HomeMy WebLinkAboutKinetic Hydro Enegery Conversion Study 1983KINETIC HYDRO ENERGY CONVERSION STUDY
(KHECS)
For the New York State Resource
Phase 1 -Final Report
March, 1983
/. I\
' .
KINETIC HYDRO ENERGY CONVERSION STUDY (KHECS)
FOR THE NEH YORK STATE RESOURCEt
Gabriel Miller*
Dean Corren**
Joseph Francheschi***
PHASE I -FINAL REPORT
MARCH 1983
NYU/DAS 82-08
tResearch sponsored by the Power Authority of the State
of New York (PASNY) Contract I NY0.-82-33 (NYU-5-259-868)
* Associate Professor and Principal Investigator
** Assistant Research Scientist
***Consu 1 tant
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY
FACUL TV OF ARTS AND SCIENCE
DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED SCIENCE
•I
...
, .
NYU/OAS 82=08
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge Mr. Gerald Stillman. Hs. Connie Tan and
Dr. Harvey Brudner of the Power lathor1ty of the State of New York
(PASNY) for their help and direcUon during the course of the study.
I
i
-1-
\ . '
I :
NYU/OAS 82-08
ABSTRACT
This report describes the Phase I research performed by New York
University for the Power Authority of the State of New York to de-
termine the use of mechanical devices to extract energy from free
flowing water resources.
The preliminary evaluation of the New York State resource was per-
formed and found to be encouraging.
A general survey and analysis of potential kinetic hydro energy con-
version systems (KHECS) was performed and a propeller turbine system
was found to hold the greatest potential as a practical cost effec-
tive system (at least in the near term) for sites ~th reasonable
depths.
.
t Further work is being performed in Phase II, to develop: a more detailed
conceptual design; to perform a cost estimate for the production of KHECS;
and to fabricate a test model. A favorable result of the economic study
and model test program should lead to a prototype test program.
-11-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pac~ -Acknowledgements i
Abs tr·ac t i i
Table of Contents iii
list of Nomenclature iv
I. Introduction 1
II. Resource Assessment 4
11-1. Introduction and Methodology 4
II-2. Region. and .. Resource Classification 6
II-3. Resource Characteristics 10
II-4. Selection Criteria 12
II-5. Preliminary.Site Selection 13
II-6. Statewide Power Estimate 21
II-7. Final Site Selection 26
III. Device Evaluation 28
III-I. Generic Advantages of KHECS 28
III-2. Generic Disadvantages of KHECS 30
III-3. Device Descriptions 32
III-4. Evaluation Methodology 39
III-5. Device Evaluations and Comparisons 41
IV. Conclusions 49
v. References 50
V-I. Resource Assessment 50
I ' V-II. KHECS Devices 51
iii
r
Uco
v
v
X
p
T
liST OF NOMENCLATURE
Projected frontal area of a KHECS (m 2 )
Power coefficient based on frontal area (dimensionless)
Orag Coefficient
Diameter (m)
Drag Force. (N)
length (m)
Power (kW)
Power avaf I able from a fluid flow (k~J)
Power output from proper·ly loaded IOIECS (k~l)
Radius (m)
Freestream velocity (m/s)
Volume (m3)
Velocity (m/s)
.Weight (kg)
Tip speed ratio (wr1'Uco)
Density (kg/m 3)
Angular velocity (s-1)
Torque (N·m)
iv
I .
NYU/DAS 82-08
I. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the first phase of a study of
hydro energy convertors which utilize only the kinetic energy in flowing
water resources. The available resources \'Jere first assessed for New York
State by type, and then a variety of devices that could be utilized in
these resources were examined.
Broadly, harnessing hydro resource may be compared as fundamentally simi-
lar to harnessing the \'lind resource for which the technology is more devel-
oped. Because of the difference in resour·ces, capturing the kinetic water
resource· may hav~ certain distinct advantages. The key difference beb1een
the two types of freestreams as t·egards power· production is the 850-fold
advantage in the density of .water over air. This must be contrasted to
the fact that streams of interest have 1/5 to l/3 that of most wind energy
conversion systems (WECS) site velocities. According to P = Cp l/2 pAV 3
and assuming comparable Cp's, the two opposing factors yield an advantage
in power per unit area for kinetic hydro energy conversion systems (KHECS) of
between 7 and 30, which corresponds to a diameter reduction per un1t power
of between 2.6 and 5.5.
~ With respect to forces on the device, which can be expressed. as F = Co: 1/2 pAV 1 ,
the density term dominates the square of the velocity difference and thus
structures for the hydrodevice may be required to withstand forces from 34 to
95 times higher per unit area than the wind device. However, to insure that
the structure can withstand extreme wind speeds, WECS must be designed to
accommodate speeds in excess of ten times average speeds, or three to four
times maximum design operating speed. KHECS will utilize resources with over-
-1-
. .
NYU/DAS £12-08
speed capabilities ranging froo1 1.5 the design point for river sites, down
to virtually no overspeed beyond design point for tidal system.
A further consideration is that besides the area reduction, there would
typically be a linear dimension reduction in the supporting structure (e.g.
tower) for a KHECS as compared with a WECS, pursuant to the rotor (or active
part) area reduction and the fact that the KHECS \·iill be submerged in a flO'il
as opposed to a WECS (which must pierce a boundary layer or flow shear).
Such a reduction by a factor of two or more will serve to favor the KHECS
structural economics. ~1hi1e such a compar-ison is extremely crude and does
not deal with such important effects as ice, mounting and other site specific
considerations, the KHECS and WECS systems \olill probably yield comparable
costs per unit area under many conditions.
Combining the structural comparison with the diameter reduction (for a
given power setting) which is given twice the economic weight for rotating
machinery, our comparison yields a considerable advantage for the KHECS sys-
tem based on the usual construction economics. This, of course, makes no allo\'t··
ance for other differences between the two types of devices, e.g., cavitation
and control complexity and to site specifics such as interconnect costs.
From the above," on an a priori basis of analogy with WECS, the KHECS con-
cept shows potential cost-effectiveness warranting the present review of the
kinetic hydro resource and a variety of potential conversion devices. In
l . addition, this cursory observation leads one to believe that the cost per
kilowatt installed for the KHECS could be an order of magnitude less than an
equivalent WECS.sited in typical good New Yor~ State wind regimes.
New York's kinetic hydro resources include inland rivers and streams, and
tidal rivers and coastal. estu~ries. The resource potential for k1netic hydro
-2-
l .
NYU/OAS 82-08
convertors is assessed in Section II. Devices, potentially usable v!it;.
the resour·ces ·identified are analyzed and compared in Section III.
-3-
\' '
NYU/DAS 82-08
The development of a methodology for resource estimation, site
selection and device application is essential to identify regional
natural energy sources that could possibly support •(inetic Hydro
Energy Conversion SystRms (KHECS).
The site assessment methodology was developed to assure adequate
broad investigation and uniform coverage of the state regions and
resource types.
This methodology provided the process by which specific sites were
identified and recorded, categorized to facilitate data storage
and accumulated to develop the statewide resource potential. It
will also assist in the selection of potential sites for further
detailed study, possibly .for the development of .a prototype system
at a selected site.
l
An outlin• of this methodology is shown in Figure II-1. It should
be emphasized that this methodology did net account for
insitutional, legal or environmental impediments which would
hinder the appl tcation c.f KHECS. The approach here ~'las to· secure
an overview of whether or not there is any potential for the
application of KHECS in New York State.
-4-
NVU/OAS 82-08
\: .
! '
; I ..
-5-
(l,..
0 -~A . -
~ '>-1 = (.!' w 0 § .....1 ~ ·o LL. 0
0 :c
...... w
~
(/)
CIJ >-...J
<(
.Z
<C
' .
NYU/DAB 82-08
The analysis involved d1vidlng the State into regions to be
studied and investigating those regions ior resource types. Tha
resource types to be classified are those natural forms of energy
which have the capacity to support KHECS power production. The-
follo~·Jing sectior.s ~·•ill discuss each block of the methodology
outline in some detail in the sequence shown.
The energy regions in N~w York State which ~re suitable for KHECS
power production were sub-divided to provide for their cummulative
power potentials to comprise the Statewide po\..,er estimate. The
regions under investigation, shown in-Figure II-2, are as follows:
As discussed below, the Lower Hudson
Basin was investigated, while the
following basins power potentials
were estimated from basin runoff:
St. Lawrence
Lake Champlain
Lake Ontario
Bl.ack River
Upper Hudson
Erie-Niagara
Genesee
Oswego
-Mohawk
Allegheny
Susquehanna
-Delaware
-6-
....
I ....,
I
--
"
. .
AREA OF INVESTIGATION
.J
BASIN
STATl' .01' NEW 'YORK
PRINCIPAL IJRAINA6E BASINS
,_1 •
NEW YORK HARBOR
*LO%-Ier· Hudson Basin r.evJewed and data extrapolated to other drainage basins
FIGURE II ·-2
•.
0
)>
Vl
00
N
' 0
00
', .
NYU/DAS 82-08
constitute a major portion of the Statewide power potential an~
comprise the largest land area for investigation. Since the
allocation of KHECS is site specific the analysis became labor
intensive du~ to thG magnitudo of indiv1dual maps w~tich must be .
reviewed for tnis regions site selection. Because of this, the
Lower nudson Basin was first determined by using USGS Quadrangle
Maps and Discharge Data. Once this is established, a
propotionality factor can be developed to estimate the Principal
River Basin's power potential. This factor is based on their
individual basin runoff value referenced to the Lower Hudson. Each
basin•s factor multiplied by the Lower Hudson power potential
became the power potential for that basin. Although this method
i
may over-or underestimate the power potential for different
basins, i.e. underestimation of the Erie-Niagara basin due to the
Niagara River•s large power potential the degree of precision was
considered appropriate for the set objective of securing an .
overview ol the state's power potential.
·The natural energy resource category in this region is ~~yig~Ql~
-8-
NYU/OAS 82-08
~a~-~Qn=n•~lg•~l€_8iY~C§_~ntl_§t~~~m~ <NRS>. It was observed th0t
unnavigated potions of navigable rivers were shallow which were
usually inappropriate for KHECS allocation and therefore provided
only a minor portion of the regions power potential.
2> Since the major portion of the ~Y~!90-Bi~§~ is tidal driven
flow, its powar potential is assessed sepwrately. The boundaries
on this region is the Hudson River proper from Albany <north> to
Yonkers <south> and any tributary entering the Hudson to the first
upstream topographic line crossing that tributary. The analysis
used NOAA Depth and Current Ch3rts to invesligata this region.
The natural energy resource category in this region is !12il
Bi~§C <TR>, much different than the principal river basin
perspective "'hen viewed as tidal driven. During the analysis it
was observed that towards the northern section of the river
approaching Albany, the river depth and tidal flow effect are
reduced providing a lesser contribution to the regions power
potential.
3,4> With the major power production in the ~~-X;ck-~!CQ~
(NYH> and ~gog_l§lADd (Ll) regions also coming from tidal
flow, the two regions possess similar resource categories and were
subdivided only for geographical reasons. The NV Harbor region
extends from the Narrows to the northern tip of Manhattan Island
and the Long Island region includes the south shore from Coney
-9-
. ' .
NYU/DAS 82-08
I :
Island to Montauk Point, Long Island's north shore was not
included due to the low tidal velocities existing in LI sound. The
analysis method utilized NOAA Depth and Current Charts to
investigate these waters.
IB:a for their natural energy resource categories. The tidal
rivers prevalent in the NYH region have a greater potential than
the TR's in the Long Island region. Also, the TCE's of Eastern
Long Island are shallow and contain minimal daily displacement
volumes. These TCE"s aslo lack n~rrow conEtrictions appropriate
for KHECS allocation and do not contribute significantly to the
regions power potential.
investigated in the New York State regions are:
Type
1) Navigable and Non-navigable
Portions of Rivers and Streams
2) Tidal Rivers
3) Tidal Consticted Estuaries
Symbol
NRS
TR
TCE
Overall resource type characteristics were determined to integrate
with and support preliminary KHECS devi.ce type design decisions.
These overall resource characteristics are listed below.
-10-
NYU/DAS 82-08
1> 8t~@~a-2Q2_§~~@em~-Site location is concentrated on the
principal river o~ the river basin and the lower portions of it's
major tributaries. Downward slopes were preferred over flatlands
because high density turbine packing arrangements are possible due
to faster velocity head recovery. ·
~2~ig~el@_Bi~~ca_~n2-~1c~~m~
-Deep and Swift 3-7 m in depth
1-3 m/sec velocity
-Turbine Placement to Riverbed Substucture
-.6 Plant Factor or Greatar
~gn=nmyig~glg_8iygc§_~ng_§1c~~m~
-Shallow and Swift 1-3 m in depth
1-2 m/sec velocity
-Turbine Placement to Riverbed Substucture
-.6 Plant Factor or Grearter
Yon~~ig~1~g_fec1ieoa_ec_~~~i9EQ1~-B~§
-Shallow and Slow 1-3 m in depth
.5-1.5 m/sec velocity
-Turbine Placement to Riverbed Substructure
-.6 Plant Factor or Greater
2> !ig~l-B!~gc§-Sites mostly concentrated along lower river
areas or parallel flow constrictions where depths and velocities
are greatest.
Ii.Qe!.J!~I!r:.a
-Shallow or Deep
-Slow or swift
-Bi-directional Flow
3-25 m in depth
.5-2 m/sec
-Turbine Placement Moored or Bridge Secured
-.6 Plant Factor or Greater
=11-
·, .
I!.Q.~!.-~QO.§L.t:.!.~~~Q-~§t~2t:.i.€§-Sites concentrated mostly ~·J!.ere
tuary encompasses large daily water volume displacements with
and deep inlet/outlet.
!l9.2!.-~QO.a~!.~~@Q._s~~~~t:.!.€~
-Shallow or DeeP, 1-20 m in depth
-Slow or Swift .S-1.5 m/sec velocity
-Bi-directional Flow
-Turbine Placement Moored or Bridge Secured
-.s Plant Factor or Greater
e selection criteria developed for the resource types fell "''ithin
ree distinct groups:
1) Geologic
2> Hydrologic
3> Power Capacity
though these groups were identical for allresource categories,
specific data set developed to characterize this
.iteria was different. The data set for TCEPs and TR"s was
the data set far the NRS's except for minor
;
fferences discussed below. These are due t9 the different analysis
ls (Table II-1) available for the resource types.
1> Geologic Survey Map -the name of the USGS New
York State Quadrangle Map, 7.5-Minute Series,
-12-
.. ·
NYU/DAS 82-08
is recorded for the selected site.
2> Site Identification -recorded for each selected
site a coded lable to identify that site
on the Geologic Survey Map.
3> Resource Type -For TCE' s and TR' s the res·ource
type is identified on the data form because both
resource types are present in the regions for
which the form was utilized (NyH, LI and HR>.
This was not necessary for NRS's because this
is the only resource type in the PRB region and
therefore a specific NRS form was utilized.
For TCE's and TR's
For NRS's
1> Mean Velocity -the velocity obtained
from NOAA Tidal Current Charts in the
closest proximity to the site identified
from the Geologic Survey Map.
2> Mean Depth -the depth obtained from NOAA
Sounding Charts in the closest proximity
to the site identified from the Geologic
Survey Map.
3> Turbine Fastening -as part of the analysis
a preliminary determination of placement
stategy was evaluated and recorded.
1) Site Width -at a selected site the waterway
width was scaled off the Geologic Survey Map . and recorded.
2) Site Depth -developed from a plot of
the gauge stations discharge versus
depth data where the depth is chosen at the
Q25 flow point (see Figure II-4)
3) Site Area -was calculated using the
Catenary equation
8Bs8 = dw -aaa2 sinhCw/2a) + aw/2
where
d = river depth calculated at gauge
-13-
NYU/DAS 82-08
station
w = river width at site
a = value relating d/w obtained from
table
4> Site Velocity -was obtained by first
plotting the monthly flow duration curves
for several months of gauge station data
and then calaulating the average of the
25% values off these curves to establish
the Q25 flow point. The site's velocity
is then obtained using: '
~~bQGliY = Q25/AREA
The power obtained from this point will be
considered the sites installed capacity.
(see Figure II-5)
1) Turbine Area -calculated as follows
IYB~!~§_eBse = 3.14 x <Turbine Diameter/2>**2
(Horizontal)
IYB~!~&-8Bs8 = Mean Depth x Turbine Diameter
(Vertical>
2) Turbine Power -calculated using
!UBBl~i-fQ~EB • K x Ap x ng x nt x At x Vtl3
CK\oJ>
where K =-RHO I 2g
Ap .. .9 plant availability
no = .!5 generation efficiency
nt = .59 theoretical efficiency
At = Turbine Area
V = Site Velocity
4) Power Per Site -obtained from
-14-
..
NYU/DAS 82-08
For NRS"s
§l!~_EQ~~B-= Turbine Power x Number of Units
<KvJ)
6> Generated Power -calculated from
§£I:Jt86Is!LEQkl5B = Ps >: G7 6o :·: PF
<Kwh/yr>
where
P~ = Site Power
PF = Plant Factor
1> Site Power Available -evaluated from
fi1.Is_E:Q~J;B_f!~66!6~bs = K X Cp :·: AREA X VELOCITY**3
< Kl•J >
where
K = RHO I 2g
Cp = .3S
2> Site power Usable -this considers that SOX
of the sites available power is useable
§l!s_eQ~sB_Y§se~bs = .s x Psa
<SO 4 Fill Factor)
where
Psa = Site Power Available
.
3> Number of Units -total possible number of
turbines at .each site based on a packing
density related to turbine placement every
10 site depths within the sites
identified turbine placement area.
4) Plant Factor -obtained from Section 11
resource characteristic listing
5> Site Total Power -obtained from
IQIBb_EQ~sB = Psu x Number of Units <KW>
where
-15·
. '
NYU/DAS 82-08
Psu = Site PovJf.::~-Useable
6) Generated Power -calculated from
m~t:~5!38Is~LEQ!&~8 = Pt )( 8760 X PF
where
Pt = Total Power
PF = Plant Factor
These data sets were tabularized into forms so that data from
identified sites could be collected for review, power compilation
and decision making.
A~ discussed above the decision which prompted the development of
the two separate forms was pr1nctpa11y based on the type of dat~
contained in the analysis tools which was available for the
different resource types.
By using the various analysis tools established in Table II-1,
' selected sita information was recorded on the Resource Forms.The
process of identifying sites and gathering the required data to
establish the power potential will be described below:
The process began by investigating U.S. Geological Survey
'-16-
TABLE II · 1
ANAI.'fS [ S TOOLS
U.S. GEOLOGIC SURVEY MAPS
location of sftes
• U.S. GEOLOGIC SURVEY WATER RESOURCE DATA (gage station data}
River & Stream Discharge (cfs)
River & Stream Velocity Distribution (ft/sec)
Max./Min. Water Level (ft)
• NOAA TIDE TABLES
Thlal Constl'icted Estuaries & Tida 1
River Max./Min. Water Level
• NOAA TIDAL CURRENT CHARTS & DIAGRAMS
Tidal Constricted Estuaries & Tidal
River Velocity (knots)
• NOAA SOUNDING CHARTS
Tidal Constricted Estuaries, Tidal River I
River Depths (ft)
-17-
NYU/PAS 82-08
Quadrangle Maps in the following r~gions;
1> Hudson River
2> New York Harbor
3) Long Island
and identifying tha TCE's and TR's.
Then, comparing the USGS maps with NOAA Depth and Current charts,
sites having favorable depth and current relationships were
selected in these regions. For the Hudson River consultation with
the USGS was required to establish river velocties due to the
non-availability of current data south of Albany and North of
Yonkers. At this point, the site ID, geologic survey, resource
type, mean velocity and mean depth was recorded. Based on the
site~s depth, max/min water levels and surrounding geologic
composition; the turbine fastening, diameter and the turbine
density <units/site> were determined and entered into the data
form. The remaining site power capacity identifiers to be
developed were calculated values described above.
The process far thisresource type begins the same as for TR•s and
TCE•s by utilizing USGS 7.5 Minute QuAdrangle Maps to identify
suitable rivers to investigate. The rivers that were chosen for
review in the Lower Hudson Basin because of their discharge
characteristics are:
-18-
NYU/DAS 82-08
-W~lkill River
-Rondout Creek
-Esopus River
-Wappinger Creek
-Fishkill Creek
-Shawangunk Creek
-Roeliff Jansen Creek
Claverack Creek
-Kaaterskill
-Normans Kill
-Croton River
Once the rivers were chosen their discharge data was obtained from
the USGS and used to develop the velocity, area and depth of the
waterway.
Simultaneous to this task these rivers were investigated to
identify suitable sites and their Geologic Survey Map and site IO
was recorded. Typical composition of these sites followed the
pattern of constricted channels created by various geologic
structures. Concentrating on locating constricted portions of the
waterway, sites were selected and their geologic survey map name
and site number was recorded on the NRS data form shown in Figure
II-3. Impoundments encountered during the site search were,passed •
over and new site selection commenced again at the first upstream
topograplc lin• to cross the waterway. The site•s width was then
scaled off and recorded.
For each site the depth was determined and the area and velocity
were calculated as described by the methods in section II-3. Based
on the site velocity and area the values of available and useable
-19-
fJ
.) .u
!:
~
-
,-":
i
.. ---·. --·--.....J.-..
":r' -...... ' a'-~ C'i 1.1) I"'(. I--t I"'(
0
"1 -I.
r-'\t N"\ ,..... r-'\ \..., CP Ct.l
l,n ~ g ~i ~ ~· ~ '"'l "': ~1
""" -! -.
c I.,·
-· ...... ~.--. ···-·-~---.. ----· .. --~.-·------·---·
0 I""(' (}:)
---·-·
I
w c .
~:.:'
•IIC: I _ ___, _ _...._...;... _______ . . . .. •·
I ,..., ,..., t: 3:i
I 0 I
'~I
"-!. ......, ....., --s' '-.3 ~ " '-5 ""' " -..$ . __: __ :. -· ... -. ____ ·-.. _, __ ··-
~-0 o' 0 l..1i ~ '-1 ° f"t I"'( I 1"1 ' ' r"\ .. --··-·-------···· ·------~--...... ·-....
l..) -
l.. . I
• ~-__,.!. .• ---·-·-------
I . . •
!
rl). -lt)
.. -·--------·----
o:
-~·. 1"1 \.1,.' 1.!, . -1.1.
:: !. ' :. ' :: : :! :. =·
FRANCESCHI ENERGY SYSTEMS, l TO.
R.O. 2 Route 312
Joo N'Ju. I PASN"'i kHe<:.>
Sllci!T HO. F l GIJ R E.. 3I.-'t 0 , ------
NYU/OAS 82-08 BREWSTER, N.Y. 10509 CALCULATED BY-------OATE---.---
CltfCl<fO BY--------O~'tE-----
FRANCESCHI ENERGY SYSTEMS, l TO.
JOB N 't ":;) ~A!.~ =-F-SE_~ OF
SHEEr No.E l {.;\};i£ IL ------
HU/OAS 82-08
R.D. 2 Route 312
BREWSTER, N.Y. 10509 CALCU\.ATED BY------DATE-----
CHECICIOBY'-------0At1-----
--~~--II · I ' · J I _ _j j __ .:
. . I' I j1 I I I ! I 1,' . 1. 1--1----i---!-~· LQQI"l ' ~ ..... .S-+~+11 ol~~~·. -J'c;;;:"-F:.t~~-f--+-+--t--i-t--1 I I 1 1-I I J. .l 1 ! -~ I I H-' ! I ~~ ~-1-·· I -,. I lt"1f . rt I ,-r-r--r-· ---~-h-t . ·,· ' ! ,. -----r--r---I ! NttrF~ ~ I I' .I I I L.
l ' I 1 i I . \ s~so '~isl ! · I ' l ! l . I · l 1 I~L I \ ~ _ t~ F:-1\~ . r---
, \ r-.
\ \ ~-I !
' ~ ' r \ \
\ \ : i
NYU/DAS 82-08
site power can be calculated.
With the depth kno~m, the number of units per site can be
determined. This is done by scaling off the USGS map the l~ngtl1 o
river available for turbine placement at the selected site and
dividing this value by 10 times the depth. Finally, the total
power and generated power are calculated using the appropriate
equations.
The State•s resource potential is compiled by a summation of the
resource available in each energy region identified, namely
Principal River Basins
Hudson River
NeN York Harbor
Lang Island
• I
We underscore the point that there can be very real differences
betweenresource~ potential and power available, due to the
questions of economics, environmental impact and legal and
political barriers at any given site.
