type turbine runners were manufactured in 1960s as an academic
model that was tested is shown in Fig. 16. The runner with a total of
teaching tool rather than an industrial turbine testing facility the
16 buckets can be seen in the centre through a transparent wall. The
runners used for the results provided in the manual are not the
inlet nozzle can be seen in the bottom right corner mounted hor-
same ones as used in this project. Even though it is expected that
izontally. The ow control spear is directly coupled to the stepper
they are of the same design and dimensions the manufacturing
motor as described in Section 5 Implementation.
quality of the prototype runners is quite poor compared to the real
Table 4 contains the information about the chosen test plan and
industrial turbines. Hence, two different runners of the same
important rig dimensions.
A large volume of numerical data (936 rows containing 6
readings) is collected. An example of the numerical data acquired is
shown in Table 5.

Table 4
Test plan for the Pelton turbine model.

Angular velocity of the stepper motors 10 rpm

Total revolutions on the ow valve 12
Number of the ow rate samples 18
Diameter of the turbine runner 0.09 m
Total revolutions on the load control nut 5
Number of the load samples 50
Extra revolutions on the load control nut (to reach 5
a complete stop)
Number of samples per channel 500
Delay time before taking readings 5s
Brake (load) arm radius 0.17 m
ZI 0.175 m
Fig. 17. Raw results of the Pelton turbine prototype model test in 3D.
440

G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441
Fig. 18. Processed results of the Pelton turbine prototype model test in 3D: turbine
efciency hill surface meshed with tetragonal elements.
Fig. 19. Pelton turbine efciency hill chart with the mesh.
design are expected to have different efciencies or produce
different shape iso-efciency curves. Fig. 21 shows a photograph of
the Pelton turbine prototype model surface quality to illustrate the
problem.
However, despite the limitations listed above the results can still
be compared and close resemblance can be seen. Fig. 22 presents
the original results of the Francis turbine prototype model nor-
malised to 100%. The absolute best efciency of the model tested
originally was 3% lower than the efciency of the model used for
automatic testing. It can be seen that the original results match the
results acquired automatically (Fig. 15) very closely in terms of the
operational range and the location of the best efciency point.
Fig. 20. Normalised to 100% 2D efciency hill chart of the Pelton turbine prototype
model.
Fig. 21. Manufacturing quality of the academic Pelton prototype runner.
Fig. 22. The original normalised hill chart of the Francis turbine model.
Fig. 23 presents the original results of the Pelton turbine pro-
totype model normalised to 100%. The absolute best efciency of
the model tested originally was 10% lower than the efciency of the
model used for automatic testing. Again, the original results match
the automatically acquired results (Fig. 20) very closely in terms of
the operational range and the location of the best efciency point.
Moreover, the automated test has tested the turbine at wider
conditions (i.e. the maximum tested unit ow of the original test
was ~0.09 m3/s whereas the maximum tested unit ow of the
automated test was ~0.11 m3/s).
To conclude the comparison of data, the chosen algorithms for
automated control of the testing conditions and the chosen data
Fig. 23. The original normalised hill chart of the Pelton turbine model.