The Principal River Basins <PRB> contr~bution to the Statewide
estimate is developed using the resource estimate for the selected
NRS in the Lower Hudson,Basin to establish the PRB total
NYU/DAS 82-08
potential. This is accomplished by calculating a nondimensioal
propotionality factor for· each basin from run,lff data shown in
Figure II-6, referenced to the Lower Hudson runoff. Each basins
factor is multiplied by the Lower Hudson power potential to give
the power potential for that basin. Summation of each basin
produces the power potential in the PRB region.
The runoff data for the 1 arger Hudson-t'lohti\wk Basin shown in figure
II-4 was found from USGS data to be composed of
Upper· Hudson
Mohawk
Lower Hudson
7.44 billion gal/day
3.09 billion gal/day
5.40 billion gal/day
The resource estimate developed for the selected rivers in the
Lower Hudson Basin is compiled below:
RIVER
Walkill
RandCJUt
Esopus
Wappinger
Fishkill
Shawangunk
Roeliff Jansen
Claverack
Kaaterskill/Catskill
Croton
IQI8b
-24-.
RESOURCE
(I<W>
13,547
5,226
5,216
1,122
214
3,174
607
420
611
1,569
31,706
GENERATION
<Kwh/yrx10**6>
27.4
;27.5
7t. 2
5.9
1.1
16.6
3.2
2.2
3.3
8.3
166.7
I
N
U'l
I
. . . ..,_v
·•
muiJKua AVIlA~ J.'UIIOJF
(UlUCNi. o.f &dlo:t• por &a,-)
..
·aA.!!N .. · ta.e .
DASIN
RIVER BAS.IN RUNOFF CORREI~·A TION ..
P nrr: n _ r
:z
-< c: .........
~
V'l
00
N
I
0
00
/
NYU/DAS 82-08
The PRB"s proportionality factors and resource potential are
calculated and become:
FACTOR
BASIN
St. Lawrence 1.20
Lake Champlain .46
Lake Ontario .60
Blac:k River .46
Upper Hudson 1.38
Erie-Niagara .39
Genesee _..,
• ..:>._)
Os~·Jt•go • 76
Moh.a~·Jk .57
Lower Hudson 1.00
Allegheny .33
Susquehanna .87
Delaware .50
!QI8b
RESOURCE
(MW>
39.0
14.a
19.0
14.6
43 .. 7
12.4
10.5
24.1
18. 1
31.7
10.5
27.6
15.9
-----
280.7
GENERATION
(Kwh /yrx 1 (lt '* 6)
200.0
76.7
100.0
76.7
230.0
65.0
55.0
126.7
95.0
166.7
55.0
145.0
83.4
-------
1475.2
power potentials o~ the Hudson River, NYH and Long Island regions
-26-
NYU/DAS 82-08
Therefore, the Statewide Potential becom0s:
STATEWIDE POWER POTENTIAL
REGION
Principal River Basins 280.7
Hudson River 19.8
New York Harbor 10.4
Long I sl e-md 2.4
-----
313.3
-27-.
GENERATION
0~~·•1"./yr:: lOt:it.~
1475.2
106.0
46.4
10.6
-------
1638.2
NYU/DAS 82-08
III. DEVICE EVALUATION
Devices capable of capturing the kinetic energy in water flow are varied
in their design and operation, but due to their common task and situation
with respect to the resource, there are a number of general characteristics
of K~IECS. Sections III-1 and III-2 describe these generic characteristics
which form the basis for the factors by which the various device types are
compared. The KHECS candidate types and the evaluation methodology are
described in Sections III-3 and III-4, and the devices are evaluated and
compared in Sections III-5 and III-6.
III-1. GENERIC ADVANTAGES OF KINETIC HYDROENERGY CONVERTORS
Kinetic conver·tor·s as considered here have several inherent technical
and practica 1 advantages over conventional ~otential-head energy hydro
installations. Advantages include:
• Minimum civil structure: there is no impoundment or channeling which
requires dams, penstocks or draft structures. Site-specific civil
work required by kinetic devices may include mounting provisions and/
or dredging or other stream-bed modification. Minimizing civil struc-
tures and custom work can contain costs effectively.
• Minfmua environmental impact: lack of impoundment or gross stream
modifications sharply reduces potential impacts on fish and oth~r
;
aquatic life both at the site and downstream. Mitigating equipment
such as fish ladders are unnecessary. Minimum flow rates are easily
maintained and the raising of upstream levels is slight. Thus costs
and regulatory difficulties may be less. Furthermore, most typas of
kinetic devices, by having relatively large water passages will be
far less damaging to aquatic life passing through them and/or can
utilize coarser mesh protective screens than potential-head systems.
.,
NYU/DAS 82-08
•
•
Maximum production economy: Hithou t extensive c ivi1 structures, th~
bulk of installation cost is in the device hard\'iare itself which
utilizes medium scale industrial manufacturi hg. Device capacities
in the tens to hundreds of kilowatts would be suscepti.ble to mass
production cost efficiencies.
Mininun land use: Since no massive civil structure or any impound-
ment area is entailed, the ~dro kinetic convertor devices can use
as little land as the machine itself requires, with the additional
need only of installation and electrical transmission access. Certain type::;
may even be able to be installed entirely from the water (e.g. barge) trn-:t~ ·
certain circumstances. Permanent, continuous removal of land from
other uses could in some cases be non existent, e.g., when the device
is sullnerged in a river. Ultimately, thedE'vicesconsidered are more
portable and more easily removed than civil structure-type installa-
tions. The relatively small land requirements wi11 result in minimized
land acquisition and related costs.
-29-
NYU/OAS 82-08
I II-2. GENERIC DISt\OVANTAGES OF KINETIC HYDRO ENERGY CONVERTORS
In addition to advantages, KHECS are subject to a few drawbacks inherent
in the fact that they utilize no direct potential head or static pressure
difference contribution to energy conversion as opposed to conventional hydro-
power systems. Such disadvantages include the foll~1ing.
• Relatively large machine size per unit of po\•ter: As compared \'lith
conventional, potential-head hydropower systems which convert stored
potentia 1 energy to kinetic energy at high speed at or innedi ately
prior to rotating machinery, KHECS must use the relatively slow
naturally-occurring kinetic flow, thus rcquir·ing larger rotating macn11.·
ery and greater gear ratios for practical electrical generation.
• Relatively small device capacity: Due to the nature of the kinetic
resource and practical engineering considerations, typical KHECS device
capacity will be on the order of tens of kilowatts per unit as opposed
to megawatts for potential-head installations. This is not directly
a disadvantage, especially since it may permit mass-production
economies, but it tends to lead to less cost-effective control. and
conditioning systems of higher sophistication and cost.
• Greater complexity and reduced accessibility: basically, whereas
i
witb.a potential-heat device, the device contains and controls the
flow, with a KHECS, the flow contains the device, and therefore,
rotating machinery is more exposed to the underwater enviro1111ent.
This, in many cases necessitates the use of sealed structures and
components would tend to reduce reliability while the economics of
servicing such equipment in-place or removing it for servicing re-
quires high reliability.
-30-
NYU/DAS 82-08
• Interconnect conside~ations: Hhereas each individual unit will be
rated in the tens of killO'r'/att range, a cluster of such units in a
given region must be installed so that charges due to interconnect
• can be distributed. Thus interconnect Ylill not overwhelm any favorable
economics.
• Environmental consideration: Installing such devices directly in
rivers and streams leads to a set of problems associated with 1oca1
recreational activities such as bathing and swimming. In a m1xed use
area protective measures such as mat·ker buoys may be appropriate.
-31-
NYU/DAS 82-08
III-3 DEVICE DESCRIPTIONS.
KHECS can be categorized by several alternative methods focusing on
any of their characteristics or on their stage of development. The most LISL··
ful method':is to categorize them .prima.r.ily :by· rotation ax. is orientat ion,which
tends to predetermine many otherimportant characteristics (such as the speed/
torque relationship). Examined here are devices with rotational.axes in all
three orthogonal planes relative to the water flow: axia 1-flow, crossflo\•1
and vertical axis (vertax). (See Figure III-1). Other major design cons1det··
ations include rotor submersion (the degree to which the rotor is submerged
in the flow), augmentation structure, and the mounting of the device.
Table III-l lists these four basic design parameters.
····-..... ---···.. . . ... ---. -··
Design Parameters
Rotational axis orientation
Rotor Submersion
Augmentation structure
Mounting
Table III-1
Options
Axial-flow
Cross flow
Vertical axis
Full
Partial
Non-augmented
Shrouded
Ducted
Bottom fixed
Bottaa tensile
Floating fixed
Floating tensile
Bridge suspended
Rotor submersion refers to the portion of the entire rotor which is
immersed in the water at a given time. This would normally be either 100~
or somewhat less than 50%. (See device drawings, e.g. Figures III-2 through I!I-4.)
Some devices include a structure which channels or accelerates the
freestream flow. A shroud is -an example of the former and a duct ts an
example of the latter. Some device types using submerged rotors require
I •
j .
NYU/DAS 82-08
Figure 111-1. KHECS Device Rotational axis Orientations
-33-
N 't U/ DAS 82-08
~
flow
isometric
a.
free
rotor
d.
Wells
rotor
Figure III-2. Axial flow KHECS
elevation
,r----screen
I blade
I
I
I
b.
free
rotor
I
1 nacelle
c.
I
\
\
\
ducted
rotor
-34-
' ' \
\
' mast
\
' "-----
duct
nacelle
isometric
~'
flow
a.
water1'/heel
elevation
_...:,.__~(:::::=::::._--H. W.
----r--+-~---L. w.
b.
submerged
waterwheel
base
-H.W. ·
-L.W.
Figure III-3. Cross Flow KHECS Devices
-35-1
NYU/ DAS 82-08
screen
plan view
--... ..
a.
sa von ius
-----·.' type
b.
Darrieus
type
Figure III-4. Vertical Axis KHECS devices
'-36-
elevation
shroud blade
base
generator
shaft
blade
shrouds to function. Figure UI-4 is an example of a shrouded device and
Figure III~2 shows a ducted device.
There are many possible variations of mountings for KHECS. A bottom
fixed mounting entails sinking pilings or pinning the structure to underlying
rock. Such a mounting would be applicable to any resource where the bottom is
appropriate and cost and accessibility for installation is reasonable.
A bottom tensile mounting uses anchors or moorings to which the KHECS is
cabled. The. anchor points may be on shore or underwater, and the
KHE~S is maintained at th~ proper depth and altitude by buoyant and/or
i
hydrodynamic forces. This type of mounting is suitable in general only
for relatively constant unidirectional flO\'IS as found in certain rivers.
A floating fixed mounting has the KHECS attached to a barge which is
anchored or moored from several directions. It would be usable with any
resource, unlike floating tensile n~unting, which, like the bottom tensile
mounting, is only usablP. with .unidirectional flows.
Finally, if available, a KHECS can be supported by an existing structure
such as a low bridge span from above; or a bridge pier from the side.
The gamut of mounting possibilities can be subsumed by the above general
categories.
Some particular embodiments of the potential KHECS designs are illustrated
in Figures 111-2 through III-4.
This study was 11•tted to examining devices suitable for capturi~g energy
from the resource of constantly flowing rivers and streams and reversing
tidal estuaries. Devices considered include only those which entail little or
no civil structure or rechanneling of water flow. Also, custom-type devices
for capturing energy fro• the flows in specific situations such as waterfalls,
existing conduits, etc. were not considered.
Figure 111-2 shows three of the many possible configurations for axial
-31-
.. NYU/OAS 82-08
flow KHECS. These are similar to horizontal axis WECS. Those shown have tr:o
bladed, upstream rotors with fixed bottom mounting, but practical devices could
also have one to six blades,, downstream r·otors 'and any of the roounting arr·angc-
ments. Another version shown is the diffuscr-augmentor turbine which utilizes
a flared hydrofoil duct to augment -flow through the rotor which :then can be .
smaller (vlhen compa_red with a non-a.ugmented system of similar po~t1er output).
Also shown is a hypothetical Wells turbine (Reference 8) which would be able .to
operate bidirectionally without the mechanical additions necessary for the ·
ordinary propeller turbine to do this.
Axial flow turbines of all types arc desct•ibed in U.S. patents dating back
at least to 1907. As examples McLaughlin (Reference 6) patented a dO\·mstream,
screw-type rotor unit \'lith tensile mounting, while Corbin (Reference 3) 1n 1915
designed a similar unit, but with upstream rotor and conical aug~entor. Such
patents demonstrate that the concept o"f kinetic hydro-conversion is not ne1·1.
Figure 111-3 shows two types of cross-flow KHECS, an undershot waterwheel
and a submerged waterwheel. The former has a rotor submersion of up to 50% and
the latter has lOGS with the addition of a significant augmenting shroud. Both
kHECS shown are undershot, but an overshot version of the submerged waterwheel
can also be considered, with equally involved shrouding. This figure also shows
both of these waterWheels with top~unted generators, with only dri~e train com-
ponents subjected to the water •. In addition to these 1s a hybrid crossflow device
called the Schneider Lift Translator (Refs.l2&13) which uses a multitude of hor-.
1zontal vanes moving vertically between upper and lower sprocket sets.
Figure 111-4 shows a turbine under development by Nova Energy Ltd:, the
Darrieus. Shown 1s a cantilever top mounting as would be supplied by a suitable
bridge structure or fixed, floating barge. A bottom mounting would also be
theoretically possible. For clarity, the necessary protective screen is not
shown in the figure, nor a possible d~ct.
NYU/DAS 82-08
III-4. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
Possible devices for· kinetic hydr·o energy conversion \'Jere evaluated and
compared according to the several operating characteristics listed here.
These design parameters relate to the hydrodynamic and energy
theoretical prop.erties inherent in the particular design under study as
well as practical operational considerations. The parameters exam~ned ~re: .
• Fill factor: As used here, this is a qualitative judgement of the poten-
.. tial for the device to fill the cross-sectional area of the appropriate
resource type, particularly for small streams. Quantitatively a fill
factor of .5 would indicate that turbines are filling 1/2 the cross-sec-
tion area. Fill factor for cross flow machines relates the amount of activ~;
structure in the water at any time to the cross-section.
• Power coefficient: The predicted power output of a device based on a stan-
dard flow and expressed per unit frontal_ area of the device •.
• Power per unit volume: A figure, expressed in kW/m 3 which r~tios the power
output of a practicable embotlir.1ent of a device with fts total active (or
swept} volume. Relatively high values indicate lower bulk volume per unit
power delivered. · \
• Per unit weight: A figure, expressed in kW/kg which ratios the power output
of a device with an estimate of its weight (or mass). This relatesiunit
transp~rtat1on and installation costs. Relativ~ly high values indicate lower
weight per unit power delivered. \
• Speed to torque ratio: A figure, expressed in (·kN·m· s)'"1 W.ich ratios
a typical angular velocity with the accompanying torque (~t). This
gives a test of the suitability of a device to a load. For generating
electricity, a high value of w/t is desirable so that speed increaser
costs and inefficiencies are minimized.
-39-
NYU/DAS 82-08
• Reliability: This is a judgement as to the realistic potential for a
device to operate at high capacity factor (limited by resource only) with
minimum preventive or downtime maintenance. Reliability is judged to
be enhanced by design simplicity and inherent ruggedness. Simplicity
requires minimizing linkages, seals, and all other components with
limited service lives or requiring periodic servicing. Designs must
also lend themselves to the use of high reliability components. Rugged-
ness includes defensibility from hydrodynamic forces, aquatic life, debris
and ice.
• Serviceability: This factor refers to the elementsinherent in a design
which affect the access and ease of services. This is directly effected
by the type of mounting used an~ the complexity of the design.
• Directionality: This term is an indication of the potential of a given
design to be used for unidirectional or bidirectional resources. Some
designs are inherently omnidirectional, and some designs require extensive
modification to be used bidirectionally.
• Power control: Thfs term assesses the potential for a device to be
susceptible to overspeed or overpower under high flowrate conditions.
Some designs can be self-limiting and others will require governing, ;.clutching,
braking, or feathering systems to prevent damage. '
-.. .... . ... .. ... ---•--··· .. . ·• ·---, .... ,. ··~ . .. •.. .. ... -~·· ., ... __ . ·-r-·-·-·
• Aspect Ratio: The aspect ratio is the ratio of the height to width of a
machine cross-section. For axial flow turbines the aspect ratio is always.l.
For vertical axial machines such as the Darrieus, the aspect ratio can either be
unity or values greater than or less than one. This ability to vary the
aspect ratio of the vertical axis machine can impact on the fill factor,
particularly in shallo~r resources.
. '
I II-5. DEVICE EVALUAT.IONS AND COMPARISON~
In this section several d~vices which are feasible as KHECS are discussed.
Because of the basic design and inherent operating condition differences
between the types of potentia 1 KHECS examined, an issue was the convnen-
surability of the data derived. The most useful analysis method for com-
parison is to examine a practical version of each type with common values
for aspect ratio, frontal area, and of course, current velocity. The
following discussions are based on particul~r systems for analysis as des-
cribed, and the results are listed in Table III-3 for the standard conditions . .
taken (aspect ratio = 1.0, AF = 28.3m 2, and U:o = l.Sm/s).
A. Axial-flow propeller
This type of machine, as shown in Figure III-2 and described in Section
111-3, is the one studied in more depth for use as.a KHECS by Aerovironment. Inc.
(Ref. 9). The design is inherently simple and rugged, especially as con-
ceived for unidirectian·al;flbw. It also has a high speea to·
torque ratio which is relatively well suited to electrical generation.
Since it would be impractical to operate the rotor other than fully submerged,
a rotating seal will be required to protect bearings,gearbox and the gener-
ator.
the system:examined has a three-bladed rotor with a diameter of 6m
with moderate solidity gfv1ng a tfp speed ratio ,x·; at P max of 4.5.
A horizontal axis propeller rotor automatically has an aspect ratio
of 1.0 which gives a relatively poor fill factor for shallow resources.
However, a poor fill factor simply means that to extract a major por-
tion of the energy available in a flow requires the use of an array of
KHECS. This is desirable anyway in the case of a resource crossection
larger than the economically optimum size machine.
-41-
NYU/OAS 82-08
Relatively high values of P/V and P/~1 indicate relatively 10\'1 bulk
and weight per unit power· delivered, making the device efficient from the
material requirement and handling perspectives.
At Pmax the speed to torque. ratio. is ;relatively high,which 1s good for
electrical generation. For· the analysis model, w at P is 2."25 rad/s max
or 21.5 rpm.
By using a simple, fixed-blade rotor with a reasonable strength safety
ratio, and locating the rotor below the floating ice region at the water
surface, good reliability should be able to be obtained. This also assumes
proper specification of the shaft seal, drive tra_in COilllOnents and generator.
Ultimately, a hydraulic drive option with remote (land-based) generator
could ,be examined; this configuration possibly giving enhanced reliability,
serviceability, and capacity factor (rotor and generator speeds can be
decoupled) •
. Serviceability for this submerged rotor, if its design is kept simple,
will .probably not be a severe economic drawback .. Cleaning and general inspec-
tion could be performed in the submerged position. Internal maintenance or
seal replacement would require lifting of the turbine either by uncapsizing
a mounting barge or lifting a bottom-mounted unit by crane. Obviously, a
key design parameter is to minimize the lifetime CCl!lllitinent ·for such raisings.
The propeller turbine can be designed for any directionality. Var.ious •
schemes include articulated blades and bidirectional generator drives,which
are considered impractical from cost and reliability perspectives. More
practical is to give the turbine freedom in the yaw direction (rotation about
a vertical axis). This would make the turbine omnidirectional, but since the
tidal resource only requires bidirectionality, .rotation can be limited to
about 180° so that slip rings for electric power or hydraulic connections
·can be eliminated (since ~he machine would only be allowed to turn through
half a circle).
..42-
•
i :
Power shaft (kW)
I
C a
Pmax
P/V b (kW/m 3)
P/W b {kW/kg)
wl T ( kNms) -1
Fill Factor
Reliability
Servi ceabi 1 i ty d
· Directionality
Power Control
NOTES:
TABLE II I -2
KHECS DEVICE COMPAIUSON CHART
UQJ = l. 5m/ s AF = 28. 3ri
ASPECT RATIO = 1.0
Propeller Waterwheel
19.1 . . 6. 7
0.4 0.14
3.1 c 0.06
0.035 0.001
0.26 0.012
Poor-Good Good
Good Good
Fair Good
Any Uni ,bi
Stall or External,
furl or clutch
brake
Darrjeus
14.3
0.3
0.12
0.025
0.36
Poor-Good
Fair
Fair
Onni
Brake, possibly
stall
a. cp based on rotor only, does not include other component losses.
max
b. Hot including muntfng, drive train, or generat~r.
c. If given yaw rotation so as to be omnidirectional like the Darrieus,
P/V for the propeller would decrease to about 0.15.
d. Depends 1 arge ly on mounting
-43-
..
Another propeller device for bidrectionality is the Wells rotor as shown
in Figure III-2. This would use a large hub and short synmetrical foil
blades at its periphery, and \'JOuld rotate in the same direction with flows
from either direction. It is a theoretical possibility which would require
further empirical testing.
Power control of the propeller turbine can be made inherent to the
design and thus not require any external governor system. This can be done
bY. ·using a directly connected induction generator operating sychronously with
the power grid. In its power generation range, the rotor speed would be
fixed, and as the current speed rises above the design point, blade stall
occurs, sharply reducing efficiency and 1 imiting power output to a value
roughly equal to Pmax. ·Power ts thus automatically 1 imited and useful power
is still generated at above design point current speeds as opposed to a braked
or furled system which would supply no power at high current speeds.
Furling and braking would also be possible with appropriate sensing
and control systems~ and furling may be appropriate for.small units.
A key background advantage to the propeller turbine as compared to the
other proposed KHECS is its lowest relative technical risk and highest con-
fidence in ultimate performance,due to vast experience with significantly
similar systems.
B. Waterwheel
The waterwheel kHECS (see Figure III-3) is a cross-flow device fi'rmly
mounted to the banks of a strea. or on a convenient existing structure.
It is conceived of as a low-technology device which would have dimensions
appropriate to the particualr stream cross-section. It is a low efficiency
device in terms of frontal area, volume, and height, and would be limited
to shallow resources and small power outputs. Therefore, along with the fully
submerged rotor version which can be expected to be even less efficient
-44-
•
NYU/ i:JAS 82-08
and more complex, the waterwheel KHECS would be more suitable for an indi-
vidual with a stream than for utility applications.
For analysis, the corrmensurable water~r1heel examined has a diameter
and length both equal to 5.32m. This gives a total frontal area aspect
ratio of 1.0 and an in-the-water aspect of 0.5. This, or a lowe~ aspect
can give a good fill factor on a small stream. As shown in Table III-3,
the rotor CP based on total frontal area is at best quite low, as are
va,ues for P/V and P/W. Because w/T is also extremely low, this device
would be better suited to a mechanical load rather than paying the great
further efficiency loss for the speed-up to generate electricity.
Although crude and bulky, the waterwheel could have relatively access-
ible shaft bearings and other machinery, and th:Js both good re1 iabil ity
and serviceability. Also, the inherent ruggedness of the rotor and insen-
sitivity to small rotor damage enhances reliability. Screening would likely
only have to prevent large debris from entering the rotor, as small debris
would not cause damage, and fish could pass through largely unharmed.
While the rotor cou~d be used bidirectionally with straight blades,
it would be somewhat less efficient, and the resource envisioned for this
device is only unidirectional anyway.
Since the blades cannot practically be stalled or furled, power control
must be external if the resource used has a large ratio of peak to design
current flow. Either a hefty brake along with blad~s st~ng enough to
resi-st the high torque from being locked in ~n overspeed current, or a shroud
which lowers, shielding the rotor from the flow could be used. Most likely,
the above would dictate that an external system operating a clutch releasing
the load from the rotor would be most practical, allowing the rotor to spin
freely with no torque •
The Savoni~s-type vertical axis device (see Figure III-4) is similar
in performance to the submerged waterwheel. Its efficiency is very low, and
relative material requirernents are high. Unless it could be suspended by
an appropriate existing structure, it requires an involved mounting struc-
ture unwarranted by the low power capacity limitation per device.
C. Darrieus
This wind turbine design, either straight-sided or egg-beater shaped,
has also been suggested for use in water. The straight-sided version
(see Figure III-4) with -two to four blades is a moderately high speed
medium efficiency machine. However, it is not self-starting and requires a
starting system. This can be a current sensing and starting motor circuit
or a small, ratcheted savonius turbine on the axis, or by using an indue-
tor motor as both starting motor and generator(with appropriate switching circuitt·y)
A related design Which can achieve higher efficiencies and is self-starting
is the cyclogiro (also known as the giromill). This is a low w, high effic-
iency design. Its two to four vertical, symnetrical airfoil blades are pivoted
and require a modulation control system which adjusts their angle of attack
during the course of a revolution. The complexity of these articulated joints
at the exposed ends of the rotor, which must carry hydrodynamic and centrifugal
forces, are considered a severe drawback to reliability. Indeed, the basic
geometry of both the Darrieus and cyclogiro with sizeable blades entfr~ly at
;
r (the circ&aference), supported by rotor anns, is considered significantly less
0
rugged than a p~opeller roto~: In ~dditi~m .th~ rotor could be susceptibl~ to strong
vibrations,s1nce tne blades are at large distances from the axis of rotat1on.
The particular model analyzed is a three-bladed Darrfeus device with both
a height and diameter of 5.32m, giving as aspect ratio of 1.0. Smaller aspects
to give better fill factors for single-device installations would be possible,
but would have lower w/T values, thus lowering efficiency.
-46-
\
' J
j
'·
'
NYU/OAS 82-08
Most of the factors shown in Table III-2 approach those for the propeller
turbine, except those for P/V and reliability which are related to the blades
being located at the peripher·y of rotation on arms as discussed above. Also,
the relatively more sensitive blades will require finer screening.
It can be seen that w/T for the Darrieus is actually better than that for
the propeller, but this is due to the fact t~t the reduced efficiency of the
Oarrieus is manifested almost entirely in reduced torque (since power is the ..
product of wand T and the rotation rates are comparable).
Serviceability as with the prope 11 er, wi 11 be dependent upon ;o1hether
the cantilever shaft is supported from a structure above (floating or fixed)
or below. The operating requirements for the shaft bearings will be more
severe than for the other KHECS candid~tes. Cleaning would be slightly more
involved than for the propeller turbine KHECS.
The Darrieus is inherently omnidirectional, and thus could be used for
both uni-and bidirectional resources.
Power control for currently overspeed conditions may be available through
careful rotor design, .to rely on blade stall, using a synchronized generator.
More likely would be to use a brake driven by an external sensing and control
system, since the torque would then be very low.
D. Other devices·
.•
Two other devices which warrant discussion are the diffuser-augmentor
propeller tunJ1ne and the Schneider Lift Translator. The propeller turbine
with a flow augmenting duct was the subject of a detailed theoretical and
experimental study by Aerovironment, Inc. (Ref. 9 ). While it has been
shown that a carefully designed duct can augment flow through the rotor, more
research would be required to establish whether the augmentation can be
raised to a value sufficient to make the ducted version more cost-effective
than the free rotor turbine.
-47-
Meanwhile~ the increased complexity of duct, mountings, and control sys-
tem,increase technical and economic risk and cause one to view against using·
the ducted propeller at this stage.
The Schnieder Lift Translator has been conceived as a low-head rather
than kinetic hydroengine. Although it could undoubtedly be used in such
a manner, it would be more difficult. For example, the sprocket
shaft bearings and linkage to the gearbox would have to be submerged, thus
requiring at least three more seals than a turbine device. Extensive model
tests of a freestream application of the lift·translator concept would have to be
performed.
Although its blades have the advantage of not being twisted, and thus
are potentially extrudable at moderate cost, with increasing width, they need be
fortified, as well as their end attachments (which must take the total blade
load)• Also, they must be relatively stiff to prevent hydrodynamic inter-
ference between blades and oscillation. The sheer number of blades, perhaps
forty or more, and the complexity of the chain and sprocket drive do not bode
well for ultimate reliability. Indeed, the device is inherently susceptible
to damage by foreign bodies entering into the blade area. Inspection and
cleaning may also cause significant problems.
Finally,. from the standpoint of economics {$/kW installed). the most importa:-rt
figures are the CP and the total installed structural cost. The ratio:(~/T)
is a figure·of merit concerning.cost of rotating machinery. nigher (w/T) values
indicate lo\~r rotating machinery costs per unit power; however, rotating
machinery usually represents less than lOS of the total machine cost. Thus,
comparingthc propeller device and the Darrieus in Table III-2, one ~rust give
stronger weight to the significantly h1gi1er CP for the propeller than the ili gher
(w/-r) for the Darrieus. One is led to the conc.lusion that the propeller de-
~ice should be more attractive from an economic analysis, even though this
-analysis is more qualitative than quantitative.
~48-
' .
NYU/DAS 82-08
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Kinetic hydro energy .resource warranting the develofiTlent of devices to
utilize it has been found to exist in New York State. This resource con-
sists of river flow (unidirectional) sites and tidal flow (bidirectional}
sites, both of ~1hich have substantial power production potential.
The various possible types of KHECS yield a number of device types and
versions which can be practical. Based on the criteria considered important
to cost-effectiveness, the axial flow propeller machine applicable to rivers
of reasonable depth is cons1dered to be better than the others. This type h?~
the greatest potentia 1 for economic viability and is adaptable to both uni-
directional and bidirectional resources.
In the next phase a conceptual engineering design for uni.-and bidirec-
tional propeller turbine KHECS will be developed. Costing and performance
predictions for actua 1 uni-ts at actual sites will be performed and a
cost-effectiveness assessment generated. A model testing will be conducted
to verify the system:efficiency and determine operating parameters. If
high efficiency is obtained prototype testing is indicated (if the economics .
1.! also ..... ora~le).,.
'~~-·~.
-49-
'i
V. REFERENCES
V-I. RESOURCE ASSESSt~ENT REFERENCES
1.) USGS Topographic Quadrangle Maps, 7.5 Minute Series, United States
Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior-.
2.) Water Resources Data for New York, Volume 1, 2 & 3, U.S. Geological
Survey Water Data Report NY-80-1, 2 & 3, USGS/WRO/HD-81/030, 1981.
3.) NOAA Nautical Charts, East Coast and Great lakes, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Survey, 1982.
4.) NOAA Tidal Current Charts, New York Harbor & long Island Sound,
Nationa 1 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seventh & Eigth
Edition, 1979.
5.) NOAA Tide Tables, East Coast of North America, National Oceanic
· and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Survey, 1982.
6.) NOAA Tidal Current Diagrams, long Island Sound and Block Island
Sound, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1982.
-50-
f
V-II KHECS DEVICES
l. Ah;ard> RonJ et al, Nicr·o-Hydro Power·. Reviewing of an Old Concept,
DOE/ET/01752-1, U.S. Cepar·tment of Energy, Washington, D.C., January,
1979.
2. Brulle, Robert V. and Larsen, Harold C., "Girom111(Cyc1ogiro Windmill)
Investigation for Generation of Electrical Power" in Proceedings atthe
Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems. Washington, D.C.,
June 9-11~ 1975.
3. Chappell, John R. and Mclatchy, Michael J., 11 DOE Small Hydropm•~er
Engineering Development Activities," in Water Power '81 Conference
Proceedings, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C., 1981.
pgs. 334-347.
4. Corbin, Elbert A., "Power Conversion Plant: U.S. Patent, No.-1123491, 1915.
5. Cros, Pierre, "System fm• Converting the Randomly Variable Energy of a Natural Fluid," U.S. Patent, No. 4149092, 1979.
6. Mouton, William J., Jr., and Thompson, David F., "River Turbine," U.S.
Patent, No. 3986787, 1976.
7. Mclaughlin, Robert, ••Means for Obtaining Power from Flowing Water," u.s. Patent, No. 868798, 1907.
8. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, "New Energy-Saving Tech-
nologies Use Induction Generators," Technical Support Package, MFS-25513,
NASA Tech Briefs, Vol. 6, No. 1, f.larshall Space Flight Center·, 1981.
9.· Radkey, Robert L., and Hibbs, Bart D., Definition of Cost Effective River
Turbine Designs, final Report, AV-FR-81/595 (DE82010972}, U.S. Department
of Energy, washington, D.C., 1981.
10. Raghvnathan, S., Tan, C.P., Wells, N.A.J., "Theory and Perfonnance of a
Wells Turbine.~ in, Journal of Energn5, Vol. 6 number 2, March-April, 1982,
American Institute of Aeronautics a Astronautics, New York.
11. Renewable Energy News, Ottawa, Canada, Spring, 1982.
12. Schneider; Daniel J. and Damstrom, fmory K. , "World's First C0tm1ere;ia 1
Lift Translator Hydro EngineTM lnstalled.at Richvale, California," in
WaterpaNer •a1, op. cit., pgs~ 1262-1276.
13. Schneider Lift Translator Corporation, A Technological Breakthrough in
low-head, Standardized Hydroelectric Powr Generation, Justin, Texas.
14. Smith, Nonnan, •the Origins of the Water Turbine,• in Scientific American,
January 1980, pgs. 138-148.
15. Souczek, Ernst, "Stream Turbine," U.S. Patent, No. 2501696, 1950.
16. Struble, Arthur D., Jr., "Underwater Generator,• U.S. Patent, No. 3209156,
1965.
-51-
KINETIC HYDRO ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS
AND THE NEW YORK STATE RESOURCE
Phase II -Final Report
August, 1983
NYU/DAS 83-108
~ ~ I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors wish to acknowledge Mr. John F. Franceschi for
his help in field investigations and photography; Helen
Jones for her typing and/Connie Tan of the New York Power
Authority (NYPA) for her helpful suggestions during the
course of the program. The test model was fabricated by
the General Applied Science Laboratory of Westbury, N.Y.
-ii-
NYU/DAS 83-108
Figure No.
II-1
II-2
II-3
II 1-1
IV-1
IV-2a
IV-2b
IV-3
IV-4
IV-5
IV-6
IV-7
IV-8
IV-9
V-1
V-2
V-3
V-4
V-5
V-6
v-7 v-8
V-9
V-10
V-11
VI-1
VI-2
VI-3
VI-4
VI-5
VI-6
VI-7
VI-8
V I-9
VI-10
VI-11
VI-1?.
VI-13
LIST OF FIGURES
Standard Submerged KHECS Turbine Unit
KHECS Turbine Nacelle Internals
Standard KHECS Site
Lift Coefficient and Angle of Attack Distributions -
NACA 4412-4424
KHECS Water Channel Test Model
KHECS test model brake assembly during installa-
tion in nacelle
KHECS test model brake assembly mounted on rear
end-head, showing shaft coupling, tachometer.
Sensor wiring and coolant hoses.
KHECS test model shaft housing assembly (view from
forward nacelle end-head and rear shaft
bearing carrier)
KHECS test model mounting components
Assembled KHECS test model without fairings
Complete KHECS test model mounted to pylon with
fairings attached
KHECS test model (83X4 Rotor)
KHECS test model data acquisition and control
system (DACS)
Final checkout and calibration of KHECS test
model and the data acquisition and control
system
Circulating Water Channel ewe test section work area
KHECS test model during rotor change ewe current speed calibration chart ewe reference pitot tube manometer
KHECS post model mounted in submerged test position
in ewe
KHECS test model under test
B2X5 under test (side view)
B2XS under test (side view)
S2X5 under test(bottom view)
B2X5 under test (bottom view)
Rotor B2X4 --Torque vs angular velocity
Rotor 83X4 --Torque vs angular velocity
Rotor 82X5 --Torque vs angular velocity
Rotor B3X5 (Damaged) Torque data
Rotor B2X4 --Power vs angular velocity
Rotor 83X4 --Power vs angular velocity
Rotor B2X5 --Power vs angular velocity
Rotor B3X5 (damaged) Power data
Ideal Rotor Performance
Rotor 83X4 --Power vs angular velocity
Power coefficient vs free stream velocity
Rotors after testinq: catastrophic failure of
rotor 83X5 and slight damage to B3X4 and B2X5
Slight damage of rotor B3X4
i i i
Page No.
II-6
II-7
II-8
III-3
IV-4
1 v-5
IV-5
IV-6
IV-6
IV-8
IV-8
IV-10
IV-11
IV-11
v-3
v-4
v-4
V-5
v-5
V-6
v-6
V-7
v-7
V-d
V-8
: V!-5
VI-6
VI-7
VI-8
VI-9
VI-10
VI-11
VI-12
VI-13
VI -14
VI-15
VI-16
VI -16
NYU/DAS 83-108
List of Figures (Cont'd)
VII-1
VII-2
VII-3
VII-4
VII-5
VII-6
VII-7
VII-8
VII-9
VII-10
VII-11
VII-12
VII-13
VII -14
VI 1-15
VII-16
VII-17
Proposed site for KHECS
Enlargement of Roosevelt Island
NOAA Tidal current data 1983 (Hell Gate)
View of lower Niagara River, looking north.
Area given priority during the on site investi-
gations is situated on the U.S. bank of the Nia-
gara (topographical view) ...
Prior investigation area outlining navigational
depths
The proposed site and strata along the Niagara Gorge.
Hydrologic conditions at proposed site
The New York State River Basins (as defined in the
Phase I report) constitute the major portion of
the KHECS power resource.
Sketch of an idealized fluvial system
Relation between width/depth ratio and percentage of
silt and clay in channel perimeter for stable
alluvial streams (after Schumm, 1960).
Examples of channel patterns. P is sinuosity (ratio
of channel to valley length) (From S.A. Schumm,
1963, Sinuosity of alluvial rivers on the Great
Plains: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., V74, pp 1089-1100).
Variability of sinuous channel patterns.
Maps showing channel (A) before and (B) after in-
troduction of suspended sediment load.
Meandering-thalweg channels.
Relation between channel sinuosity and flume
slope {From Schumm 1973).
Relation between sinuosity and ~tream power. (Data
from Khan, 1971).
-iv-
Page Number
VII-3
VII-4
VII-S
VII-9
VII-10
VII-11
VII-12
VII -13
VII-15
VII -16
VII-16
VII-21
VII-21
VII-23
VII-24
VII-25
VII-25
NYU/OAS 83-112
r
p
p
Q
u
X
LIST OF SYMBOLS
2
rotor frontal area = ~r t
number of blades
2 section lift coefficient = L/; pU A
CD
2 pressure coefficient = (p-p )/ ;p U CD CD
3 power coefficient = ~/;p UCDA
Lift force
turbine radius
radial distance from the axis of the turbine
pressure
power
volumetric flowrate through rotor = AU
stream velocity
tip speed ratio = wr/U
GREEK SYMBOLS
a. section angle of attack
n
3
efficiency of rotor = Power delivered/t P UCD A
p density of water
w rotational. speed
SUBSCRIPTS
max maximum
co free stream value
1 upstream
4 downstream
15
I. INTRODUCTION
The possibility of installing turbines directly in waterways has been studied
by a number of investigators 1 •2•3 recently. In the New York Power Authority
Phase I study, conducted at New York University, a number of conclusions were
reached with respect to the New York State resource, and with respect to the
types of kinetic hydro energy conversion systems which could be utilized to
exploit it. This study established the following:
0
0
0
0
A kinetic hydro energy resource (estimated to be on the order of
approximately 300 MW) warranting the development of devices to exploit
it has been found to exist in the State of New York.
Significant resource potentials exist for both river (unidirectional)
and tidal (bidirectional) flows.
Whereas rated power for wind energy conversion systems is usually at a
power setting significantly above the average power point {sometimes an
order-of-magnitude greater), this effect is usually not true for hydro
energy conversion systems (whose velocity distribution curve shows con-
siderably less variability). Such an effect is important in determin-
ing cost effectiveness.
A technology ass~ssment yielded a number of devices, and versions of
devices, which could be practical. However, criteria relating to
engineering simplicity, cost effectiveness, and near-term commercializa-
tion show a benefit for axial flow propeller type machines in both
tidal flows and rivers of reasonable depth.
These favorable results led to the Phase II program described herein. An
engineering and economic analysis has been carried out to determine the
approximate cost per kilowatt installed of representative KHECS units.
I-1
NYJ/DAS
The economic analysis was developed for a series of moderate sized (approxi-
mately 4m rotor diameter) units suitable for an established baseline con-
dition described below. The reason for the consideration of such units is
that while sites of exceptional depth, span, and flow rate are available
in the State (for example, the Niagara River downstream of the Lewiston
Power Plant, and the East River downstate), a more conservative analysis
of cost effectiveness should consider less advantageous situations. We thus
established a baseline situation, which is a river of moderate depth (greater
than Sm), span (greater than 20m), and flow rate (2m/s exceeded 25% of the
time) for our cost effectiveness analysis. This analysis is presented in
Section II.
A test model was built and tested to quantify the effectivness of the
KHECS system envisioned. A test program was designed and 4 model blades
were tested during the week of 9 May 1983, at the David Taylor Naval Ship
Research and Development Center (DTNSROC) in Bethesda, Md.
The blade design calculations,based on Glauert airfoil theory, are des-
scribed inSection III. The water channel tests carried out at DTNSRDC are
described in Section V, which follows the description of the engineering
design and fabrication of the test model (Section IV). Presentation and
analysis of the data gathered during the water channel tests conducted
appears in Section VI.
In conjunction with these efforts, preliminary site specific investigations
were also carried out both upstate and downstate to .identify suitable sites
for prototype and demonstration-scale testing. These investigations centered
on the geologicayhydrological, legal, and environmental factors influencing
kinetic hydro develop1nent at the sites. The results of these investigations
are presented in Section VII.
I-2
NYU/DAS 83-;:.=.
II. ENGINEERING AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF GENERIC SYSTEM
In order to develop a mature cost estimate for a generic KHECS, it was
necessary to examine the New York State resource in detail. This analysis
let to the conclusion that while significant depths exist at Niagara and
the East River {see Section VII), most of the other good sites have depths
on the order of 5-6 meters. In addition, a velocity of 2 m/s which is
exceeded 25% of the time is a representative value for an average good
site {a much higher speed is available at Niagara).
Based on these conditions, clusters of 4.3 m diameter turbines were examined.
Peak power is assumed at a velocity of 2 m/s {the design point). Based on
an assumed overall efficiency of 33.5% {including losses due to screen, gear,
generator and transmission) generic units rated at 20 kW are established.
Note that if rotor efficiencies in excess of the value utilized are avail-
able {through, for example, augmentation),the unit rating can increase
significantly.
Another important factor considered for the generic system was that since
such sites have 5 m depths, ice loading onto the top section of the units
must be considered in unit design. The KHECS units described below are
intended to withstand 611 thick ice.
A. Engineering Analysis
In order to establish the likely benefits and costs of the favored KHECS
in mature design and deployment, a standardized design and site were
postulated (as stated above). The "standard design" is shown in Figs.
11.1 and 11.2, and is described below. The "standard site" assumes the
utilization of ten turbines of 4.3 m diameter in a stream with a mean
I I-1
NYU/DAS 83-108
width in excess of 20m as shown in Fi~. II.3. It is based on a
streamwise separation between turbines of ten diameters to reduce
wake effects. Ten such sites would be rated at 2 MW.
As presently conceived, the standard axial turbine KHECS has a two-
or three-bladed 4.3 m diameter turbine. Its supporting and protective
structure can withstand 6" (0.15 m) thick ice and is integrated and
tied to a 70 ton (63,640 kg) reinforced concrete base. A description
of the "standard" KHECS subsystems follows:
Blades
There are several candidate materials for the blades for the "standard"
KHECS which has three blades and a 4.3 m diameter rotor. With a
nacelle diameter of .1m the individual blade length is 1.75 m ex-
clusive of the blade root. Several materials, such as fiberglass
reinforced expoxy, cast iron, fabricated steel, cast aluminum, and
fiberglass reinforced nylon, were examined. Epoxy-fiberglass blades
were utilized in what follows because of strength, durability, and
ease of fabrication. The low current speeds and high density of
moving water result in low rotation rate and high torque requirements
for the rotor. Possible ingestion of submerged debris smaller than
the minimum screen apertures also requires local impact resistance
and blade root impact torque resistance. The blade design takes
these factors into account.
Structure and Screen
For the standard KHECS designed to withstand 6" thick ice of any
lateral dimension, the screen requires a massive steel spine which
then also serves as the pylon supporting the turbine. Thus the
II-2
NYU/DAS 83-108
turbine can be considered to have a downstream rotor. (If augmentation
effects are important a redesign would be necessary.) Once the KHECS
assembly is in place, the turbine can be removed from the supporting
structure if necessary. The spine is hot-rolled steel stock 2" by
12 11 with back supports of 8" diameter pipe. Grid bars for the screen
are horizontal 3/8" by 3" stock running from the spine aft to the back
supports. Intermediate supports stiffen the grid bars as necessary.
The strength and sharpness of the spine allows it to cut through ice
and deflect any large branches, while the base is of sufficient
weight to prevent overturning. Shedding of debris is encouraged by
the horizontally aftward slope of the screen assembly.
Nacelle
The nacelle cover, a pipe section of approximately 0.7 m diameter,
must accommodate the rotating machinery including the shaft bearings
and seal, gearbox, brake, and generator. Assembly and disassembly
with reasonable access must be provided for with adequate strength,
rigidity, and watertightness. Machinery is supported by an internal
heavy backbone so that it may be assembled, tested, and serviced
with the nacelle cover removed. End covers seal to the nacelle shell
by 0-rings. The forward end cover is integral to the nacelle back-
bone and spine mounting tang. Fairing bodies minimize flow distur-.
bance. The aft end cover includes the shaft seal.
Base
The KHECS base is reinforced concrete in a flat triangular slab. Its
weight is sufficient to prevent overturning of the turbine assembly.
The slab incorporates steel 1-beams and rebar tying together stud
II-3
NY~/UAS e3-108
pads for the spine and back supports. The slab has a height of
;
2 0.75 m, a weight of 63,640 kg, and a footpring area of 37.7 m .
The base has three corner feet for stability.
The construction of the base will depend on the accessibility of the
particular site. For sites accessible by a 100 ton barge crane,
the KHECS base can be cast in one piece dockside and transported
to the site. For a site where such loads cannot be handled from
the water, a base caisson, including cast in structural steel can
be preformed, trucked to the site, floated into place, sunk, and
filled with concrete underr1ater by tremie.
Rotating Machinery
For simplicity, ruggedness, and low cost, the generator is an
induction machine. Its excitation is supplied by the grid and it
cannot generate when the grid is down. Control equipment is the
same as that for an induction motor and no costly synchronizing
equipment is required. A totally enclosed, fan-cooled unit is
specified in light of the marine environment. It is rated at 20 kW.
The low-speed shaft is sealed at the aft nacelle end plate and
supported by a pair of packed, sealed ball bearings. The gearbox
is a concentric speed increaser having a ratio of approximately 35:1
with adequate ratings for the maximum power and twice the rated
torque. It is connected to the low-speed shaft by a flexible
coupling and directly to the generator via the high-speed shaft.
Elements of the nacelle internals are depicted in Fig. 11.2.
II-4
Transmission
A submarine cable brings power from each of 10 turbines in the
standard interconnect site to the shore and generator control box.
The individual boxes are connected by cable to a common 13.2 kv
power transformer.
B. Capital Cost Analysis
The capital cost analysis is presented here. All equipment has been
broken down by component, based on 100 units. The per turbine costs are
presented in the last column. It is assumed that 10 turbines are
installed at each site.
Costs of equipment utilized in the units are based on quotes received
from manufacturers. Estimates were made for the mature cost associated
with the installation of 10 units per site of 10 sites. Material costs
are based on local suppliers' quotations, and other material and labor
costs are based on the values cited in the 1982 R.S. Means Construction
Cost Handbook. The plug and mold setup is necessary to produce the
blades for 100 units. The capital cost analysis does not include trans-
mission costs from the land near the site to the nearest available
power line.
If only one site was developed we would estimate an approximate 20%
increase in the cost analysis developed below (and blades would be
manufactured without a mold). but mature economics should be based on
the 20MW rated system described here.
II-5
.NYU/DAS 83-108 Q) f.'l :0 '"..0
.... ~
. } •• Q)
~---: ... :>
I -. -· .
Oo; • -tV
-r-ro·
' • 'M
I . Vl
r ••
--L.
t
1. •. • •. 0 • I • . Q) o •
0 ,.. 0
··-~·--------. -~-----.. --~-:-~~ -~ 0-.-a:-:::~;-~
. I :-: : 0 C.l
• •• t
0 0 -~: ... I • 0 ° .. I .I
-__ [ __ ~~--· ---1-i-· : ----~~-:-----~--~: .. .------. ----·-
-I . • • • I 0 • • •••• 0 • • • • • • • • It ,
• . -+J
0~
0 0 0
-1-1.
041
I .
0 0+-:--0
o I
r o
' ' -I
/ -~-0-::o:i ~--:--~:c:-:
. ! • r:1 I
! 0~-
.. \ 0~
-l ~ . •·M·
. l :> .
FIGURE II-1. Standard submerged KHECS Turbine Unit
.I I -6
-.....
• "
seal
gearbox
brake
---------------____ __.
shell bedplate
blade
J_
FIGURE 11.2. KHECS Turbine Nacelle Internals
\ ':.: ::.•
\ ~~ I~
\ .._.
\ 'J
\ ,,
:;z
-<: c: ........
§;!
Vl
())
w
• .....
0
())
NYU/DAS 83-108
t
L A_0=~~
& & __ _
L-------
River Bed
Submarine ca'!Jle
2 cables
4 cables
2 cables
Common
switch
gear
13kV
200kt.