G.A. Aggidis, A. Zidonis / Renewable Energy 71 (2014) 433e441
acquisition technique are proved to be valid. The only possible
problem might be in the implementation of the turbine output
torque reading technique as it is based on the mechanical brake.
The weakness of the mechanical brake is its instability at low loads.
The brake arm starts to vibrate when it is griping the rotating disc
with low force and these unwanted vibrations are disturbing the
readings. The reading quality of the output torque is acceptable for
the prototype models used to date, however when testing models
with accurate and ne surface nishes it is suggested to replace the
mechanical brake with hydraulic or electromagnetic brakes.
7. Conclusions
The technology for fast fully automated initial testing of hydro
turbines was developed and implemented on the originally manual
turbine testing facility manufactured by Gilbert Gilkes and Gordon
Ltd. The testing facility was upgraded to a stage where test control,
data acquisition and processing are fully automated. The operator is
only required to mount the prototype model to be tested, calibrate
the sensors and specify the test plan. After the test is started, the
facility can work for a number of hours and acquire hundreds of
data points without any external action required. A typical test
would acquire approximately 800 data points in 4 h. After
completion of a test, the data le can be loaded on the processing
software and a hill chart characterising the performance of the
tested turbine design can be produced within less than one minute.
The implemented technology was illustrated by successfully
performing tests on both reaction (Francis) and impulse (Pelton)
turbine models and processing the acquired data into meaningful
results of the standard form. Moreover, if the care is taken to ensure
that the model dimensions and the test conditions are in agree-
ment with the limits provided in the testing standard [20] the af-
nity laws provided in this paper allow scaling and modelling of the
turbine's performance by using the formulae (Eq. (15), Eq. (16)).
Scaling is very important for the industry when hydropower plant
is designed.
Finally, the described technique for fully automated turbine
testing can be very useful in further developing hydropower
technologies. It can reduce the duration of initial research and
development phase drastically by enabling quick testing of new
prototype designs.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Lancaster University
Renewable Energy Group and Fluid Machinery Group, Dr. Antonios
Tourlidakis, Andrew Gavriluk, Barry Noble and Ian Nickson for their
comments, suggestions and technical support. The authors grate-
fully acknowledge the contribution of the turbine manufacturing
company Gilbert Gilkes and Gordon Ltd. which supplied the
manual turbine testing facility.
References
[1] European Renewable Energy Council (EREC). Renewable energy in Europe:
markets, trends and technologies. 2nd ed. London: Earthscan; 2010.
441
[2] European Commission. Promotion of the use of energy from renewable
sources [Internet] [Cited 2014 April 18]. Available from:, http://europa.eu/
legislation_summaries/energy/renewable_energy/en0009_en.htm; 2009.
[3] Aalto P, Temel DK. European energy security: natural gas and the integration
process. J Common Mark Stud; 2014.
[4] British Hydropower Association (BHA). Hydropower: opportunities, chal-
lenges & sharing best practice [Internet]. The British Hydropower Association
perspective; 2010 [Cited 2014 April 18]. Available from:, http://www.ciwem.
org/media/142437/The%20British%20Hydropower%20Association%
20Perspective.pdf.
[5] Lancaster University Renewable Energy Group (LUREG). Hydro resource
evaluation tool: engineering options [Internet]. [Cited 2014 April 18]. Avail-
able from: http://www.engineering.lancs.ac.uk/lureg/nwhrm/engineering/
index.php?#tab.
[6] Keck H, Sick M. Thirty years of numerical ow simulation in hydraulic tur-
bomachines. Acta Mech 2008;201:211e29.
[7] Pelton LA. 1880, US Patent 223,692, October 26, 1880.
[8] Crewdson E. 1920, UK Patent 155, 175, May 10, 1920.
[9] Jo
st D, Lipej A, Me
znar P. Numerical prediction of efciency, cavitation and
unsteady phenomena in water turbines. In: ASME 2008 9th biennial confer-
ence on engineering systems design and analysis; 2008. pp. 157e66.
[10] Jo
st D, Me
znar P, Lipej A. Numerical prediction of Pelton turbine efciency. In:
IOP conference series: earth and environmental sciencevol. 12(1); 2010.
p. 012080.
[11] Perrig A. Hydrodynamics of the free surface ow in pelton turbine buckets
[Ph.D. Thesis, EPFL_TH3715]; 2007.
[12] Koukouvinis PK, Anagnostopoulos JS, Papantonis DE. SPH method used for
ow predictions at a Turgo impulse turbine: comparison with Fluent. World
Acad Sci Eng Tech 2011;79:659e66.
[13] Anagnostopoulos JS, Koukouvinis PK, Stamatelos FG, Papantonis DE. Optimal
design and experimental validation of a Turgo model Hydro turbine. In: ASME
2012 11th biennial conference on engineering systems design and analysis;
2012. pp. 157e66.
[14] Barstad LF. CFD analysis of a pelton turbine. MSc Thesis from the Norwegian
University of Science and Technology; 2012.


[15] Zidonis A, Panagiotopoulos A, Aggidis GA, Anagnostopoulos JS, Papantonis DE.
Parametric Optimisation of two pelton turbine runner designs using
computational uid dynamics. J Hydrodyn Ser B; 2014 [in press].
[16] Zoppe  B, Pellone C, Ma^Itre T, Leroy P. Flow analysis inside a Pelton turbine
bucket. J Turbomach 2006;128(3):500e11.
[17] Klemensten LA. An experimental and numerical study of the free surface
Pelton bucket ow [MSc Thesis]. Norwegian University of Science and Tech-
nology; 2010.
[18] Correa JLC, De Andrade J, Asuaje M. A preliminary analysis of a turgo type
turbine CFD simulation designed with an integrated dimensional methodol-
ogy. In: ASME 2012 uids engineering division summer meeting collocated
with the ASME 2012 heat transfer summer conference and the ASME 2012
10th international conference on nanochannels, microchannels, and mini-
channels; 2012. pp. 327e37.
[19] Correa JLC, De Andrade J, Noguera R, Croquer S, Jeanty F, Asuaje M. Design
Procedure for a Turgo type turbine using a three-dimensional potential ow.
In: ASME turbo expo 2012: turbine technical conference and exposition;
2012. pp. 2039e52.
[20] International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). 60193. Hydraulic turbines,
storage pumps and pump-turbines: model acceptance tests. 1999; 1999.
[21] European Small Hydropower Association (ESHA). Guide on how to develop a
small hydropower plant; 2004.
[22] Munson BR, Young DF, Okiishi TH. Fundamentals of uid mechanics. 5th ed.
John Willey & Sons, Inc; 2005.
[23] Mosonyi E. Water power development, volume one: low-head power plants.
3rd Eng. ed. Budapest: Akade miai Kiado ; 1987.
[24] Nechleba M. Hydraulic turbines: their design and equipment. Prague: Artia;
1957.
[25] Doebelin EO. Measurement systems: application and design. 5th ed. Colum-
bus: The Ohio State University, US; 1990.
[26] Boiten W. Flow-measuring structures. Wageningen: Wageningen Agricultural
University; 1993.
[27] Cusick CF. Sewage and industrial wastes, volume 29: open channel ow
measurement. Water Environment Federation; 1957.
[28] George GP. Numerical methods of curve tting. Cambridge U.P.; 1961.
[29] Gilbert Gilkes and Gordon Ltd.. Gilkes Tutor GH5: operating and maintenance.
Kendal: Gilkes; 1967.