\Two generator centro~
boxes per pole
. : .
FIGURE 11.3. Standard KHECS Site
II -8
NYU/DAS 83-108
COSTS FOR EQUIPMEiiT AND COI·tPONENTS FOR
THE KINETIC HYDRO Et~ERGY CONVERSION SYSTEr~ (KHECS}
PRICE BASE PER
NO. UtliTS TURBHIE
(1) (100)
a. ROTATING EQUIPMENT
1. ROTOR
la. Blades (Epoxy Fiberglass)
Plug and Mold Set-Up $40K 400
Blade Production, $350/Blade + 1050
50% additional reinforcement 525
Blades Total 1975
lb. Hub
Material 250 lbs Steel @ 50¢/lb 125
Fabrication 1500
Bushing, Bronze 150
Hub Total 1775 1243 1243
ROTOR TOTAL 3218
2. GENERATOR
1200 rpm, 480v, 30, TEFC, Induction Std. 1222 1074
Premium Efficiency 1464 1318 1318
3. GEARBOX
35:1 Concentric, Low Maintenance 4218 3569 3569 . ;
4. BRAKE
Failsafe, Electric Release 526 315 315
Electric Control 132 79 ..11.
BRAKE TOTAL 394
5. LOW SPEED SHAFT
4-~" x 3' Stainless Steel Rod 498 332 332
Machining 200 100 100
SHAFT TOTAL 432
II-9 ·.
NYU/DAS 83-108
PRICE BASE PER
UNITS TURB I fiE
(1) ( 100)
6. BEARINGS (2) @ $200/ea.
Double Row Spherical Sealed 4~" I. D. 400 280 280
7. COUPLING 150
TOTAL ROTATING EQUIPf·1EiH 9362
b. NACELLE
1. SHELL
24" Pipe X 5' 40¢/lb 200 200
Machining, Welding 500 350 350
Shell Total 550
2. FORI~ARD END HEAD (MTG. END)
Cast Grey Iron $1.50/lb 300 300
Mac hi ni ng 500 350 350
3. AFT END HEAD (SHAFT END) 650
Cast or Fabricated 1500 1000 1000
4. BEDPLATE 400 280 280
5. AIR BAFFLE 50
6. SHAFT SEAL
4}z" I. D. 300
7. CAST ZINC FAIRINGS 200 ; 200
TOTAL NACELLE 3030
c. STRUCTURE/SCREEN
1. SPINE
2" x 12" Steel (1) 40¢/l b (100} 35¢/l_b 800 700 700
2. BACK SUPPORTS
(2) 8" Pipe (1) 45¢/lb (100) 40¢/ln 454 403 403
3. SCREU! GRID L:~RS
3/8" X 311 40<t/1b 1850 1•H.:J l1lJU
II-10
NYU/OAS 83-108
PRICE 8/\SE p 1:1{
#UN ITS TUR!l IrlE
( 1 ) (100)
c. STRUCTURE/SCREEN (Cont'd)
4. TOP PLATE 2" Thick 490 429 429
Cutting 50 40 40
4159
5. FABRICATION 3500 2800 2800
6. COATING
Zinc Primer 200
Asphaltic Epoxy Paint 300
500
TOTAL STRUCTURE/SCREEN 6352 --d. BASE
1. INTERNAL SKELETON
(2) I Beams 10" x 30' 442 394 394
Rebar and Mesh, 500 lbs 200 175 175
Fabrication 642 449 449
Internal Skeleton Total 1018
2. CONCRETE
37yd 3 25% caisson $60/yd 3 555
75% fill later $75/yd 3 2081
Total Concr·ete 2635
3. FORMS 4000 40
TOTAL BASE 3694
e. ELECTRICS
Based on site of 10 turbines (Ten sites)
1. Po\'1er Cab 1 e
48 m per turbine #8 (4 cond. $1.15/ft. 181
2. Submerged Power Cable
40 m per turbine $1. 40/ft 184
3. Control Cable
4 cond. f/16 40 m/turbine $.60/ft 79
4. Poles (5) Installed 695
I I -11
NYU/ DAS 83-108
PRICE BASE
II UN ITS
( 1) ( 100)
5. Turbine Connection Box {1/turbine)
5a. Box w/ Contractor Overpm~er
5b. Switch -
5c. Reverse Pm~er Re 1 ay
5d. Speed S\'li tch
Total Turbine Box
6. Site Switchyard
558
50
200
300
1108
6a. S true tu re 2000
6b. Transformer 250 kva 480-13.2k V 7500
6c. Meters 1000
6d. Low Side Breakers 300
6e. Fuses 600 A 13 kV 600
Total S\~i tchyard
TOTAL ELECTRICS
f. NON t•IATERIAL (Production quantity 100 units)
1. Assenbly and Testing
1 person week @ $30/hr
2. Transportation
100 miles $500 + $2/mile
3. Site Assembly
4. Installation
4a. Funicular and Barge
4b. Site Labor
4c. Equipment Rental
4d. Concrete Placement Labor
5. Hook-Up
20 person-days
6. Start-up and Check-Out
11400
PER SITE
(10 TURBINES)
3200
1600
850
PER
TURBHIE
850
ll!Q._
3129
1200
700
980
800
1600
500
800
3700
TOTAL NON MATERIALS 7060
II -12
NYU/ DAS 83-108
CAPITAL COST SUMMARY (PER TURBINE}
a. ROTATING EQUIPMENT 9362
b. NACELLE 3030
c. STRUCTURE/SCREEN 6352
d. BASE 3694
e. ELECTRICS 3129
f. NQN .. ~TERIAL 7050
32,627 @ 20 kW or $1630/kW
The per unit cost is thus on the order of $1600/kW installed. This does
not include power transmission costs from the site to available power
lines. Obviously, site studies must include this parameter in kinetic hydro
economics.
It is therefore concluded that the economics associated with such installa-
tions is favorable. Indeed, the development of even a single site would
yield a cost figure under $2000/kW installed. In addition, a river like
Niagara with a velocity exceeded 25% of the time of 2.44 m/s could have
much better economics since the rated power is proportional to the cube of
the velocity. Another variable which can decrease the dollars per kW in-
stalled is the power coefficient. With significant augmentation the costs
per kW can be decreased appreciably if the augmenting structure cost does
not raise the capital outlay significantly.
III. TURBINE BLADE DESIGN
The economics presented in the previous section assumes an overall system
efficiency of less than 34%. The exact efficiency is a function of a
number of parameters, but it is most sensitive to the power coefficient of
the blades. This coefficient is defined for unaugmented systems as the
power delivered to the rotating shaft to the available power, that is
torque x angular velocity divided by l/2p V3 A (where p is the water density,
V the stream velocity, and A the area of the rotor disc), and must be less
than 59. 3%, the Betz 1 imi t.
The design of the blades is thus the most critical factor affecting turbine
performance. Fundamentally, the design is similar to wind turbine blades,
but a number of effects unique to water turbines must be no.ted. The first
is the possibility of cavitation, particularly near the blade tips. The
second is the high power per unit area produced by hydro-systems (as compared
to wind energy devices operating at reasonable velocities) due to the relative-
ly high density of water. This effect leads to high torque loadings, since ro-
tation rates for KHECS and WECS are comparable. These two factors lead to a
design which must be rugged (particularly at the hub to withstand the high
torque loading) and, in addition, the pressure on the suction side must yield
values above the critical cavitation number, particularly near the tips.
The blade shapes chosen for the test described in the following sections were
the NACA 44XX series4 • It was determined that if the test results for these
sections were good, such blades would be satisfactory for the generic or larger
systems. These asymmetrical sections were chosen because of their high lift
coefficients, availability of data for these sections for thickness between 12%
and 24%, and power performance as wind turbine blades. For a good compromise
between strength and performance, a linear thickness taper from 24~ at the
hub to 12% at the tip was used for all rotors.
II I -1
The angle of attack at each radius was chosen near the peak lift coefficient
with an appropriate safety margin from stall. Figure 111-1 presents the lift
coefficient (Ci) and angle of attack (a) distribution utilized for both the
two-and three-bladed designs tested. For larger blades, standard geometric
scaling would apply.
A comment is in order with respect to augmented structures, particularly
since both Refs. 1 and 2 have tested such designs for hydro-applications.
For such units the power coefficient based on turbine blade area can be well
above the Betz limit. The basic principle utilized is to develop a low
pressure zone behind the blades so that the exhaust pressure does not return
to the free-stream value downstream of the blades. This factor increases
the disc loading (in the same manner in which low pressure steam turbines
have higher efficiencies when exhausting into a stronger vacuum) increasing
the power available. For a ducted design the power coefficient, even .based
on exit duct area, can be well above the Betz limit, the theoretical maxi-
mum being approximately 75%.
While the power coefficients for augmented systems will be higher than for unaug-
mented ones, questions of economics and overall performance were carefully
considered. The low levels of augmentation shown in Refs. 1 and 2 led us
to the conclusion that non-ducted blade designs would be most cost effective
and practical. Thus., such designs (so-called free rotor designs) \vere adopted
in this study.
We have discussed augmentation here because the test program described be-
low yielded an unexpected augmentation effect. This effect, based on the
development of a low pressure region downstream of the rotor due to nacelle
interaction, is described in detail in Section V and in Appendix I.
I II -2
14 I I
. I I . I
•
13
12
11
ALPHA
~ (0)
10
9
8
•rHICKNESS 10
(%C)
'
' ..... ¢_ ......._ ·;ell . ......._ I , "'-...t.. ........_ I '
v 'i I
I......._ . ' !
1 I 'o : .
I " ' ' . .. ··I . ' " I : .....
I .... '·-'"T I i ! ' 0 . . \.' ·-··· . . ! .... .,... . . -, ' ~ I
' -..... •\. ' ·--; --' "-' i '
i "safety; ; '-. I II
I ' >o • ''-' . marg 1n; ' ' I -.. .. ....
"( d> .. I
'¢' I
l
designj alpha
j
I
!
---~····"' -----·-I I
' ' ~
-:
'
I-.
--·-.--!. ......
I
I
·1-
e',mpirical j
~tall alphaj
a't peak cl !
I
;'," I;-
' I ... -·· '
1
__ • -0 : ·--i .. -· -·----'F , . .. "\.. . -----· · ·· r ----------1 t ---r·
' 'i
' ,, !
o, ; " !
' . I --t ' j ----.. --. --1 ________ ~-----\ I T~-~ !',, \ i
I . , \1
I ' ; 1_______ 'I
i
!
i
-.------·j--··
I :
I
··------... --r---~· ·-----
: design
I
I ' -·---~-----------· -----~ ··----· --.. -f--...... ~-.
I f • J
. ' ' ' l I · l I I
I'
,--------,
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
tip I I I I I I I I I I hub
r/Ro 1.0 .9 .8 .7 .6 .s .4 .3 .2
FIGUREJII-1. Lift Cocfficient.and Angle of Attack Distributions -I~ACA 4412-4424
1.4
.L.
-<
' -..
1.3 c;..J
u-)
co
(,.)
I .....
t:)
CD
1.2
1.1
cl
1.0
0.9
0.8
25
NYU/OAS B3-108
IV. TEST MODEL
A KHECS test program was designed and carried out to detennine the power
available from practical free-flow water turbine blades. Secondary goals
of the test included testing various system design concepts for the turbine
itself which are useful for the eventual full-scale implementation. Results
of these goals are explained in a subsequent section.
The model for water channel testing of the KHECS was designed to satisfy the
test mission to collect blade performance data and to perform in such a way
as to ensure efficient and extensive data collection during a one-week test
period. Previous similar empirical testing by Aerovironment 1 was not
adequate for free flow turbines either in terms of quantity or precision of
data, or in its nature (low Reynolds number).
Major components of the KHECS test model include the rotors, shaft, shaft
seal, shaft housing, shaft bearings, shaft coupling, brake, tachometry
transducer, torque transducer, nacelle, fairings, mounting pylon, mounting
boom, and mounting brackets. (See Fig. IV-1.)
Blades for four rotors were designed and fabricated according to the draw-
ings in Appendix II. These designs were chosen for two and three blades (S)
and tip -speed ratios at peak power (X) from 3 to 5 (where X = wr/U) in the
following combinations:
B 2
X
3
4 I
5 I
3
I
I
To maximize the power available, the design of the blades (their chord and
twist distribution for each tip speed ratio and blade number) is accomplished
IV-1
NYU/DAS 83-108
utilizing Glauert airfoil theory 5• The chord and twist distributions for
four designs are listed in Appendix II along with the blade drawings. These
were the blades tested in the water tunnel test program described below.
The KHECS test model was designed to achieve aims of accuracy and repeat-
ability of blade data, along with' reliability and ruggedness. These
criteria necessitated maximum possible simplicity in the drive train and
shaft loading device which is also the heart of the test model. For the
model testing proposed, it was decided that a brake would be more effective
than a generator or other type of power absorber in terms of size, i.e., it
could be smaller, especially in diameter, for a given torque absorbed. A
magnetic particle brake was selected to permit smooth chatter-free braking
action over a wide range of speed (virtually from 0-3600 rpm). Using this
device met the requirement that the loading and measurement system be
direct-coupled, with no gearing which would have been a potential source for
measurement inaccuracy and breakdowns. The maximum practical brake size
that would permit a reasonable KHECS rotor diameter was rated at 100 lb/ft
(136Nm) torque, which, according to blade performance estimates, allowed a
rotor radius of 0.3428m (13.5") for the higher torque (lower tip-speed
ratio) rotor versions. With water cooling, the brake could absorb a maxi-
mum power of 6kW, more th~n the rotors could be expected to provide at a
current speed of 3.0S m/s (6 knots). The brake is electrically actuated
with a 90-volt DC supply, and its torque is proportional to the brake coil
current. Figure IV-2ashows the brake assembly being placed in the nacelle.
Again, for simplicity, ruggedness, and directness of measurement, a reaction
torque sensor was selected. This eliminated the need for another rotating
component and potentially problematic slip rings. Accordingly, a sensor
unit was selected with the required range and precision, and with the
IV-2
~Y~/JAS 83-108
ability to carry the weight of the brake and coupling in cantilever
without affecting the torque reading. Thus, all of the loading torque is
reacted through the sensor which is mounted to the nacelle rear end-head.
Figure fV-2bshows the brake mounted on the rear end-head through the
torque sensor.
As the brake and the watertight nacelle which houses it is of a significant
diameter relative to the rotor, the rotor was placed upstream of the nacelle
as far as was practical, with the original intention of minimizing the effect
of the nacelle on the rotor. To achieve this, a shaft housing or sting of
0.8 m (35") length was located between the rotor and nacelle. It should be
noted that this design differs significatly form that discussed in Section II,
but the interest was in blade performance. At the upstream end of the shaft
is the forward bearing housing which supports a spherical roller bearing
with oil chambers. Also mounted in this housing, ahead of the bearing, is the
shaft seal which is of the graphite/ceramic face seal type. This seal was
selected to provide high performance sealing with minimum residual torque.
Figure IV-3 shows the shaft housing assembly.
IV-3
l ·-• . _. .. i • t--::.:. r -~~~~:.: -__ ,__ -_ ....... _. -·-•'"t--+ ·-.... .
---~----------------· -~1·. _..;..._-... :·j·• .. --. ,.,._. ___ --~ ...•..
. ~ • , ··-..•.• I . .
---_l
. --·-: . ---•-·· ---__ _, -·
l --~----__ ., ..... - -t:J. -+ -----:·-··--.. j-. ..) \0) c ----· ------.• --'-./!. Q,' ~-----~------~------~n-------~~---~E~ -·--· . . . . .... z i .:I
' ! .
.. I ·•
.;
j -l ------"--·-------·----.. -.• ...
..
---------,,-...:.-------· ;-·--....
-i '-t •· .-! ..
j
I ·-r
. ~--·-_:_ ~
..
--------'--T"'--""--.------"'·w------~ •-
----;.
•.
...
IV-4
-···----·------
---·----._:r---~-----
..... 2. ::::.~ .. .-.:1.
.. :l '(A. ..... ,
J\3
..
. -
--r-
t
L
'> v.::; l.
C::::J3:· ! -___ .. 4 t;J·ec------
,. ·----:::-:-:::--J .) < . ~ . ,, -. .. . 0 4: .LL ' ~.>...Z.
' 1-,
'-
I.
i --·-
---···--·1-·:;:-~·-···------·-_J I
.¢
i .
' -"T ..
'. I
I-
V)
w
1-
..J w :z: z:
c;( ~ . 5 !.
0::: w '.
1-
:i :----
V'l u w :c
~ I.
r •
.....
' •.-----
> .....
LU
0:::
=>
"" .....
LJ._
<: .
(Jl
FIGURE IV-2a KHECS test model brake assembly during
installation in nacelle.
z -< c:: ........
0
)>
VI
co
w
I
0
OJ
FIGURE IV-2~ KHECS test model brake assembly
mounted on rear end-head, showing
shaft coupling, tachometer. Sensor
wiring and coolant hoses.
NYU/DAS 83-108
FIGURE IV-3. KHECS test model shaft housing assembly
(view from forward nace11e end-head and rear
shaft bearing carrier)
FIGURE IV-4. KHECS test model mounting components.
IV--6
NYU/DAS 83-108
A rear bearing housing which holds the rear shaft bearing is located on the
inside of the forward nacelle end head. The model was designed so that the en-
tire front end, including the shaf~, could be removed from the rest of the na-
celle. To accomplish this the rear end of the shaft was a keyed slip fit
into the flexible shaft coupling which was mounted to the brake shaft.
Mounted by a clamp to the brake housing is an optical encoder tachometry sen-
sor driven by a toothed belt from a pulley on the shaft. This unit was selecteJ
for accuracy and reliability, and resolution in that it provides 600 pulses per
revolution. A signal conditioning circuit provides a linear analog voltage
for the data acquisition system, Figure IV-2 is a photograph showing the physi-
cal arrangement of the tachometer sensor on the brake.
The KHECS test model is supported approximately four feet below the water sur-
face by a four-inch diameter pipe, flange-mounted to the nacelle top, held by
support clamps to a short horizontal boom which is attached to a column on the
facility's test carriage. The KHECS mounting components are shown in Figure IV-4.
A lifting shackle at the top of the pylon is used to maneuver the model by over-
head crane. Figures IV-5 and IV-6 are photographs which show the completed
KHECS test model, and Fig. IV-7 is a perspective drawing of the entire model
system.
All non-rotating underwater seals are accomplished by the use of 0-rings,
permitting disassembly and reassembly. For these to be reliable, the sealing
flanges are all stainless steel. In the case of mild steel structures such
as the nacelle and pylon, stainless flanges are welded to the mild steel piece.
IV-7
NYU/ DAS 83-i 08
FIGURE IV-5. Assembled KHECS test model without fairings.
FIGURE IV-6. Complete KHECS test model mounted to pylon with
fairings attached.
IV· 8
NYU/DAS 83-108
Just behind the shaft seal is a leakage drain area which is connected to the
nacelle body by a surface-mounted, clear hose which permits visual inspection
of the seal status, even during operation, and allows limited operation time
even if a seal leak occurs. Backup moisture detectors in the nacelle are designed
to alert operators of significant water in the nacelle before any components
are damaged.
Other instrumentation in the nacelle includes three vibration sensors mounted
orthogonally to the brake mounting spider, the front end-head, and the rear bearins
housing, and thermocouples measuring the temperature of the brake coolant water
and the brake surface.
All electrical cables and cooling water hoses pass into the nacelle through the
pylon, the top end of which is well above the water surface. An ambient water
temperature thermocouple mounts to the outside of the pylon, submerged in the
channel flow. The brake coolant water supply hose, like the electrical cables,_
comes from the control panel, but the coolant drain hose terminates as it leaves
the pylon, simply wasting into the channel.
Data Acquisition and Control
Signals from the torque sensor str~in guage, tacometer, thermocouples
and thermistermoisturedetectors are monitored, stored, and manipulated
by the data acquisition and control system (DACSl. All s.ignals are
converted to analog voltages which are scanned by the data logger. In
addition, the data logger is able to maRe quasi-real-time calculations of
power coefficient based on instantaneous angular velocity and torque data,
along with stored constants. The data logger prints a set of data at
intervals of ten seconds and transmits a set via an RS232C 1 line to a
IV-9
flow
NYU/DAS 83-108
FIGURE IV-7. KHECS test model {B3X4 Rotor)
IV-10
.......
<
I .... __,
• . . .
• • • • • •
0 • • ·--~--IE:--:;;;;;;====::::;&
b
---·---·----~ e, .. ••••no ._ ...... ,.::::::::
~
i.l
--'•• ·r:!-!IDJ
I.-. . .
·;.--~ ·~
FIGURE IV-8. KHECS test model data acquisi-
tion and control system (DACS)
FIGURE IV~9. Final checkout and calibration of KHECS test
model and the data acquisition and control
system (DACS)
z -.
CJ
J;:>
Vl
co w
I
0 co
-' ','"";
'...J""' ! -"'
microprocessor storage on disk. Several signals were given alarm
set-points for protective purposes, e.g., moisture detectors
and coolant temperature, or for operational purposes, e.g.,
low speed indicating rotor stall.
Along with the data logger and computer, the model control station
includes power supplies and circuitry for the brake, the thermistor
moisture detectors, and the torque sensor strain gage. There is
also a measurement and control system for the brake coolant, and
an oscilloscope to monitor the vibration sensors. Figure IV-8
is a photograph which shows the model control station, and Fig. IV-9
shows the entire test system under final checkout and calibration
prior to shipment.
1 v-12
V. TEST PROGRAM
At the David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center (DTNSRDC)
photographically clear filtered water is circulated at speeds variable from
zero to five meters per second through a test region of generous cross
section (width 6.7 meters and depth 2.7 ~eters), ensuring a uniform free
stream velocity. At the highest velocities, air bubbles are entrained in
the flow to a degree significant enough to impair visibility. Figure V-1
shows the essential arrangement. Figure V-2 shows the Circulating Water
Channel(CWC) test section, and Figure V-3 shows the test model prior to
submersion. Windows at various locations in the sides and bottom allow
visual observation and photography, and in this case stroboscope and video
camera operation also. A pitot tube mounted in the free stream, and con-
nected to a calibrated •..:ater manometer, indicates the water velocity
within 0.1 knot; the actual water velocity was checked and found to
agree with this calibration (See Figs V-4 and V-5). An overhead travelling
crane assists in moving models, and a regulated power supply is available
for instrumentation.
Test Procedure
Appendix 3 gives the operating procedure for tne CWC. Essentially, the
channel operator· brings the impeller motors up to speed, adjusts the
blade pitch until the water velocity is steady at the desired value, then
gives an audible signal to the model test operators.
With the water circulating at the chosen rate and the rotor turning, the
. .
datalogger takes. an appropriate number of readings of the angular velocity
and torque, from which it calculates tne power and power coefficient.
V-1
;, r-" .., .. ,-.,:;
By increasing the brake current, the load is raised and a new set of
readings and photographs taken. This process is repeated until the
point is reached at which the loading is so high as to cause rotor
stall.
A new water speed is then established, and the measurements carried out
again at increasing torque. Readings are checked as needed
for repeatability, with angular velocity both increasing and decreasing,
until it is felt that the particular rotor performance has been com-
pletely quantified.
Circulation is then stopped, the model raised from the water, and a
new rotor installed. The procedure is repeated for the next rotor.
Figures V-6 and V-7 show the KHECS test model submerged in the CWC i~
still and flowing water, respectively.
Figures V-8 through V-11 are photographs of rotor B2XS under test
showing the clear appearance of tip-cavitation helices. Figures V-10
and V-11 show the shaft seal drain tube which could be monitored
visually during testing for indication.of leakage.
V-2
o;)
0
r-
1
M
o;)
OAVIO W. TAYLOR NAVAl SHIP RESEARCH & OEVELOPMEST CENTEA
BETHESDA. MARYLAND 200841102.) 227·1515
CIRCULATING WAT,ER CHANNEL (1944J
.Enler;ement s.c:tion
..
1.Free Water Sutf.M:e 8!-gim~ Hero
Adiuat~~bt. Up Viewlnv Window•
. . •· -...
CJ
Vt~~wingWindows
Towinv8ftm
Detail E!pvtdon YiP!!
. of Aigving Brida•
UNITED STATi.:-.>
lmral11'
'11=.1'--.:t::EJ .J
DESCAIPilON Of FACIUTV: venfe.l ple:'l•. open to the crtmDspbme test section wfth G frea 1urfac• In • cluaod
recirculeting wa1et dtcui't. vari.W. speed. rectiH'Iguler cr~ONI shllp4t with ccmst~~mlnttidt width of 6.7 m (22 hl
(except ot the pumpa), 9.1 m (30 ttl long..,._gement HCtio" with H •djustabl• aurfGCe c:cntrol tip t1t the u;mream en•l
of 1M 'lint HCtion, 10 ..,.. viewing window~~ on eittHir •Ide of the -.t MCtlon •t dlff.,.,.. ....,..,.. & s m the bot'tl)rn,
movable briclp .,..,. 'lhe t.t MCtion for .... & versatility In mountlftu II'IOihlb. rfgpg bridge is ctpabl. of taking
toWing loads n any one of nun....,. ,.. up to 3G.II4 N (1(100 lbsL Ol*'h•cl traveliftiCI'IIMS for hendltnu latga &
heevy mod. fHtenl koepWIIW .............,_.,ca....
TVPI 011' DRIVE SYSTEM: two 3.1 m (12.5 ft) clilmeter 1d;u.t.ble pitch two bieded t:ILII flew lmpeiter. operating 1n perollol:
lmpllilar blede tnt~le 18 c:ontrolled by •n hydnlullc ewvo aystem c:tptlble of meimalnina tnt NCtio" water vslocity wi1hin
::1:0.01 knot.
TOTAL MOTOR POWER: two ...:hl32 leW 118 Bitt. hpL _, ...-CO'IIS•m .,...a. pump~t i'otate In oppo.ka dlnlc:tiOM
WOfiKING SICT10N MAX. VEl.OCITY: 1.1 mla (10 ~ . . ..
WORKING SEcnON DIMENSIONS: length • 1~ m flO td. wktrh • 1.7 m 122 ftJ. rnu. W8t1W chtpth • 2.7 m II ttl with 1.0 m
· tu td of~ abov• the frM wtter surface. it Ia ~to low..-the Wllblr ct.pth & OJNI'8'ta t1t rNucttd speedlt.
PUBUSHED DESCRIPTION:
• Saunders, H. E. & Hubbtrd. C. W ... Th• Circulating Watw Channel or th• David W. Taylor Model Basin. .. SNAME
Trensactions Vol. 52 (19441 •
• le11t, C. A. '*Th• Characteristics end Utilization of the David W. Taylor Mod•l S..s.in Circulating Water Chennl!l,'
Proceedings of the Thwd Hydraulics Conference, Iowa City, Iowa (Jun 1946)
FIGURE V-1. Circulating Water Channel
V-3
NYU/OAS 83-108
FIGURE V-2. CWC test section work area.
FIGURE V-3. KHECS test model during rotor change.
V-4
<
I
U'1
FIGURE V-4. ewe current speed calibration
chart~
FIGURE V-5. ewe reference pitot tube
manometer.
0
::t>
(/)
en w
I
0
OJ
NYU/DAS 83-108
FIGURE V-6. KHECS post model mounted in
submerged test position in ewe
FIGURE V-7. KHECS test model under test.
V-6
NYU/DAS 83-108
FIGURE V-8. B2X5 under test (side ·view)
FIGURE V-9. B2X5 under test (side view)
V-7
NYU/DAS 83-108
FIGURE V-10. B2X5 under test (bottom view)
FIGURE V-11. B2X5 under test (bottom view)
V-8
NYU/DASP 83-108
VI. TEST RESULTS AND DATA REDUCTION
During the entire testing process, data ... ,as carefullyrrarl'<er.lwith special data
logger channels as to whether it was valid with regard to equilibrium conditio~s
of both the water channel and the model. Transient effects were thereby elimin-
ated. Still, a total of seventeen hundred valid data points were acquired for
the four rotors tested. These data, for torque angular velocity, power and
power coefficient, for each rotor and for each current speed, are shown plotted
in Figs. VI-1 and VI-8.
Errors in the measurement of rotor power include those in angular velocity
and torque, and for power coefficient include the uncertainty in channel
current speed. However, according to the CWC calibration record, current
speed uncertainty is less than 0.1 knot from the nominal speed over the
range of speeds used. This would yield a potential error of between
+/-1.7% for a nominal speed of 6 knots, and +/-3.3% for a speed of 3 knots.
Errors for angular velocity and torque are below +/-1% each. Thus, the
total uncertainty in power is +/-2%, andin power coefficient is from
+/-3.7% at high current speed to +/-5.3% at low speed.
The torque versus angular velocity curves in Figures Vl-1 through VI-4
clearly show the expected linear relationship between these two parameters.
The data presented here are those collected by the DACS which were already
calibrated in engineering units modified only by adding to the torque
values the constant, permanent dynamic torque of the shaft seal and bear-
ings (those components not sensed by the reaction torque sensor) which
had been measured to be 1.56Nm. Although in practice it is impossible to
achieve zero loading, due to residual seal and bearing friction in both
the front end and the brake, these plots allow linear curve fits which
VI-l
can be extrapolated back to a ''zero torque" condition. The
angular velocity at this intercept is equivalent to the no-load
rotation rate. The equations for the least-squares fitted curves
are shown in the figures.
There are no curve fits for rotor B3X5, the blade of smallest chord, which
suffered rapid physical deterioration and provided no useful data due to
design and construction deficiencies. Rotors B3X4 and B2XS had minor damage.
In each of the data graphs it is clear that most of the variation in the test
data is due to fluctuations in angular velocity, even while the torque load-
ing was held steadily constant. Such rotation rate fluctuation could often
be easily observed visually, especially at high loading values, and can be
attributed to minor variations in blade manufacture and resultant flow field
irregularities. Still~ however~ the data is eminently coherent and repeatable.
Figures V-5 through VI-8 are plots of the rotor power versus angular
velocity. Each figure shows, for a single rotor, the family of power
curves, each curve at a different current speed. Fit by least-squares
to each set of data is a curve of the theoretical parabolic shape which
uses the derived no-load rotation rate and the origin as x-intercepts.
In the case of rotor B2X5, Figure VI-7, the data does not extend to a
high enough level of torque to support the parabolic curve fit for the
'
power at maximum power. The curve fit appears unconservative which is
substantiated by the fact that if the projected values for maximum CP
are plotted in VI-11 (CP max vs U00 ) an unreasonably sharp slope results
due to the exaggerated values at low values of current speed. Therefore,
more reasonable and conservative values for Cpmax have been plotted in
VI-2
~~" U/ DAS 83-l 08
Fig. VI-7, and these values were later used for Figure VI-11.
Because the blades were designed close to the maximum angle of attack
(near stall) for each section, the power curve drops sharply when the
rotor is loaded beyond the maximum power point. This blade design is
appropriate for a uni-directional river resource with overspeed po-
tential where it is desirable to have a rotor connected to a fixed-speed
induction generator, thus causing the rotor to stall when current speed
increases beyond the design point (tip speed ratio drops below a minimum
value). A small number of data points which were clearly part of the
blade stall were not used for the parabolic curve fit since they would
cause errors. These points are noted on the plots, as are the
equations for the derived power curves.
Added to these plots are the stall point and the maximum power curve
which joins the maximum power points for each current speed. The ideal
load absorber would have an operating curve which matches this curve,
thus permitting efficient use of the available rotor power at any
current speed. Fortunately, the maximum power curve differs from the
idealized maxil'lum power curve of Fig.· VI-9 in such a way that the
rotor is actually better suited to an induction gener~tor, wi:th its
straight-line operating curve than is the idealized rotor.
The power curves for the B3X4 rotor (three blades, design tip speed
ratio of four) in Fig VI-7 a·re duplicated in Fig. VI-10 along with a
theoretical maxil'lum power curve and a generator operating curve. It
can be seen that the experimental resul~ gave better than theoretical
load matching. Over the range of current speeds tested, the load
matching efficiency would be near 100% for most of the practical
VI-3
NYU/ 83-108
generation range, excellent result.
A general comparative overvie~ of rotor performance is provided by Fig.
VI-11 which plots maximum C vs. U for three blade designs. This p 00
figure also demonstrates a high efficiency for a reasonably wide range of
current speed. The slopes seen in Fig. VI-11 probably indicate a slight
Reynolds number dependence.
Of course, the most striking result in t~e data is the level of power
coefficient obtained. To be consistent, we used values based on the rotor
area, even though, with the particular geometrical configuration of the
test model we achieved an augmentation effect due to flow acceleration
around the nacelle. This effect, linked to a change in downstream
pressure (see Appendix I) is considered in the conclusion section.
VI-4
NYU/DAS 83-108
55
50
45
~ 40
IJ.J
1-
IJ.J
X: 35 z
0
1-:.r
UJ z 30 ~ -~
IJ.J
:::::>
0
25 r
~ 20 1-
15
10
5
ROTOR B2X'l TORQUE VS RNGULRR VELOCITY
+:~ ~ +
3.09 M/S
\ \?.83 M\
\ z.s: ~
\ \ ··~~ ..
\.31 M/5 \ . "\
\ + •• ~ ...... \, ••
~.06 M/\ ··~\
~-. -~-. ~
+ ~ -\ • .\ . ·-!.54 M/S
~
~ +
-
I
-...;
I -: ...,
-..,
-:
' -I
J
'
'
0 ~~~~.--~--~--~--~--~~~~~~~~~~--~~
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 l an .. v
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RADIANS/SECl
FIGURE VI -1
Vl-5
NYU/DAS 83-108
ROTOR B3X4 --TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
45 j
+ ' '
40 !
...J
+
...:
...;
35 ' 1 ~ ....
I
-:
I
• J
~ 30 ! • _..
i lU ...,
I-' \ ....i UJ ' L l
~ 25
........
1. 80 MIS \•+ I-,..
:% -1 lU ' z . --:
20 ~
._j
I
r ~ lU :::::>
0 a:::
0 15 I-
...
10 -·---,
"
5
0 ~~~--~~~--~~~--~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
ANGULAR VELOCITY tRADIANS/SECl
FIGURE VI -2
VI-o
40
35
-~ 30
l1J .....
l1J
:::t:
~ 25 ..... ::z
·J
!!
l1J
::J
0
20
~ 15 .....
10
5
ROTOR 82X5 --TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
0 ~~ .. ~~ .. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RADIANS/SEC)
FIGURE VI-3
VI-7
-(f')
0:::
UJ
1-
UJ
:::E:
z
0
1-
:3:
IJ.J z _,
IJ.J
;::::)
C3
0:::
0
I-
NYU/DAS 83-108
ROTOR 83XS --TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2.0 r-r-r-·r•~t~I~J~l-,J~l"l~~~ -rl-rr-rt-.1~1~'~1~'-,1~1~1-.1'.11~1~
1.8
LS
1..4
1.2
1.0 ~ •
. .. .. • •
~
• B t
I
.6
.4
.2
•
.. • •
..
-1
I
~
I
!.
i
....J
.· j
1 . . . 1
1
i
~
Q Ll-L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LI~I_._.(~t_.l_.t~l~l~l~l~l~l~f~l~i
0 10 20 30 40 50 . 60 '10 80 90 100 110 . 120 130
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RADIANS/SEC}
FIGURE VI-4. Rotor B3X5 (Damaged) Torque data
V I-8
t4YU/OAS 133-108
ROTOR B2X4 --POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
4500 ~
+ i
-'
4000 I
I
~ 3500 -! .. t
l + J ++ ,.. . .. " .· .... ~
3000 .. ,. ... -1 ,.. : .. -1
I
(f) l
t-J t-
2500 ~ a: j :3: ........ I
1
'"1
.J
2000 t-i a::: .......
I w j 3: + 0 a.. I
1500 l
l
i
1000 t 1 ......
-1
-1
-1
j 500
-1 ..,
0
0 20 40 60 60 100 120 l'iO
ANGULAR VELOCITY CRADIANS/SECJ
FIGURE VI-5
VI-9
3000 t
2800
2600
2<100
2200
2000
(f) 1800 r-
I-a:
::3: 1600
1<100
a::: w
3: 1200 0
CL
1000
.800
600
qoo
200
0
0 10
NYU/DAS 83-108
ROTOR B3X~ --POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1. 80 H/S
+
+ I
J
j
I
I
-l
!
!
I
-1
"i
I
l
I ....,
20 30 qo so so
ANGULAR VE~OCITY
70 80 90 100 110 120 130
(RAOIANS/SECl
FIGURE VI-6
VI-10'
ROTOR B2X5 --POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
3600 ~r-~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~----~~~~~
3400
3200
3000
2800
2600
2400
Vi 2200
1-
~ 2000
1800
0: 1600
LU
3: a: 1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 ~~~._._~._~~~~~----~----~~~~~~~~
0 1 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 11 0 120
ANGULAR VELOCITY CRADIANS/SECl
FIGURE VI-7
VI-11
NYU/DAS 83-108
ROTOR B3X5 --POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
200 I I I I I I-.-I t I I I I I I r I r I I I I I
I !
I I L l
1ao L l
l
I
160 ' -~ • I
i
140 I l ....,
I
' j
I
(J') 120 • -t 1--!
1--I a:
~ • ~ -.
100 ~
I • I
~
80 t l LL.I • 3:
0 I 0.... I .. I ~ • 1 I
60 ~ I
.J
~ • I
I .I
40 t-• -t
i
I
1
20 r ~
0 L1 I
!
-1
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RADIANS/SEC)
FIGURE VI-8. Rotor B3X5 (damaged) Power data
VI-12
POWER
maxirr.u."!!
~~--power
curve
ROTATION RATE
FIGURE VI-9. Idealized Rotor Performance
VI-13
(f)
1--
1--a:
~
L: w
~ a a_
3000 t 2800
2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
NYU/DAS 83-108
ROTOR 83X4 --POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
theory normalized
to maximum peak
+
+ +
experimental
maximum power curve
.p. / .
I I ~genera tor
with 10% slip
10 20 30 40 50 60
ANGULAR VE~OCITY
70 80 90 100 110 120 130
CRADIANS/SECl
FIGURE VI-10. Experimental and theoretical maximum power curves compared with
induction generator operating curve
VI-14
.95
.90
.85
1-.so z w -u -I.L.
I.L. .75 UJ
0
~ l
J
..?.: .'70 0
0-
,65
.55
......
... ::,.<::_
t. 8 2. 0 2. 2 2. 4 2. ~J~ 2. 8
CURRENT SPEED lMETERS/SECl
FIGURE VI ... ll· .•
VI-15 I
,,..,
.
.
.
.
'
NYU/DAS 83-108
FIGURE VI-12. Rotors after testing catastrophic failure
of rotor B3X5 and slight damage to S3X4 and B2X5
FIGURE VI-13. Slight damage of rotor B3X4.
VI-16
NYU/OAS 83-108
VII. SITE SPECIFIC INVESTIGATIONS
This section presents a summary of both specific and generic KHECS sites
investigated in New York State. The specific sites include the East River
and Niagara River which were evaluated as possible locations for the instal-
lation of a prototype system. The generic site discussion will serve as a
guide to identify numerous locations within the New York State River Basins
for future consideration. Subsequent to these investigations and discussions,
the various KHECS environmental and regulatory aspects are discussed.
The topic areas to be covered for the two sites investigated, namely:
East River
Niagara River
are the description and location of the proposed site, the geologic composition
and the hydrologic characteristics of the investigated site. The topic areas
to be covered for the NYS River basins will include a discussion of fluvial
parameters affecting river channel morphology and the development of a site
selection methodology.
1. East River Investigation
The East River is part of the Inner New York Harbor which lies to the north
of, and is connected with the outer harbor, or the lower bay, by the narrm·ts.
The harbor consists of the Upper Bay, lower Hudson River, East River, Long
Island Sound, and tributary water ways. The East River is a tidal strait
about 16 miles long and 600 to 4000 feet wide connecting the Main Harbor
Channel at the Battery with Long Island Sound at Throgs Neck, and separ-
ating Long Island from the mainland. The portion of the East River stretch-
VII-1
NYU/DAS 83-108
ing between the north end of Roosevelt {Blackwells) Island and Negro
Point Bluff on Wards Island is known as Hell Gate, the confluence of the
Harlem and East Rivers. The channel in the East River is of varying but
navigable widths and depths from the Main Harbor Channel to the Long
Island Sound. The river divides into two channels which pass around
Roosevelt Island.
The specific site investigated for installation of the prototype KHECS
is situated on the east side of Roosevelt Island in the east channel,
under the Roosevelt Island Bridge. This is a lift bridge which is perm-
antly fixed in the lowered position. The East Channel has no commercial
vessel traffic due to the low bridge clearance. The selected prototype
site is shown in Figures VII-1 and VII-2 and topographically possesses a
depth of approximately 10 m (32 feet).
The geologic composition of the proposed site is underlain by bedrock
at an elevation of approximately 10.7 meters (35 feet) below mean high
water level or 22.9 meters (75 feet) below the span of the Roosevelt
Island Bridge.
The semi-diurnal current profile developed from averaged maximum current
data taken from the NOAA Tidal Current Tables at Hell Gate is shown in
Figure VII-3.
VII-2
NYU/ OAS 83-108
VII-1.
FIGURE VII-1
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
Proposed site for KHECS. Situated on the east side of Roosevelt
Island in the East channel, under the Roosevelt Bridge.
(with inset)
VII-3
NYU/DAS 81-108
. . ..
''.
. NOTED . ;
'rh. l'ninimi.m iiJtnO'ileO nPlhl, .r
CMtr IN E l3td Slnlet l.lllllel -<15 feet
h Wilt lOde lind 35 feet on IN e•t side
··~llllnd. .
FIGURE VII~ 2
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
FIGURE VII-2. Enlargement of Roosevelt Island
VII-4
NYU/DAS 83-108
2
~ 1
T ' E
R s 1
/ s
E 1 c
HOAA TIDAL CURREt~T
DATA 1993 <HELL GATE>
U.;:.<max> = avet'age
of maxim1.ur, C'-~rt··ents
for Jan. S. Feb. 1983
..
'
TINE<hr>
12
I
I ./
/
/
2 '--~
Semi-diurnal Current Profile
ITacmaxl Sin wt
FIGURE Vll-3
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
VII-5
NYU/OAS 83-108
2. Niagara River
The Niagara River forms the international boundary between the province
of Ontario, Canada, and the State of New York as discussed in Tesmer (6).
The river flows generally north approximately along the 79th meridian,
has its source at the eastern end of Lake Erie at about 42 degrees 50
minutes North Latitude and its mouth at Lake Ontario at about 43 degrees
15 minutes.
Internationally famous because of its spectacular waterfalls and striking
gorge, the Niagara River is unique in that it serves as an outlet for four
of the largest fresh-water lakes in the world. Furthermore, as rivers go,
the Niagara has an exceedingly short course measuring only 50.8 km
(31.6 miles) along its western channel and 57.3 km (35.6 miles) along its
eastern channel. Over this short watercourse, however, there is a rela-
tively large descent in elevation from 175 m (575 feet) at Buffalo-Fort
Erie to 76 m (250 feet) at Fort Niagara-on-the-Lake. The total drop or
relief is 99m (325 feet), of which 51 m (167 feet) occurs in the plunge
from the crest of the Horseshoe Falls to the Maid-of-the-Mist pool below.
Unquestionably, a conspicuous feature of the Niagara River is its trem-
endous flow, about 5720 cubic meters per second (202,000 cfs). The
river's width varies from its narrowest constrictjon of 76 m (250 feet)
at Wintergreen Flats to about 2580 m (8500 feet) at its broadest expanses
at its source at Buffalo, the sound end of Grand Island, and the downstream
side of Navy Island. The river's source at Buffalo is wider. than that of
its mouth at Fort Niagara (915 m; 3000 feet).
VII-6
'' ... ·,
e _ i ~twea:c:a
is
The gorge
The
by
rian
NYU/DAS 83-108
North of the Niagara Escarpment where the proposed site is situated, the
prevalent strata along the Niagara River are the red shales of the Queenston
Formation from the Ordovician System. These shales weather to form the
sticky red clay of the Lake Ontario Plain. The strata along the Niagara
Gorge and at the proposed site are shown in Figure VII-7.
The hydrologic conditions at the proposed site are shown in Figure VII-8.
Based on the acceptability (flow, depth and accessability) of both the
Niagara and East Rivers for the prototype installation, the East River
site was selected because of its proximity and existing support structure.
VII-S
rJYU/DAS 83-108
View of lower Niaaara River, lookin& north. Note the Niagara
Gorp. power plants, and l.ewiston..Queenston Bridp toward the front oE view.
In the background, the Niapra River widens and meanders as it crosses the
Lab Ontario Plain, to the north of the Niapn Elcarpment.
FIGURE VII~ 4
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
VII-9
•
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NYU/DAS 83-108
: Pyi<Wl•G • .,. __ .., Mon
. I Park
L---------
FIGURE VII_; 5
NYU/NYPA . KHECS SITE STUDY
~--------------------------------------------------
FIGURE VII-5. Area given· priority during the on site investigations is
situated on t~e U.S. bank of the Niagara (topographical
view) approximately 1.2 m (40uv ft) north (dmmstream)
of the Lewiston-Queenston Bridge.
VII-10
NYU/DAS 83-108
l a:
· ... ·; .·,
·:._ ... _ .. · ..... -·,;"··,
-:;:~
... -: ·. . ~ ·-: -.. '
. _,. ·-
FIGURE VII-6
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
FIGURE VI I -6. Prior investigation area outlining navigational depths.
VI I -11
NYU/DAS 83-108
-110
lo30
ua
3JII -210
uo
10
N
l.ewY*-
1
NIAGARA
ESCAR'MINT
I
-·-'!
"' ' \ 'I
i
"" ' '
\
:.: ' 'r, ·: •• :.; ,, .. "' ·:
FIGURE VII-· 7
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
FIGURE II-7. The proposed site and strata a long the Niagara Gorge.
VII-12
·.
NYU/DAS 83-103
0
"D l ~ ri: ~(~
(~Jf.e:c..) 1.5
z.o
zoo'
~ ~\lre. Lv"=-.f,s"-'8.5 1
_fu~v.,,E:,.ft~ l·lt .. --1'-+ 5 1
.
bf.X)' 7o::f
FIGURE VII-8
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
FIGURE VII-8. Hydrologic conditions at proposed site.
VII-13
NYU/DAS 83-103
3. New York State River Basin Generic
The New York State River Basins as defined in the Phase 1 report and shown
in Figure VII-9 constitute the major portion of the KHECS power resource
of the state. To help facilitate future river basin sitings, this section
will try to provide some insight into the complex requirements of regional
KHECS allocation and attempt to provide the beginnings of a methodology to
assist developers. First, this section will discuss some fundamental
morphological concepts of rivers and secondly, describe a preliminary
methodology to assist in actual river basin investigations.
To develop a unified approach in reviewing invidual river basins it se~ts
appropriate to investigate.the zones of the fluvial system, as discussed
in Schumm (7) that match KHECS power production. Figure VII-10 is a sketch
of an idealized fluvial system divided for convenience of discussion into
three parts. These are referred to as Zones 1, 2, and 3 in a downstream
direction. The uppermost is the drainage basin, watershed, or sediment-
source area (Zone 1). This is the zone from which water and sediment
are derived. Zone 2 is the transfer zone, where, for a stable channel,
input of sediment can equal output. Zone 3 is the sediment sink or area
of deposition.
Zone 1 is the area of greates~ interest to watershed scientists and to
hydrologists, as well as to geomorphologists involved with the evolution
and growth of drainage systems. Zone 2 is of major concern to the hydrau-
lic and river-control engineer and of primary interest to this river
basin study. This will be considered the preferred river basin placement
VII-14
NYU/DAS 83-103
...... ,.., • '0 "" .. s ' • • n· tr 0 ....
! .... :. ....
0
.I • ·a ... ... ....
"' ... s ~
:'
FIGURE VII-· 9
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
FIGURE VII-9. The New York Stat~ River Basins (as defined in the Phase
report) ·constitute the major portion of the KHECS power
resource.
'JII-15
~~YU/DAS 83-108
1
Upst.r...., c.o..trol.t
(eli,_•, c:lla«t~
I&...S•UM.)
Elowtls«.Nal't'\
Cont.rvlrt
(beselrlel,
di•.t.ropli<jffl,)
1
~ 1000
.!!!
0 IZ
£
Q,
c!i
I
II! ;;
j
ZONE I (produel..lon)
Dr•ina9e !!sKin
ZONES !deposition}
•
FIGURE VII-10. Sketch of an idealized fluvial system.
10
FIGURE VII-11. Relation between width/depth ratio and percentage of silt
and clay in channel peri~eter for stable alluvial streams.
(After Schumm, 1960).
VII-16
NYU/DAS 83-108
zone for horizontal turbine KHECS allocation. Zone 3 is of primary con-
cern to the geologist, the coastal engineer and to tidal KHECS allocation,
and the internal structure, stratigraphy, and morphology of alluvial fans,
alluvial plains, deltas, and fan deltas are of critical geologic-geomorphic
concern.
The variables that influence river morphology and the manner in which
rivers respond will be discussed for stable rivers (no progressive channel
adjustnent during past 10 years)· Although there are many variables assoc-
iated with river morphology, only a limited set which influence KHECS
allocation will be covered. These include
1) Discharge
2) Total Sediment Load
3) Sediment Size
4) River Gradient
5) Wetted Perimeter
6) Sinuosity
If the sediment and water flow through a stream channel are the primary
independent variables influencing modern channel morphology, then it
should be possible to develop relations among water discharge, the;nature
and quantity of sediment load, and all aspects of channel morphology, such
as channel dimension, shape, gradient and pattern. Numerous empirical rela-
tions, requiring river specific data, have been developed by geologists
and engineers that relate channel morphology to water and sediment dis-
charge, and some of these are reviewed here.
VII -17
riYU/DAS 83-108
Lane (8) summarized these relations by presenting an experimental qua1i-
tative relation among bed material load (Q's), mean water discharge (Q),
median sediment size (dSO) and the river gradient (S) as follows:
Qs * dSJ = Q * S
He concluded that a channel will be maintained in steady-state equili-
brium when changes in sediment load and sediment size are compensated
for by changes in water discharge and river gradient. A part of the sedi-
ment, bed-material load, is defined as that part of the sediment load of
a stream consisting of sediment sizes that comprise a significant part of
the stream bed. Another important component of the total sedi~ent load
is the wash load, which is part of the total load not significantly repre-
sented in the bed. It is held in suspension by surface charge or by the
turbulence of the flowing water and it moves at the velocity of the flowing
water. The suspended load is composed of sediment ~aller that sand (less than
.06 to .07 mm)· In summary, a river in which a large portion of the sediment
load is silt and clay as opposed to sand size or larger bed load will be
morphologically very different.
Lacey (9) concluded from analysis that the wetted perimeter of a channel
is directly dependent on discharge, but that the shape of the channel re-
flects the size of the sediment load. Coarse sediment produces channels
of a high width/depth ratio, and fine sediment produces narrow and deep
cross sections. Data indicates that gravel-bed streams at a given dis-
charge will be wider and shallower than sand-bed streams. Also, sections
of rivers may exhibit vastly different channel shapes depending upon down-
VII-18
NYU,'DAS 83-103
stream tributary total sediment load characteristics. Tributaries intro-
duce large suspended-sediment loads where the width decreases, and large
bed loads or sand loads are added where width increases.
From Midwest river data of the bed and bank materials {no suspended load
measurement), it was determined that the shape of the channels is closely
related to the percentage of silt and clay (M) in thesediments forming tre
perimeter of the channel. Silt-clay was measured as the sediment smaller
that .074 mm (200 mesh sieve). The width/depth ration (F) of these channels
was found to be related to the percentage of silt-clay (~1) in the ~erirneter
of the channel according to Figure VII-11:
F = 255 * M**-1.08 (VII-1)
The percentage of silt-clay, M, is an index of the type of sediment being
transported through the channel, and it is also an indication of bank stab-
; l i ty.
In regards to mean discharge, it has been widely accepted that the greater
the quantity of water that moves through a channel, the larger is the cross-
section of that channel. It has been reported that for most rivers, the
water surface width {w) and depth (d) increase with mean annual discharge
{Qm), in a downstream direction:
w = k * Qm ** 0.5
d = k * Qm ** 0.4
The coefficients k are different for each river, and when data from a
VII -19
~¥0/J~S 83-108
number of rivers are plotted against d~scha~e. the scatter covers an
entire log cycle. That is, for a given discharge there is an order-of-magni-
tude range of width and depth. Therefore, other variables apparently in-
fluence channel dimensions such as peak/mean discharge characteristics
and sinuosity (ratio of channel to valley length)·
Since it is rare to find streams that drain geologically similar areas
and yet have different flood peaks, a comparison of the morphologic and
hydrologic character of these rivers shows major differences in width and
sinuosity. These differences appear to be the result of the great differ-
ence in peak discharge characteristics (flood), although there have not
been systematic studies of the influence of flood peaks or the ratio
of peak to mean discharge on channel morphology.
Rivers display a continuum of patterns from straight to highly sinuous
(Figure VII-12). It should be emphasized that any division between
straight and meandering channels is arbitrary, and that a meandering
stream may be of low sinuosity, perhaps as low as 1.2, if the channel dis-
plays a repeating pattern of bends. Popov (11) makes a useful distinction
between several types of straight channels based on the morphology of the
channel flow as briefly described in Figure VII-13.
For stable alluvial rivers of the Great Plains, the degree of meandering
or the sinuosity (P, ration of channel length to valley length} is related
toM as follows
P = 0.94 * M ** 0.25 (VII-2)
VII-20
NYU/DAS 83-108
A P • 2.1
a p. 1.1
D P • 1.2
E P•1.05
Examples of channel patterns. P is sinuosity (ratio of channel lo valley length).
(from S. A. Schumm, 1963, Sinuosity of alluvial rivers on the Great Plains: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.,
v. 74, pp. 1069-1 100.)
13
12
Variability of ~inuous channel patterns. II I Sinuous cho~nnel, uniform width.
n.11rrow point bo~rs. tz> Sinuous point·barchannel, wider at bends. Ul Point·bar braided channel.
wider ill bends. (4) Island-braided channel, variable widah. (from Culbertson et al., 1967.1
FIGURE VII~ lf{
NYU/NYPA . KHECS SITE STUDY
VII -21
NYU/ DAS 83-108
Hence, equations Vll-1 and VII-2 show that streams transporting little bed
load are relatively narrow, deep and sinuous. However, it is true that
rivers that transport small quantities of sand are not always sinuous and
some rivers that appear to be transporting only very fine sediment are
straight. A partial explanation of these sinuosity differences among rivers
may reside in tectonic factors associated with the channe1 gradient and
valley gradient changes during the past 15,000 years.
To test the theory that both width/depth ration (shape) and channel sinuosity
(pattern) are strongly influenced by type of sediment load, a series of ex-
periments were performed and described in Schumm (7). These experiments
were performed in a concrete recirculating flume that is 31m (101 feet) long,
7 m (23 feet) wide and about .9 m (3 feet) deep. The parameters of river
gradient, discharge and sediment loading could be varied. The studies per-
formed at constant discharge with bed load (sand) fed at the entrance revealed,
that increasing bed load increased the width/depth ration and decreased
depth. Also that the channel became narrower, deeper and sinuous as a
result of the introduction of suspended load and a decrease in bed load.
Figure VII-14 shows favorable KHECS allocation cross-sections of a channel
when suspended sediment loading is introduced.
The effect of gradient and sediment load were investigated at constant dis-
charge by varying gradient, it was observed that at low slopes the channel
remained straight until a threshold was reached that pennitted development
of a meandering-thalweg channel (straigh·t channel with alternate bars,
Figure VII-15)· Thalweg sinuosity increased to a maximum of 1.25 with in-
VII-22
NYU/DAS 83-108
A
Cross Setlion
Cron Section
0 3
Scole
e
Ao "'=---_..,-->
8t
0 ~
......,.._~
Scole
• Maps showina channel (A) before and (8) after introduction of suspended-.
sediment load. Cross sections show c:han8ft ol channel di~ and sh.iape. Slope was
OAJ064. (from Schumm and Khan, 1972.) · · • •
FIGURE Vll-14
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
VII-23-
~YU/ DAS 83-108
B. Stope • 0.0059
0 3 6Feet --...
Scole
C. Sfope=O.Q084
Meandering-thalwes channels. Solid lines show boundaries of bank-full chan-
nels. Dashed line is thalwe;. Note that. in spite of thalwq sinuo:;ily oi 1.25 for channel C, a
straiiJhtliM an be dr.rwn down the center of the channel without touching either bank. (from
Schumm and Khan. 1973.)
FIGURE Vll-15
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
VII-24
NYU/ O.t\S 83-1 08
·: 16
r
Relation between channel sinuosity and flume slope. (From Schumm
1973.)
1.6
1.4
~
~ •. z
"' c
17 iii
1.0
00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 . ., .... ,. .. , ( ""'
Relation b!tween sinuosity and stream poo.tier. !Data from Kha~. 1971.)
FIGURE VII-16L
NYU/NYPA KHECS SITE STUDY
VII-25
~YU/DAS 83-108
creased slope, and then the pattern became braided as shown in Figure
VII-16.
A practical observation from ~eviewing the literature is to relate river
sinuosity, which is observable from Geologic Survey Maps, to stream velocity,
therefore, the relationship between stream power (proportional to cube of
velocity) and sinuosity was investigated. Stream power here is defined
as the rate of work done by the fluid or the rate of energy loss per unit
length of stream. As seen in Figure VII-17, the relation between sinuosity
and stream power resembles that between sinuosity and slope.
In Phase I, the velocity of the stream was developed using the catenary
equation, which is appropriate for straight rivers, and from Figure Vll-17
we observe that highly sinuous rivers are 3.1 times more powerful than
straight fivers, therefore, we can develop a relation between the velocity
of the catenary like stream and a sinuous stream:
V sinuous= (3.1 ** .33) * V catenary
or the velocity of a sinuous river is 1.45 that of a straight channel.
If we now postulate that it is always possible to find river widths of
80 to 100 feet for Zone 2 rivers, as discovered in the Phase 1 investigation
with depths of 10 feet. Then this suggests from:
Q = v * A
that the Q needed for sinuous rivers will be;
Q/ 1.45
to obtain matching river velocities.
VII-26
NYU/DAS 83-108
As evident from the above discussion, it becomes obvious that river morpho-
logy exhibits a weak multi-parameter dependency which rules out simple
decision making for site allocation. This property increases the complex-
ity of KHECS siting in the river basins. To organize this complexity, it
seems appropriate that a procedural methodology be developed to coordinate
and systematize the needed data on rivers for decision making purposes.
Working with available tools (i.e., USGS Maps, river flow data, etc.) and
supporting this information with field investigations and data collection,
a computerized data base could structure this information in a decision
support system form. Once compiled in this manner, appropriate data sorting
can be performed to assist in KHECS allocation decisions. This data could
be compiled by river basin/river and be available real-time to users.
A preliminary procedural methodology task sequence may take the form such as:
1} Survey river basins to identify Zone 2 fluvial systems
using regional survey maps.
2) Enter ciata from available tools(USGS Maps and data) into
prescribed data base form.
3} Based on data correlated in Step 2, decide on field
investigation and data collection program.
4} Collect and enter field data into database.
5) Sort data base in prescribed form to identify possible
KHECS sites.
6} Perform in-depth investigations into selected sites.
Although this seems systematic, the field of fluvial systems possesses a
NYU/DAS 83-108
degree of uncertainty regarding its use for KHECS allocation that will re-
quire further inquiry and knowledge development to provide a reliable
decision support system for KHECS allocation.
4. Environmental Aspects
Since no existing literature specific to KHECS has been found, the analysis
of Environmental Issues will follow the work developed for conventional
hydroelectric installations as described in Turbak (10).
From the results of Turbak's analysis, the most important parameters,
relating specifically to KHECS, that provide for maximum fish survival
~tier e:
1) Low Blade Speed
2) High Turbine Efficiency
3) Low Potential for Cavitation (high sigma values)
Being that these conditions are inherent to the design of KHECS turbines,
without further in depth testing and analysis it appears that KHECS will
exhibit minor environmental impacts.
Recreational safety, being another environmental factor, will surely
require proper on-river identification and protection buoying in the tur-
bine areas. The upstream mesh screening inherent to the KHECS de$ign
should be designed for recreational class contingencies.
5. Regu 1 a tory Aspects for KHECS I nsta 11 at ions
The agencies requiring notification and possible reporting would be
similar for both coastal and river basin KHECS allocation. The organiza-
Vll-28
NYU/JAS 83-108
tions involved in coastal/tidal KHECS allocation are:
1) f.e£.er:_al_ fn~r9.Y_R~~l~tQ_r,t_ f.o~~j__s~iQ_n: requires the issuance
of a Project Exemption as per FERC Order 106.
2) f.u2_1j_c_S~~if_e_CQ_m!!!_i~sj_o!!_: notification regarding arrange-
ments made with resident utility.
3} Q . .?_._Fj_sb_ !n£!. ~ildli.f.e.:_ requires clearance from State and/or
City regarding environmental impacts; letter of approval be-
comes part of FERC Exemption.
4) .?_t!t~ OE,0'~.i!Y_DfP.:_ requires Environmenta 1 Impact Statement
issuance and approval. Approval letter required for U.S. Fish
Wildlife clearance and becomes part of FERC Exemption.
5} .\:.Of_al_ ~g~nf_i~s_(£.i!Y.t.lo!!_n~ ~t£..1= secure Land and Water Rights
ownership and Right-of-Ways for project construction. Proof of
ownership required and becomes part of the FERC Exemption.
6} fo!P_o.f.fn~ine!f~= require notification of proposed project.
7} fo!s!a.L ~uthQ_ritie~ .lCoa~t_G_!!a!.dl: require notification in con-
formance with proper harbor identification procedure to inform
commercial and recreational mariners.
For river basin KHECS, organization seven (7) would not apply.
VII-29
NYU/ DAS 83-108
rii. CONCLUSIONS
The water channel test pro·~ram demonstrated beyond expectation the significant
power per unit area available from both the two and three bladed rotor designs.
This was due to the fact that the downstream nacelle had a significant cross-
section area almost 25% of the rotor disc area. This apparently caused a stream-
line shape consistent with ducted designs, a low pressure aft zone and increasec
mass flow through the disc. This large nacelle (due to the fact that it containec
the 12 inch diameter brake) caused an unexpected but significant constructive
interference. This effect can yield an additional significant advantage in kine-
tic hydro performance and economics. For example, the best rotor in the model
test produced almost 4kW maximum power at 6 knots, while it would be expected
(consistent with typical free rotor performance) that slightly over 2 kW would
be produced for that blade diameter at that speed. The equivalent power co-
efficients(based on blade plus nacelle area) were on the order of 70% as com-
pared to the 34% used in the Section II economics.
The cost analysis presented in Section II for the generic design established
a unit cost of slightly above $1600/kW for the system. The possibility of pro-
ducing significantly more power for the same diameter unit without significant
costs associated with augmentation can decrease the cost per kW installed sig-
nificantly.
The site specific studies 1n New York State indicated excellent resources at
Niagara and in the East River.Amethodology for identifying a number of good
11 generic 11 sites throughout the state worthy of further investigation has also
been developed. These sites can be found by carefully addressing among other
VIII-I
NYU/ DAS 83-109
factors, the sinuosity of the flows in our deeper resources and can be further
refined through case studies and field tests. It shQuld be noted that this metn-
odology can be applied generally, and is not restricted to New York State.
The next phase of the program will address the augmentation effect in detail
through further tests in the water channel. Results will be utilized in a pro-
gram for the design, fabrication, installation and testing of a 4 m diameter
KHECS. It will be installed at a site near Roosevelt Island in the East River
channel. This site has been chosen because of its flow, depth, accessibility,
proximity, and support structure for turbine installation. In addition, the bi-
directional flow duration profile allows for testing through a spectrum of flow
rates during a daily test. Furthermore, the site will permit testing the bidir-
ectionality of the device in a future program.
VII I-2
NYU/D~S 83-103
IX. REFERENCES
L Radkey, R.L. and Hibbs, B.D.: 11 Definition of Cost Effective River
Turbine Designs, "Aero vi ronment Report AV-FR-81/595, Pasadena,
CA. 1981
2. Nova Energy Ltd.: 11 Vertical Axis Ducted Turbine Design Program, Rene~'l-
able Energy News, Ottawa, Canada, Spring 1982.
3. Miller, G., Corren, D., Franceschi, J.: 11 Kinetic Hydra Energy Conversion
Study {KHECS) far the New York State Resource,11 New York University
Department of Applied Science Final Report -Phase I, sponsored by
the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) Contract No.
NY0-82-33, March 1983. NYU/OAS 82-08
4. Abbott, I.H. and von Ooenhoff, A.E.: 11 Theory of Wing Sections-Including
a Sununary of Airfoil Data," Dover Publications, New York, 1959.
5. Glauert, H., "Windmills and Fans," in Aerodynamic Theory, Vol. IV.,
Ed. by W.F. Durand, 1934, reprinted by Peter Smith Publications,
1976.
6. Tester, Irving H., et al.: 11 Colossal Cataract: the Geologic History of
Niagara Falls, State University of New York Press, 1981.
7. Schurrm, Stanley A.: "The Fluvial System,11 Colorado State University,
John Wiley and Sons, 1977.
8. Lane, E.W.: "The Importance of Fluvial Morphology in Hydraulic Engineering,
American Society of Civil Engineering Proceedings, Vol. 81; No. 743, 1955.
9. Lacey, G.,: 11 Stable Channels in Alluvium," Institute of Civi 1 Engineering
Proceedings., Vol. 229, 1930.
1a. Turbak, S.C., et al.: "Analysis of Envirormental Issues Related to Small-
Scale Hydroelectric Development IV: Fish Mortality Resulting from
Turbine Passage," Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL/TM-7512, 1981.
11. Popov, I.V. Hydromorphological prindples of the theory of channel processes
and their use in hydrotechnical planning:" Sov. Hydrol., 1964;
IX-1
NYU/DAS 83-108
APPENDIX I
TiiEORY OF AUGMENTED KHECS/~IECS
APPENDIX I
THEORY OF AUGMENTED KHECS/WECS
The concept of utilizing static structures to enhance the performance of wind
energy conversion systems has been studied in much detail over the past ten
years. The utilization of such structures in kinetic hydro development has also
been investigated by both Aerovironment and Nova Energy Ltd. The basic principle
is to use structural elements (for example, a downstream duct) to lower the exit
pressure (P 4 in Fig. Al) so that a large ~Pis available at the turbine.
The theoretical framework of such work is based on one-dimensional actuator
disc theory which is presented here. It should be remembered that effects due
to frictional dissipation and swirl are neglected.
If Q represents the volumetric flow rate through a disc of area A (= rrrt 2 '
where rt is the turbine radius), then Q = AV where V is the axial velocity
through the disc.
The force F on the disc is then
where p is the density, v4 is the final velocity downstream of the disc, vl
is the freestream velocity and ~p =-(p3 - P2).
Then by the Bernoulli equation
Pt + P ~ = P2 + P v; ; P3 +
2 2
Utilizing (Al) and (A2) one can solve for the velocity at the disc
v = +
\\here the second term represents an augmentation effect.
AI-l
(Al)
(A2)
(A3)
r-.:YU/DAS 83-108
The efficiency n is defined as
where P = l/2p Qcvi
by the disc.
Thus
p
2
-V4 ), the kinetic energy defect which has been taken
(' ' :-,·· )
At this point we can nondimensonalize all velocities by dividing by v 1 and
denote all non-dimensional quantities with bars. Thus utilizing (A3) in (AS) one
finds
n = [1 -2 - v 4 (A6)
Now to find the maximum efficiency we let
dn ---.-= 0 and solve for v4 • This yields dV4
4 - 6 -JJ (A7)
Note that for P4 -P1 = 0, v4 = 1/3, consistent with the Betz limit analysis.
AI-2
.\YU/DAS 8 3-106
Now for P 1-p 4 « 1 \'ie fir.d
pV 2
1
v = 4
The maximum efficienc;y· thus is
n max = ~ + 4
27 3
so that for p 1 >P 4 , the Betz limit can be exceeded,
and v =
Note that for
pl
n max = .88, v =
-p4
pV2 1
(P4 -Pl)
PV~ (I-V4 )
= .2
1.1 and V 4 = .43
For the case of interest here, the nacelle has caused such an effect to occur
(as opposed to a duct structure). Note that the efficiency n as defined in
equation (A4) utilizes the disc (or turbine blade) area as reference. For
(.-\S,
(AlO)
augmented flows the total surface area should be utilized (for examplein ducted
flows, the duct exit ·area is utilized). In the case of a ceuterbody augmen-
tation, a convenient reference would be turbine plus nacelle area. If a low
pressure zone of 20% is established, an 88% efficiency (based on disc area)
would be available. If one redefines the area as disc plus centerbody, the
equivalent efficiency can still be as high as 70% if the centerbody represents
a cross section of 25% of the disc.
Al-3
-j-!-!. ------------~
-t • ~-·-. ~ ' .. t •
-1----__ ..... !. . ·j' • . I • . -----·-l.··:-·
.. ~ • -1 .. -•
I :_ •. , . : .•
---r-.. -r---·--w• .. -.
L . ; . .
t . -• t I .
l
:..~ j ...
--,·-:-·---
...
!
l i -L........--t---f . t : : --~ . h ...
I. . .. ! . : ..
---. J ·--· .. ·--1-.!. -. I l I _-• . -·-··· .-t .
---. ----· ---l
:I. . 't .
i
..
!
-·----~ ·---:...-------. . -
X
AI-4
-r
: .:. i
1../') -1 < :1::> ....... ---t ..,.,.._. __ ......,. -. ···---tl·-· -§ -------~--....... I r . ,_. i . ---· .!. ---. .. f .. -----~-----·-------l t
i -:-:-·~r~ :-~~::·--.
t i' .. -. ' t-.
:... i_ ____ __,__ __ _
-r·· -·-.\ __ ~
:\·-----. -.. .
i :... --· ! '\" --··\··· -.. ~_ ... _ "'*-
---~ -... -_ ...
~, ----I . I .
i.
i
L..
' ·-r.---·-··
+ '···· ------r···--.. ·:-·· . ,_
-~
t ... L . . . . . . . -. ---<.n . . • . • . L ··---l -.. ~-.;t:----_-::.-: ~ :-::--.. -
----, -..... ,-F. -··-·
. I . . 'V
-'='!
!
I
. I ...
--·-··-----------1---------
1
NYU/ DAS 83-108
APPENDIX II
CHORD AND TWIST DISTRIBUTIONS FOR THE FOUR (4)
DESIGNS ALONG WITH BLADE DRAWINGS
NYU/ DAS 83-108
B= 2.0
RO= .343 O.tGO= 4.179 UO= 2.250
XO= 4.0000 AO= .3318 CP~ll\X= .5615
PR R PHI THETl!.. THICK SIGCL c ALPHA CL .10 .0343 45.466 38.033 .0478 1.195 .1898 -7.-433 .678 .12 .0411 42.906 35.394 .0494 1.070 .1987 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 40.501 32.909 .0498 .958 .2024 7.591 .714
.16 .0548 38.254 30.583 .0491 .859 .2022 7.671 .732
----;>.18 .0617 36.164 \,}8.41¢; .0478 .771 .1992 7.750 .750
.20 .0686 34.227 26.398 .0461 .. 693 .1943 . 7. 829 • 768 .
.22 .0754 32.435 24.526 .0440 .624 .1881 .7. 909 • 786 .
.24 .0823 30.779 22.792 • 0419 .563 .18H ·1. 988 .804
.26. .0891 29.251 21.184 .0397 .510 .1737 8.067 .822
.28 .0960 27.840 19.694 .0374 .463 .1662 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 26.537 18.311 .0,;353 .421 .1587 _8. 226 .858
.32 .1097 25.332 17.028 .0332 .385 .1513 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 24.218 15.834 .0312 .352 .1441 8.384 .894
• 36 .1234 23.185 14.722 .0293 .323 .1373 8.463 .912
~-38 .1303 22·. 221 CJ3. 684-) .0276 .297 .1308 8.543 .930
.40 .1371 21.337 12.715-.0259 .274 .1245 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 20.508 11.807 .0243 :.254 .1187 ·8. 701 .966 .
.44 .1508 19.736 10.956 • 0228 •235 .1131 ·8. 780 .984.
.• 46 .1577 19.015 10.156 .0215 .218 .1079 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 18.341 9.402 .0202 .203 .1029 8.939 1.020 .so .1714 17.710 8.692 .0190 -.190 .0983 .9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 17.118 8.020 .0179 .177 .0939 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 16.562 7.385 .0168 .166 .0898 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 16.038 6.782 .0158 .156 .0859 9.256 1.093
~c-58 .19e8 15.545 .6:2111~ .0149 .146 .0823] 9.335 1.111
. .60 .2057 15.080 \..2.:.~~ .0141 .138 .0789 9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 14.640 5.146 .0133 .. 130 .0756 9.494 1.147 .
.64 .2194 14.225 4.651 • 0125 • 123 .0726 .9.573 1.165 .
.66 .2262 13.831 4.178 .0118 ,.116 .0697 .9.652 1.183 .
.68 .2331 13.457 3.725 .0112 .110 .0670 9.732 1.201
.70 .2400 13.103 3.292 .0106 .104 .0644 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 12.765 2.875 .0100--.099 .0620 .9 .. 890 1.237
.74 .2537 12.445 2.475 .0095 .094 .0600 9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 12.139 2.090 .0091 .089 .0584 10.049 1.253
.78 .2674 11.848 1.719 .0087 .085 .0569 10.128 1.259 . I
~ .80 .2742 11-.569 G-:31)2-~ • oo83 .081 .0554 10.207 :1.264
.• ·&~ .29U !h394 l; 8%7 . • 867!) .978 .051ZO 18:-
.82 .2811 11.304 1.017 • 0079 ;.078 .0540 10.287 1.270 .
.84 .2880 11.049 • 683 .0075 \,074 .0526 10.366 1.275 .
• 86 .2948 10.806 .361 .0072 .071 .0513 10.445 1. 281 .
.88 .3017 10.573 .049 .0069 .068 .0500 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 10.349 -.254 .0066 .065 .0488 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 10.135 -.548 .0063 . -.062 .0477 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 9.929 -.833 .0060 .060 .0465 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 9.731 -1.110 .0057 .058 .0455 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 9.541 -1.380 .0055 .055 .0444 10.921 1.314
~ 1.00 .3428 9.357 (=1:643 --~ .0052 .053 .0434 11.000 1.320
AII-1
NYU/DAS 83-108
RO= .343 QlGO= 4~179 UO= 1.8QO
XO= 5.0000 AO= .3324 CPMi\X= .5704
PR R ffii THET~ THICK SIGCL ,... ALPH,; CL ....
.10 .0343 42.290 34.857 .0416 1.041 .1654 7.433 .678 .12 .0411 39.357 31.845 .0419 .907 .1685 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 35.672 29.081 .0411 .792 .1672 .7.591 .714
.16 .0543 34.227 26.556 .0396 .693 &ib .7.671 .732
)'.18 .0617 32.009 ~4~'259~ .0377 .608 7.750 .750
.20 .0686 30.000 :2.171 .0356 .536 .1503 7.829 .768
• 22 .0754 28.182 20.274 .0335 .474 .1429 7.909 • 786
• 24 .0823 26.537 18.549 • 0313 --.• 421 .1355 _7. 988 .804
.26 .0891 25.046 16.979 .0292 .376 .1281 8.067 .822
.28 .0960 23.692 15.545 .0273 .337 .1210 8.146 .840
.
.30 .1028 22.460 14.234 • 0254 .303 .1142 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 21.337 13.032 .0237 .274 .1078 8.305 .876
.34 • 1166 20.310 11.926 .0221 .. ~.249 .1018 .a. 384 .894 .
.36 • 1234 19.370 ~ .0206 :.226 • 0962 . ·8. 463 .912 .
·~.38 .1303 18.506 .0192 .207 ~91"D ·8.543 • 930 . ..?
'.40 .1371 17.710 9;088 .0179 .190 • 861 8. 622 .948
.42 .1440 16.976 8.274 .0167 .174 .0816 8.701 .966
.44 • 1508 16.296 7.515 .0156---.161 .0774 .8.780 .984 .
.46 .1577 15.666 6.806 .0146 .149 .0734 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 15.080 6.141 .0137 .138 .0698 8.939 1.020
.50 .1714 14.534 5.516 .0128 .128 .0664 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 14.025 4.927 .0120 .119 .0632 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 13.549 4.372 .0113 .111 .0602 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 . 13.103 3.846 .0106 .104 .0_5~ .9. 256 1.093 ..
)[•58 • 1988 12.684 /3.-348\ .0100 .098 t:OS49 ': .9. 335 1.111 .
.60 • 2057 12.290 \ 2.875 ) .0094 .092 "-..0525) ·9.415 1.129 .
,.62 .2125 11.919 '2;42s .0088 .086 .0502 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 11.569 1.996 .0083 .081 .0481 9.573 1.165
.66 .2262 11.239 1.586 .0078 .077 .0461 .9 •. 652 1.183
.68 .2331 10.926 1.195 .0074 .073 .0442 9.732 1.201
.70 .2400 10.630 .819 .0070 .069 .0425 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 10.349 .459 .0066 .065 .0408 9.890 1.237
.74 .2537 10.083 .113 .0062 .062 .0395 9.970 1.247 ..
.76 .2605 9.829 -.220 .0059 .059 • 0384 10.049 1. 253 .
.78 .2674 9.588 ~ .0057 .056 .0373· 10.128 1. 259 . .. 7'-80 .2742 9.357 }") .0054 .053 · . .t0363) 10.207 1.264 .
.82 .2811 9.138 .0052 .051 .0353 10.287 1:270
.84 .2880 8.928 -1.438 .0049 .048 .0344 10.366 1.275
.86 • 2948 a. 728 . -1.717 .0047 . --.046 .0335 10.445 1.281
.88 .30i7 8.536 -1.988 .0045 .044 .0326 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 8.353 -2.251 .0043 .042 .0318 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 8.177 -2.506 .0041 .041 .0310 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 8.008 -2.755 .0039 .039 .0303 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 7.846 -2.996 .0037 .037 .0296 10.841 1.309
~ .98 .3359 1·. 690 0:231 . • 0036 .036 .0289 10.921 1.314
1.00 .3428 7.540 -3.460~ .0034 .035 ,.o2a2·, 11.ooo 1.320
AII-2
NYU/DAS 83-108
RO=· .343 CMGO= 4.179-tJo=·~ 1.500 .
XO=-6.0000 AO= .3327 CPMAX= • 5759·
PR R PHI THETA THICK SIGCL c ·MP.·F\ CL ·
.10 .0343 39.357 31.925 .0363 .907 .1441 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 36.164 28.652 .0356 • 771 .1431 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 33.313 25.722 .0341 .657 .1388 .7. 591 .714
.16 .0548 30.779 23.!09 .0322 .563 .1326 7.671 .732
)' .18 .0617 28.532 ~~D .0301 .486 C~l~56 .. -...,7. 7so .750
.20 .0686 26.537 18.708 .0280 .421 .1182 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 24.764 16.856 .0260 .368 .1109 7.909 .786
.24 .0823 23.185 15.197 .0240 .323 .1038 7.988 .804
.26 .0891 21.774 13.707 .0222 .. 285 .0972 8.067 .822 .
.28 .0960 20.508 12.362 .0205 • 254 .0910 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 19.370 11.144 .0190 .226 .0852 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 18.341 10.036 .0175 .203 .0799 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 17.409 9.025 .0162 .183 .0750 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 16.562 8.098 .0151 ·.166 .0705 ·8.463 • 912. > .38 .1303 15.788 ~ .0140 .151 G]66b 8.543 .930
.40 .1371 15.080 6:4f58 .0130 .138 .062~ 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 14.430 5.728 .0121 .. .126 .0591 -8 .. 701 .966
.44 .1508 13.831 5.050 .0113 .116 .ossa 8.780 .984
.46 .1577 13.278 4.418 .0105 .107 .0528 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 12.765 3.826 .0098 .099 .0501 8.939 1.020 • so .1714 12.290 3.272 .0092 .092 .0475 -9.018 1.038 .
• 52 .1783 11.848 2.750 .0086 .. 085 .0452 .9.098 1. 056 .
• 54 .1851 11.435 2.258 .0080 .079 .0430 ·9.177 1.075 .
.56 .1920 11.049 1.793 .0075 .074 .0409 9. 256 1. 093
>.[·58 .1988 10.688 z:-m-) .0071 .069 ~' 9.335 1.111
. .60 • 2057 .. 10.349 ..935· .0067 .065 ~-9.415 1.129 . . .62 .2125 . 10.031 • 537 .0063 ~061 ·9.494 1.147 .
.64 .2194 9.731 .158 .0059 .o5a .0341 -9.573 1.165 '
.66 . .2262 9.448 -.204 .0055 .054 .0326 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 9.181 -.551 .0052 .051 .0313 9.732 1. 201
.70 .2400 8.928 -.883 .0049 .048 .0300 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 8.689 -1.201 .0046 .046 .0288 9.890 1.237 . .74 .2537 8.462 -1.508 .0044 ,044 .0278 -9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 ·8.246 -1.803 .0042 .041 .0270 10.049 1. 253 .
..• 78 .2674 8.041 ~ .0040 .039 • 0262. 10.128 ; 1.259 .
=;>.so .2742 7.846 .0038 .037 ~ 10.207 1.264
. .82 .28ll 7.659 -2.627 .0036 .036 • 10.287 1.270
• 84 .2880 7.482 -2.884 .0035 :.034 .0242 10.366 1. 275 .
.86 .2948 7.312 -3.133 .0033 ;.033 .0235 10.445 1.281 .
.88 .3017 7.150 -3.375 .0032 ~031 .0229 10.524 1.286
.90. .3085 6.994 -3.609 .0030 .030 .0223 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 6.846 -3.837 .0029 .029 .0218 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 6.703 -4.059 .0027 .027 .0212 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 6.566 -4.275 .0026 .026 .0207 10.841 1.309
. .98 .3359 6.435 ~-486 .0025 .025 .0202 10.921 1.314
---->1.00 .3428 6.308 • 692'') • 0024 .024 (~-:-0198 11.000 1. 320 .
AI I-3
NYU/ OAS 83-108
B=. 3.0
RO= .343 CMGO= 4.179 UO= 3.000 I,...) XO= 3.0000 AO= .3307 CPM!\X= .5454 l
PR R PHI THETA THICK SIGCL c ALPHA CL
.10 .0343 48.867 41.434 .0365 1.369 .1450 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 46.801 39.289 .0389 1.262 .1562 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 44.812 37.220 .0402 1.162 .1636 7.591 .714
.16 .0548 42.906 35.235 .0408 1.070 o1679 7.671 .732
~.18 .0617 41.087 33.337 .0407 :985 .1698 7.750 • 750 .
.20 .0686 39.357 31.528 .0402 :907 .1696 '7 .829 0 768 .
.22 .0754 37.717 29.808 .0393 ~836 .1680 7.909 0 786 .
.24 .0823 36.164 28.176 .0382 • 771 .1652 7.988 .804 . .26 .0891 . 34.697 26.630 .0369 .711 .1615 8.067 .822
.28 .0960 33.313 25.167 .0354 • 657 .1573 8.146 .840 .
.30 .1028 32.009 23.783 .0340 .608 .1526 8.226 .858 . .32 . .1097 30.779 22.475 .0324 :563 .1477 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 29.622 21.238 .0309 .523 .1427 8.384 .894
• 36 .1234 28.532 20.068 .0294 .486 .1376 8.463 .912
--7-38 .1303 27.505 18.962 .0279 .452 .1326 8.543 .930
. .40 .1371 26.537 17.915 .0265 .421 .1276 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 25.625 16.924 .0252 .393 .1228 8.701 .966
.44 .1508 24o764 15.984 .0238 ~368 .1180 ·a. 780 .• 984 . .
.• 46 .1577 23.952 15.093 .0226 :344 .1135 '8.860 1.002 .
.48 .1645 23.185 14.246 .0214 • 323 .1091 8.939 1.020 .so .1714 22.460 13.442 .0203 .303 .1049 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 21.774 12.676 .0192 .285 .1008 '9.098 1. 056 .
.54 .1851 21.124 11.947 • 0182 :269 .0970 9.177 1.075 .
.56 . .1920 20.508 11.252 .0172 :254 .0933 9.256 1.093
~58] .1988 19.924. [10.589) .0163 .239 [.0898] 9.335 1.111
.60 .2057 19.370 9.955 .0154 .226 .0864 9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 18.843 9.349 .0146 .214 .0832 9.494 1.147
.64 • 2194 18.341 8.768 .0138 .203 .0802 9.573 1.165
.66 .2262 17.864 8.212 .0131 .193 .0773 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 17.409 7.678 • 0124 ~183 .0745 9.732 1.201 .
.70 .2400 16.976 7.165 • 0118 ·.174 .0719 9.811 1.219 .
.72 .2468 16.562 6.671 • 0112 ~166 .0694 . 9.890 1.237 .
~74 .2537 16.166 6.197 .0106 .158 .0674 9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 15.788 ~.739 .0102 .151 .0657 10.049 1.253
.78 .2674 15.426 5.298 • 0098 ~144 .0641 i0.128 1. 259 .
~.80 .2742 15.080 4.873 .0093 ~138 .0626 i0.207 1.264
. .82 . .2811 14.748 4.461 • 0089 ~132 .0611 10.287 1. 270 .
.84 .2880 14.430 4.064 .0086 .126 .0597 10.366 1.275
.86 .2948 14.124 3.679 .0082 .121 .0583 10.445 1.281
.88 .3017 13.831 3.306 .0078 .116 .0570 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 13.549 2.945 .0075 .111 .0557 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 13.278 2.595 .0072 .107 .0544 i0.683 1.298
.94 .3222 13.017 2.254 .0069 ·.103 .0532 ~0.762 1.303
.96 .3291 12.765 1.924 .0066 .099 .0521 10.841 1.309
~ .98 .3359 12.523 1.603 .0063 .095 .0509 10.921 1.314
. 1.00 .3428 12.290 1.290 .0060 .092 .0499 11.000 1.320
AII-4
NYU/ CAS 83-103
. RO= .343 Cl1GO= 4.179 UO= 2.250
XO= 4.0000 1\0= .3318 CR-lAX= .5615
PR. R PHI THETA THICK SIGCL c ALPHA CL
.10 .0343 45.466 38.033 .0318 1.195 .1265 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 42.906 35.394 • 0330 1.070 .1325 7. 512 • 696
.14 .0480 40.501 32.909 .0332 .958 .1349 7.591 .714
.16 .0548 38.254 30.583 .0327 .859 .1348 7.671 .732
7.18 .0617 36.164 diC4f'.L .0319 .771 --:·1328 : 7.750 .750 ~----.20 .0686 34.227 26.398 .0307 .693 .1295 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 32.435 24.526 .0294 .624 .1254 7.909 .786
.24 .0823 30.779 22.792 .0279 -563 • .1207 7.989 • 804
• 26 .0891 29.251 21.184 .0264 • 510 .1158 8.067 .822
.28. .0960 27.840 19.694 .0250 .463 .1108 8.146 .840
• 30 .1028 26.537 18.311 .0235 .421 .1058 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 25.332 17.028 .0221 .385 .1009 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 24.218 15.834 .0208 .352 .0961 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 23.185 14.722 .0196 • 323 .0915 8.463 .912
-/.38 .1303 22.221 G3_~_984.'\ .0184 .297 .;..::oan -\8.543 .930
.40 .1371 21.337 12.715 .0173 .274 .0830 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 20.508 11.807 .0162 .254 .0791 8.701 .966
.44 .1508 19.736 10.956 .0152 .235 .0754 8.780 .984
.46 .1577 19.015 10.156 .0143 .218 .0719 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 18.341 9.402 .0135 .203 .0686 8.939 1.020 .so .1714 17.710 8.692 .0127 .190 .0655 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 17.118 8.020 .0119 .177 .0626 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 16.562 7.385 .0112 .166 .0599 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 16.038 6.782 .0106 .156 .0573 9.256 1.093
r-581 .1988 15.545 (6~210 .0100 .146 .0549] 9.335 1.111
___, .60 .2057 15.080 ~6~-.0094 .138 .0526 1 9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 14.640 T6 .0089 .130 .0504 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 14.225 4.651 .0084 .123 .0484 9.573 1.165
.66 .2262 13.831 4.178 .0079 .116 .0465 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 13.457 3.725 .0074 .110 .0447 9. 732 1.201
.70 .2400 13.103 3.292 .0070 .104 .0429 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 12.765 2.875 .0067 .099 .0413 9.890 1.237
.74 .2537 12.445 2.475 .0063 .094 .0400 9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 12.139 2.090 .0060 .089 .0389 10.049 1.253
.78 .2674 11.848 1. 719 .0058 .085 .0379 10.128 1.259
__, .80 .2742 11.569 :...:.J-:36~:> .0055 .081 :~. 0369 . 10.207 ~.264
.82 .2811 11.304 1.017 .0053 .078 .0360 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 11.049 .683 .0050 .074 .0351 10.366 1.275
.86 .2948 10.806 .361 .0048 .071 .0342 10.445 1.281
.88 .3017 10.573 .049 .0046 .068 .0334 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 10.349 -.254 .0044 .065 .0325 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 10.135 -.548 .0042 .062 .0318 . 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 9.929 -.833 .0040 •• 060 .0310 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 9.731 -1.110 .0038 .058 .0303 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 9.541 -1.380 .0036 .055 • 0296 . 10.921 1.314
--7 1.00 .3428 9.357 -1.643 .0035 .053 .0290 ·, 11.000 1.320
AII-5
NYu;o;..s 83-108
RO= .343 0'1GO-= 4.179 UO= 1.800
XO= 5.0000 ~0= .3324 CPMAX= .5704
PR R PHI THETA THICK SIGCL c ALPt-IA CL
.10 .0343 42.290 34.857 .0278 1.041 .1103 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 39.357 31.845 .0279 .907 .1123 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 36.672 29.081 .0274 .792 .1115 7.591 .714
.16 .0548 34.227 . 26. 556--.'l • 0264 .693 .1087 7.671 .732
'?' .18 .0617 32.009 . 24.259_ .0251 .608 .1048 7.750 .750
.20 .0686 30.000 ~Z:Tn .0238 .536 .1002 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 28.182 20.274 .0223 .474 .0953 7.909 .786
.24 .0823 26.537 18.549 .0209 .421 .0903 7.988 .804
.26 .0891 25.046 16.979 .0195 .376 .0854 8.067 .822
• 28 .0960 23.692 15.545 .0182 .337 .0807 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 22.460 14.234 .0169 .303 .0762 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 21.337 13.032 .0158 .274 .0719 8.305 • 876
.34 .1166 20.310 11.926 .0147 .249 .0679 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 19.370 10.906-.0137 .226 .0641 8.463 .912 "> .38 .1303 18.506 q:3~.0128 • 201 < .. -~ o6o7S 8.543 .930
.40 .1371 17.710 8 .0119 .190 .0574 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 16.976 8.274 .0111 .174 .0544 8.701 .966
.44 .1508 16.296 7.515 .0104 . .161 .0516 8.780 .984
.46 .1577 15.666 6.806 .0097 .149 .0490 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 15.080 6.141 .0091 .138 .0465 8.939 1.020
.so .1714 14.534 5.516 .0085 .128 .0443 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 14.025 4.927 .0080 .119 .0421 9.098 1.056
.54' .1851 13.549 4.372 .0075 .111 .0402 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 13.103 3.846 .0071 .104 .0383 9.256 1.093
>[·58 .1988 12.684 [3.34r.l .0066 • 098 : .0366l 9.335 1.111 -.2057 . 12.290 2.875 .0062 9.415 1.129 . .60 .092 ;_ .0350-
.62 .2125 11.919 2.425 .0059 .086 .0335 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 11.569 1.996 .0055 .081 .0321 9.573 1.165
/ .66 .2262 11.239 1.586 .0052 .077 .0307 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 10.926 1.195 .0049 .073 .0295 9.732 1.201
.• 70 .2400 10.630 .819 .0046 .069 .0283 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 10.349 .459 -·.0044 .065 .0272 9.890 1.237
~ • 74 .2537 . 10.083 .113 .0042 .062 .0263 9.970 1.247 ........ 76 .2605 9.829 -.220 .0040 .059 .0256 10.049 1~253
.78 .2674 9.588 -.540 .0038 .056 .0249 10.128 1.259
-----;l > .80 .2742 9.357 ( -.850_ .0036 .053 .0242 10.207 1.264
.82 .2811 9.138 -1-.-149 • 0034 .051 .0235 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 8.928 -1.438 .0033 .048 .0229 10.366 1.275
.86 .2948 8.728 -1.717 .0031 .046 .0223 10.445 1.281
0 .88 .3017 8.536 -1.988 .0030 1'044 .0218 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 8.353 -2.251 .0029 .042 .0212 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 8.177 -2.506 .0027 .041 .0207 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 8.008 -2.755 .0026 .039 .0202 10.762 1.303
.• 96 .3291 7.846 -2.996 .0025 .037 .0197 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 7.690 -3.231 .0024 .036 .0193 10.921 1.314 .
----;>1.00 .3428 7.540
............
.035 .0188 11.000 1.320 ' -3.460 · ..• 0023
AII -6
'-II~
:li
\ < '
\ \
"-., \
,,
-~
:\ .j
'( .}
j-
I .;
. .
·.J' ••
~ '
I (".t
....
{ -
"' .. ; ..
" r<
>I ...
J
. -_, ~'
•"'"" I ,t)yw.ll
<" . <!:..
AII-7
"' ..
·'
. ....... : ~
~~~A~ i
... j ; . " '
)
"--.. '
-------~"·
I
--
-~1
j
-------1
NYU/ DAS 83-108
~
='-~; . .,
..
\ .. ;
\ --~
~
' ·.,
·-"'
.'\I I -8
'i
... ' :t
(
.:\
/
/
/
~iYU/ DAS :::. "') , "8 ,. ,)-l u <I
; ;
'<P"'
I
,.. .
~· \)~I
.,,
I-----
.I !
"' •
.;
~
;-..
!:'
~
..'5
l
•' il
-~ ~ ).
<II)
..:~:
JUI-9
\,)~·~-·~-~~-:!---
"'·
..:
'-'
1(/
I' ,.
i·
I
ri
! ...,
~--~ .
-\
i ...a:
I r--'\ 1.) --.
l, ) ,,
11
.J
,1
(
I •-'-· ''
~~vu; o.~~s sJ-loa i _I .--
·,
\
. ""i
.·
:!.) ~ ~' . .. ··J < ,. ~ _,:·...) _, z
7
.::
_·,
~
~ ..
i -~~~~
~ .-'-Jl
.,
..:
"' 01 "": _ _,
;; ::I
! ,, ~~ ·' .1
-~-· ~/ ~
-~ ..
I ,-
i. _,
··' C'
.,_.
,_.
"
l\I I-lJ
" f
~
~ -r-
~~ ..
c,
)
.J
.. ,
_)
-"
~
~
~ .;,
" ~ ,
:·
>'
/
--·-----· -------+1
.....
'
~-,,
... -
~.:,:.._ ....
~·e> ::: :5 " " 5 . ..
~: " _,
~
l liYU/DAS 83-103 •.
.. . ~
0 -.
'-
.·
'·' ....
.!.
All-11
. ...
f
' ~
=
" I' ;:x:l~ . ::£. ,._
i---<1:: ~ ~.;t
. ' r
\
NYU/O.~S 83-108
APPENDIX III
CIRCULATING WATER CHANNEL OPERATING AND
INSTRUCTION MANUAL
HYU/ DAS 83-108
.;
APPENDIX III
CIRCULATING WATER CHANNEL
OPERATING AND INSTRUCTION MANUAL
NAVAL SHIP RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER
:-.'.
Central Instrumentation Department
Control Systems Division
Prepared by
L. Shuman
March 1965
Revised September 1972
I. INTRODUCTION
CIRCULATING WATER CHANNEL
OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS
1.01 The Circulating Water Channel is a basic research
facility of the Naval Research and Development Center in
which the model under going teeting is held stationary in e
moving water stream of regulated velocity.
1.02 The Channel is powered by two 1,000 hp synchro-
nous motors mounted on top of the Channel structure. These
motors drive impellers through vertical shafts with the
hydraulic tnrusts acting against gravity forces on the
rotors and counterbalancing the weight of the rotating ele-
ments. Although it is usually operated with both motors
running, the controls are such that the Channel can be run
with only one motor. A longitudinal section of the Channel
is shown in Figure 1.
II. OPERATING CAPABILITIES
2.01 The synchronous motor speed is 80 rpm for the 90
pole, 3 phase, 60 cycle, 2,300 volt impeller motors.
2.02 Since the impeller speed is fixed, water speed is·
adjusted by varying the impeller blade angle. This is done
by admission of oil under pressure to the upper or lower
side of a piston mounted in a hydraulic cylinder at the
upper end of the drive shaft. The bbade ang6e is controlled
remotely and gan be varied from +3.0 to +42 with an accu-
racy of 1/100 • Blade angle can be adjusted either independ-
ently or simultaneously on both motors.
2.02.01 The clearance on the impeller blades is
not close to any fixed value. At the time or construction
assembly there was 1nterterenee between some of the blades
and the throat ring. The condition was remedied by hand
grinding the blades where necessary. The clearances may be
said to range between 0.070 and 0.125-inch.
2.03 Each main motor is rated at 1,000 hp, 40°C rise, r; _ · _:
continuous duty. They will deliver l.a..250 h'O tor 2 hours -f,f:.-l ·':-·~ ..
With a 55 0 C rise and develop 1, 750 hp for 8 minutes, also 1., ~·f.'.
with a 55 Crise. ---···--· ,/'·-· ,.;
2.04 The approximate speed limit for the Channel is
10 knots for 20 minutes with a 0.6 knot minimum. With the
Alii -1
NYU/DAS 83-108 (DTNS~OC)
2 hour elevated duty cycle a maximum water velocity of 9.5
knots results, while the 8 minute elevated condition will·
give a top speed of 10.5 knots.
2.05 The best operating range 1s between 1 to 6 knots
where water speed can be held constant to within 1/10 of a
knot.
2.06 Water speed can be changed at any time during a
test, but 3 minutes must be allowed for water to resettle
and assume uniform flow after a change has been made.
2.07 A maximum thrust for the 8 minute duty cycle rate
per motor:has been calculated at 40,200 pounds force.
2.08 The efficiency of the pumps at rated load has
been estimated at 81~.
2.09 Tow points can be located above, at or below the
water surface, at the centerline or near one side of the
Channel test section, a 22 foot wide by 60 foot long area.
There are also miscellaneous mounting holes located on the
bottom of the Channel. Water depth can be adJusted up to
a maximum of 9' in this section.
2.09.01 The towing beam is constructed from a
'iF 14 11 x 10 11 x 61 lb. beam 26-feet long. The beam is at-
tached at each end to a pipe st~nchion which allows conttn-
uous adjustment between the bottom of the beam and the E-
foot waterline from 5-3/4 inches to 33-3/4 inches when the
beam is attached to the stanchion at a point below the
bridge clamp. When the beam is att~ched to the stan~hion
so that it is above the bridge clamp the continuous ad.1us t-
ment between the bottom of the beam and the 6-foot w~ter11ne
ranges from 4'-3 1/8" to 6'-10 1/2". The model is attached
to the bottom~lange of the towing beam by any of the stand-
ard towing struts used on Carriages 1 and 2. Drawings for
the bridge structure which supports the towing beam over the
Channel are A-8484 to A-8hg~ inclusive. The towing beam
drawings are E-1659-1 through E-1659-5.
2.09.02 The design loads for the towing beam are
as follows:
TOWING BEAM LOADS
..
Steady state drag(truss wheels blocked)
Side force (at 6 ft. waterline, "mid-beam-span)
Yaw force
Maximum model weight
3,000 lb.
3,000lb.
10,000 lb.-ft.
10,000 lb.
Alii-2
\YU/DAS 83-108 (DTNSROC)
odels up to 27-feet long may be tested in water depth that
an be adjusted up to a maximum of 9-feet. Models 30-feet
ong may be tested in water to a maximum of 6-feet deep. ·
2.10 Electrical services available at the Channel in-
lude 125 VAC, single phase: 220 VAC, three phase delta: 6
'AC, single phase, 125 VDC; and 15-400 VDC. (See section
·, Electrical Services and Figure 2) .
2.11 A three ton crane is available for local moving
llong the Channel but a 6-foot clearance over the Channel
rall limits its use. Also available, but primarily intend-
td for lifting the pump motors, is a 20 ton crane with very
•estricted travel in the east-west direction.
-
2.12 There are 48 dye tubes available that can be con-
1ected to a test model and will admit dye under variable
)ressure from 0 to 45 psi.
2.13 The Cha.nnel has 29 windows for viewing tests, 10
~ach on the north end south w~lls and 9 underneath the test
3ection. The 7 upper windows on each side have 2' x 4'
jpenings while the lower 3 end ell windows underneath h~ve
1-1/2' x 4' openings.
2.14 Banks of 44 floodlights are located on both the
north and south walls end each bank is controlleJ by a
variac and safety switch located on the north center of the
test section, second floor. Meters ~top the variac show
the ac voltage applied to the lights.
2.15 The Channel is equipped with a system of three
filters and the necessary pumps to permit the 670,000
gallons of water in the Channel to pass through in little
more than 24 hours. See Figure 13. This figure also shows
the air removal tank and associated eQuipment which removes
the air from the upper east elbow hump. This system depends
on the filtering and water circulating system in order to
function, as is readily seen in the figure.
2.16 A lip exists og the east end of the test section
that is adjusted from -1 to +2 in order to smooth out
water flow at the various speeds. See Figure 1.
:r. START UP PROCEDURE
3.01 Start up M-G aet, 200 hp synchronous motor M3
and 60 KW de generator, Gl in switch-gear room in sequenr.e
listed below. This generator supplies the 125 V exciter
bus which energizes the fields of the 1,000 hp synchronous
motors, Ml and M2.
AIII-3
·~·
3.01.01 Throw switch on panel No. 6 to close
oil circuit breaker that applies voltage to M-G set. See
Figure 3·
3.01.02 . Check two reset handles on panel 2 to ~ .
make sure they haven 1 t tripped and reset t f -necessary. ..-
3.01.03 Check overcurrent and overload relays 1
on panels No. 1, 3, and 6 to certtfy they have not trtpped./~vvtj
3. 02 Turn on 125 VDC regula tor. ;'2_t;·t ;tt,..,;f .L'" C!. .,_ t
· 3.02.01 Make sure regulator swttch on panel 10
ts on regulat.ed, "R~G". Figure ; , i tern b. !Y'ft
3.02.02 Turn regulator AC supply switch to "ON"
position. Figure 3, item 5.
Start up oil pumping system on second floor, west.
3.03.01 Check diagr~m on wall and Figure 4,
for location of control devices.
3.03.02 Turn on lights over pumping system.
3.03.03 Turn on pump control switches Sl, S2,
and 53. Place transfer switch on either North or South
position {alternate each day).
3.03.04 Open by-pass valve Vl to relieve pressure
uhtil pump starts.
3.03.05 When pump starts, close valve Vl.
3.03.06 Check oil level tn sight glass of accumu-
;lator tank. Level should be between tank plug to ten
inches above plug.
3.03.07 If level is too high it must be blown
· :jown and then accumulator recharged with Air. This is done
oy opening pump control switches Sl, S2, and .... s:tnd reopen-
ing valve Vl. Lower oil level to pipe plug in accumulator
tank. Then start air compressor l':y closing swi tchs Sll.. .f -53·
! ~en valve VlO and let system pump to 225 psi (read on pres-
,·,sure gage, PGl). Open SLl to stop compressor, close VlO and
·restart pump again according to steps 3.03.03 through
5 .03.06) •. . .
3.04 Energize motorized valve and Channel utility
~eceptacles by closing circuit breakers 29-35 , 37, 39, and
Alii-4
.....,.... -· ~"' _,_~A!SOJ=_,__sa\!::aa:::.ww..,a """'·•>-•..,...• ....... ,..,... ------------.::..
. .,.
41 in 120 VAC panel,-11ghting panel ~A", on the North wall,
third floor.
3.05 Bleed oil system of main pumps to remove air fro:r.
·blade changing mechanism.
3.05.01 This must be done by two men, one st~
tioned at the control desk to operate blade angle controls,
and the other at the 1,000 hp pump motors.
3.05.02 Remove wing screws and plate to obtain
access to lower vent. See Figure 5.
3.05.03 Attach vent hose to top vent .
.-
3.05.04 Have man at c~ntrol desk operate blade
angle control, and turn on (open) electric solenoid v~lve,
SVl. Figure f, 1 terns 2 and 4 •·
3.05.05 Open two lower vents for approximately
5 seconds, then close and secure. Figure ~. item 2.
3.05.06 Open top vent and bleed for at least
two blade angle cycles. Close vent when indicator shows
that blade is almost "zero". Figure 5, item 1.
3.05.07 If air appears in top vent, rebleed the
top vent again.
3.05.08 Wipe up any oil that h~s spilled out,
replace wing screws and plate, and remove top vent hose.
3.05.09 Repeat procedure for second motor.
3.05.10 Note: Scale on top of pumps will g1·e
an approximate reading of channel speed in knots. Pressure
gages on pumps were installed for calibration purposes, but
never used. Their readings should be ignored.
3.06 Flush and level manometer.
3.06.01 Turn on air inJector pump (switch
located at control desk). See Figure 6, 1 tern l:Z.
3.06.02 Open two top valves, 1 and 2, located
eaat or operator. This puts a auction on system flushing
out·manometer and pitot tubes. Flush tubes for 15 minutes .
3.06.03 Close north valve, 1, and open bottom
valve. 3. This will let air into manometer and lowers the
water level so that instrument can be read •.. .. -.· .......... .... _ ' ,..-;
.. Ail-?
3.06.04 When level is at an appropriate height
on scale for test speed. close south valve 2 and bottom
valve 3·
3.06.05 Turn off air in.)ector pump.
3.01 Install model to suit teet.
3.08 Connect necessary power and rpm counter leads to
model. See Section V.
3.09 Start main motors, Ml and M2 .
. 3.09.01 Unlock motor circuit lock located on
lower south corner of control desk. See Figure 6, item 1.
3.09.02 Check blade controls, North and South
controls next to lock to see that they are closed (near
zero angle). FignrP. 6, item?.
3.09.03 Set motor selector switch in position
"1-2". This will start both motors. If Channel is to be
run with only one motor, place switch in either "1" or
"2" position. Selector is located above North and South
blade controls. Figure 6, ttem ?4.
3.09.04 Turn on low oil pressure warning bell
on top of control desk.
3.09.05 Turn on blade angle indicator switch,
upper center of desk. Figure f, ttem 17.
3.09.06 Check solenoid valve switch to make sure
switch is on and valve SVl is open. Ft gurP. f., t tem ll.
3.09.07 Close main motor switch, the red handle
above loek. Figure 6, item 25.
3.09.08 After main motor starts ~nd locks in~
open blades by operating blade angle controls. Fi~re c, item 2
3.09.09 Read water speed on manometer by using
specially constructed seale and conversion charts. This
CJin be done quite accurately. (See Figures 7, 8, .and 9).
3.09.10 Apply necessary voltage from generqtor
02 to model motor by closing two breakers and switch on
north side of desk. The first breaker will close circuit
and the second will allow operator to raise voltage to de··
sired level. Voltage is read on meter above switches,
while current is indicated on ad.1acent ammeter.
AIII-6
•
NYU/ o,;s 83-108
RO= .343 O'tGO= 4.179" UO= 1.800
XO= 5.0000 ~0= .3324 CPMAX= .5704
PR R PHI THETA THICK SIGCL c ALPHA CL
.10 .0343 42.290 34.857 .0278 1.041 .1103 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 39.357 31.845 .0279 .907 .1123 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 36.672 29.081 .0274 .792 .1115 7.591 .714
.16 .0548 34.227 . 26.556,"1 .0264 .693 .1087 7.671 • 732
'?' .18 .0617 32.009 -24.259_ .0251 .608 .1048 7.750 .750
.20 .0686 30.000 ~z:-171 . 0238 .536 .1002 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 28.182 20.274 .0223 .474 .0953 7.909 .786
.24 .0823 26.537 18.549 .0209 .421 .0903 7.988 .804
.26 .0891 25.046 16.979 .0195 .376 .0854 8.067 .822
• 28 .0960 23.692 15.545 .0182 .337 .0807 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 22.460 14.234 .0169 .303 .0762 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 21.337 13.032 .0158 .274 .0719 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 20.310 11.926 .0147 .249 .0679 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 19.370 10.906-.0137 .226 .0641 8.463 .912
~ .38 .1303 18.506 ~p-0128 • 207 (.:_ ~ 0_607~\ 8.543 .930
.40 .1371 17.710 .0119 .190 .0574 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 16.976 8.274 .0111 .174 .0544 8.701 .966
.44 .1508 16.296 7.515 .0104 .161 .0516 8.780 .984
.46 .1577 15.666 6.806 .0097 .149 .0490 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 15.080 6.141 .0091 .138 .0465 8.939 1.020
.so .1714 14.534 5.516 .0085 .128 .0443 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 14.025 4.927 .0080 .119 .0421 9.098 1.056
.54-.1851 13.549 4.372 .0075 .111 .0402 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 13.103 3.846 .0071 .104 .0383 9.256 1.093
---7'-r-58 .1988 12.684 [3.34~ .0066 • 098 r .03661 9.335 1.111
.60 .2057 12.290 2.875 .0062 .092 \... .0350-9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 11.919 2.425 .0059 .086 .0335 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 11.569 1.996 .0055 .081 .0321 9.573 1.165
/ .66 .2262 11.239 1.586 .0052 .077 .0307 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 10.926 1.195 .0049 .073 .0295 9.732 1.201
-. 70 .2400 10.630 .819 .0046 .069 .0283 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 10.349 • 459 -·.0044 .065 .0272 9.890 1.237
~ .74 .2537-10.083 .113 .0042 .062 .0263 9.970 1.247 .......... 76 .2605 9.829 -.220 .0040 .059 .0256 10.049 1~253
.78 .2674 9.588 -.540 .0038 .056 .0249 10.128 1.259
) .8o .2742 9.357 t~c?\ .0036 .053 .0242 10.207 1.264
\ -.82 .2811 9.138 -1-.-149 • 0034 .051 .0235 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 8.928 -1.438 .0033 .048 .0229 10.366 1.275
.86 .2948 8.728 -1.717 .0031 .046 .0223 10.445 1.291
0 .88 .3017 8.536 -1.988 .0030 !'044 .0218 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 8.353 -2.251 .0029 .042 .0212 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 8.177 -2.506 .0027 .041 .0207 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 8.008 -2.755 .0026 .039 .0202 10.762 1.303
-.96 .3291 7.846 -2.996 .0025 .037 .0197 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 7.690 -3.231 • 0024 .036 .0193 10.921 1. 314 .
----..;> 1. 0 0 .3428 7. 540 ---........_
.035 .0188 11.000 1. 320 ' -3.460 ----.0023
Ali -6
3.09.11 Read model rpm on counter.
rv. STOP PRECEDURE
4.01 Stop main motors
4.01.01 Close blades by operating blade angle
control until blades are near "zero".
4.01.02 Turn orr voltage to model motors.
4.01.03 Open main motor switch (red handle).
4.01.04 Lock circuit lock and return key to
proper place.
4.01.05 Turn orr blade angle indicator switch ..
4.01.06 Turn orr low oil pressure w~rning bell.
4.01.07 Turn orr solenoid valve.
4.02 Remove model if test is completed.
4.03 Secure switches 26-35, 37, 39, and 41 on circuit
breaker panel "A", north WAll third floor.
4.04 Secure oil pumps.
4.04.01 Turn off pump control switches Sl, S2,
end S3 and north-south transfer switch.
4.04.02 Turn orr lights over pump.
4.05 Secure M-G set in switch gear room.
4.05.01 Turn orr regulator control switches on
Panel 10.
4.05.02 Open oil circuit breaker on Panel 6.
V. MODEL POWER SUPPLIES AND AUXILARY ELECTRICAL S~VICES
5.01 The diversity of tests conducted in the Channel
is such that no one set procedure for electrical model
power connections exists. Available power sup~lies exist-
ing around the channel include: {See Figure 2)
AIII-7
NYU/DAS 83-108 (DTNSROC)
5.01.01 220 VAC, 3 phase, delta from the mei~
circuit breaker Panel "P" on the west wall third floor.
An often more convenient source for 220 VAC is ~t ::1 3 PhasE·
100 amp safety switch on the north wall of the channel,
east side. This switch is fed from Panel "P" Vi'-t the no~~h
welding receptacles. It should be noted that this is three
phase delta and thus no neutral wire exists for obtRtning
120 VAC. When planning to use 220 VAC, the test enginee~
should make certain th•t a delta connected line is accept-
able.
5.01.02 120 VAC duplex receptacles, fed from
lighting Panel "A", north wall, are situated in two gro·..:pe
of eight units each on the north wall of the ch~nnel.
There are also two duplex utility outlets on the east wo~k
bench.
5.01.03 6 VAC from nominal 10 amp sources 1s
provided in one loc~tion on the north side and another oh
the south. It is located in the same receptacle but on
different pins as 125 VDC. In addition 6 VAC is in one
north wall location in two Jones plug arrangements with
both 125 VDC and 400 VDC.
5.01.04 440 VAC, 3-ohase, 15 amp from a base~eGt
panel and used as a power sour~e for the drill press, i~
available on the e~~t wall of the facility,
5.01.05 0-400 VDC from the 60 KW generator G2
is located around the channel. Four circuits totaling ~0
amps are provided in single outlets, one on both the nor~h
and south walls. These circuits are for model motor power
and are controlled by four rheostats. These rheostats
serve as voltage dividers in a configuration similar to
that found on Carriage I and in the west end fitting room.
They are mounted west of the operator's desk. 400 VDC is
also available in two receptacles on the north side in
combination with 125 VDC and 6 VAC. In addition a 100 ~mp
circuit is located in a north side junction box ~nd con-
trolled by.a safety switch in front of the operator's
console.
5.01.06 125 VDC from the ~ KW generator G3 cP.n
'be obtained from a receptacle on both the north and south
walls that also contain 6 VAC (separate pins), or from the
Jones plugs on the north wall with 400 vnc and € VAC.
5.01.07 220 VAC 3 phase welding receptacles
are provided on both north and south walls, second and
..
,;lu;un.;:, Oj-.J.Ub tUIN)KUC)
third floors. It is also possible to use the 220 VAC,
3 phase switch on.the north side of the channel when weld-
ing.
5.02 It should be noted that a model which has been
connected to a test carriage may have to have its power
connectors altered before it can be electrically connected
in the channel due to some discrepancies in receptacles
between the facilities.
VI. MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES
6.01 Mechanical
6.01.01 A sample copy of the mechanical inspec-
tion report is found in Figure 12. Daily, semimonthly and
semiannual servicing and inspections are listed in Figure
12. These procedures are to be carried out continuously.
6.02 Electrical
6.02.01 A detailed description of the operating
and maintenance instructions for the switch-gear is given i~
Westinghouse Instruction Manual 5321-308. Copies of this
are located in the Electric Shop and at Circulating Water
Channel.
6.02.02 Pages 10 through 14 list the applicable
electrical drawings and where they are located for the major
parts of the Circulating Water Channel.
6.02.03 See Figure 10 and Figure 11 for examples
of the electrical maintenance report forms NDW-NSRDC 4730/25
PRNC-TMB 567. ~
VII. START-UP PRECAUTION
7.01 Because of the danger of damaging the 1000 HP
impeller motors by overheating their damper windings
allow one-half hour minimum between starts, with a maximum
of sixteen (16) starts in a twenty-four (24) hour period.
AIII-9
·-~· .i.·~ ,, ~·". -.i-·
•It
·I Ji!:' t~~~f~ ~,)I
tit'•
1
.. ;
'
I . t ,,..,. ..
1-•..;:
.. .. . f1' ;• ,
·' ...
r ,. );:'> ..... -.....
I
·I t-1
0
f • r
~
,,
'l
I
Print No.
14-A-3680
14-A-3870
14-A-8104
8-B-5984
SK-A-840361
14-A-7392
14-A-9364
14-A-9365
15-A-1260
V -Code 225 -Vault
E -Electric Shop
MANUFACTURER'S ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR C.W.C.
Print Title Location Company Micro· ·Film
Dwg. No.
1000 HP PumE Motors
AC Vertical Pump Outline v Westinghouse
and Section
AC Motor-Type HR Vertical v Westinghouse A-4770
Outline Rev. 5
HR Motor-Vert. Fr. No.
90-128-1/2-11 Gen. Ass'y.
v Westinghouse
HR Motor-Vert. Fr. No.
90-128-1/2-11 Stator Winding v Westinghouse A-4772
L.P. Metal Clad Swgr. v Westinghouse A-4779
Switch-Gear
v Westinghouse A-4776
V,E Westinghouse
v Westinghouse A-4768
V,E Westinghouse A-ll773 and
g u1ag A-11788
I
I
lj
II
l I . ;
! ~
,:
I.
!
I
'I
I!
I'
I'
I
I
' I I
]
!
)> ..... ..... .....
I
t-'
t-'
Print N
15-·A-16
15-A-·16
15-A-116
9-B-263
9-B-585
9-B-585
73-B-37
8-D-577
ll·D-B5
) .
)2 .
>3
)5
)
)
L
~
~
l
V-Code 225 -Vault
E-Electric Shop
-
Print Title Location Company Micro Film
I.Mg. No.
Metal Clad Swgr. -Wiring
Diagram Units 1 - 4
I V,E westinghouse A-4781
Metal Clad Swgr. -\'ilr1ng V,E Westinghouse A-4782
Diagram Units 5 -7
Metal Clad Swgr. -Schematic V,E Westinghouse A-4787
and 1 line Diagram
Exciter M-G Set
8BRO. - 4 Machines M-0 Set v Westinghouse A-4769
Outline
Metal Clad Swgr. -Schematic v Westinghouse -.. -Diagram
Metal Clad Swgr. -Single v. Westinghouse -·-
line Diagram
Voltage Reg. Type DT-5 v Westinghouse A-4774
\Hring Diagram
Miscellaneous Draw1nrs
Wiring Diagram -Motor v \olestinghouse
Operated Rheostat
Cont. Wir~ng Diagram -220A. v Westinghouse A-4762
60-Step Field Rheo.
? '
~l
t•'j• 'r.
~i : ,,,
I~
;~~ ,,
~~r;! I,;
1
..
•I
d d '. :I
l
'
I
I
I I:
I;
I
I
I.
i
I'
II
i ' II
I·
>
"'""' -.....
I ....
N
Print No. Print Title
-
2052-El
2')52-E2
2052-E3
El
E2
E3 .
V -Code 225 -Vault
E -Electric Shop
Inter.c.C?nn.~~_t_ion Drawings
Entrance Cable Details
Interconnection Diagrams
Interconnection Diagrams
Pull Box Detail
Location
v v v
v
v
v
Company
W.P. Liscombe
Elec. Const.
Co.
Westinghouse
Westinghouse
Westinghouse
I
Micro Film
Dwg. No.
A-4783
A-4784
A-4785
(
(
)
L
(
(.
I ...
(
l
~
c
u
:A c
' ~
NYU/DAS 83-108 (DTNSRDC)
DTMB ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR C.W.C.
Print No.
A-10216
A-10217-1,-2,-3
E-1341-1,-2,-3,
.4,-5,-12
Print Title
Remote Control Panel
CWC Remote Control Panel Elec.
Conduit
CWC Remote Control Panel Wire
Diagram
Electrical Services
Underwater Lighting
Loc a tic:-.
V,E
V,E
V,E
E-1638-1,-2,-3,-4, 20 Amp -125 Volt And 60 A~p -V,E
-5,-6,-7 0 -400 Volt DC Power Services
V -Code 225 -Vault
E -Electric Shop
Ali I-13
ill
y
' .
iJ '· r, ' .
: '
i'i
I!
1:
I:
I
I
I
::r.. .-
I ......
~
...
.
: .,
I
14f!-~ 9%-
:Z:I! ?1~0_~---------------------r----· :5~to· •j• rlo-'·rr r£crtoH
11'210. -.'
I• rruWolerSurronor,i ... ,tl~
AdjoSioble lip V-ingWindo•t.
-----• l r --=-:-1 _r::--z--( ~ fl''l• r=Woht~:-... h. [lev.ISS.S ~.::=!J'-~~-:-----t.:=:~-· .... _._....,...-"---J II--·~ t ---cJ·· ~
--.. -•·o·----
~ c
----•a'o-:.. __ _
~ .. ;;_.c:v. ..... t.t&.?·: .. w•.• .. s•. ~··•'! •· •-•·• •· ~,'-:--r.-;-:r•t """"':~ .. ~·**.-\· .. :~ .~ t..._ .•· ':'., _.f
lower Return Dud
LOJJG/TUDIYAL S'L:.CTIOAI
LOOKING SOUTH
J.torz. ..
AlL P,fRrf e>r CJII.AIAIEL l(~l!-?;t!O lVID.t:...
FTctiHE 1 :
..
~-
Jf
> ---I ....
U'1
1N
--~ D
Q P••<c";;' l!G.KTI .. Go
---~LOow~ D Wo~ Stt~o&<:.H
Rcc.~: PT.
2.~0VA.C P-.ttn"P"
·-. __ _./
\000 HP Mo"fo~·i
J
-Jl
DutoLt.'A. ~C't.P'l -~
\25 VOC
(,Vf..C 125~400VOC
I ' 8 OuPLn REc.EPT-5.-~
fLOOO\.IGo~T
JuNCTION Bo'1.
---· II fl----~----
'\00 VOC, 100 to. ~I'TCH
-~·-·-~--------. ---·--y
\.Jtl. OIN& REC.E'PT.
J~L. bn
RLC.EPT'S
CO V.&..t, 1~5 V DC
W~oo.1ER. F"L.OW
/ oVA.C, \as voc v-· 0-400VOC -·--· ~~gg~~-w-.·r----l
4 RttEOii>TI.Tii> •rt=tCONTR.OL
foR. 0. <400 \I DC DEi:.\'\
-. -~ .. . . ·-------· ·----~~~
C,RCuLt..IING \.J"TER (\.-IA.t--tNt.L-AW..ILk'BLE t::LECIRIC.A.L Po\.IE.R
PJGURE 2
r
i
L
0
l.
...
(
0
l.
v ;.t_
c.
C'
FIGu"RE 7
'
·-
v. 00 ,01 .02 .0) .Oil .0'} .06 01 O"
,1 ,005 .006 .ooa .oo; .010 .012 ,0114 .015 I ,017 .2 .021 .02) .026 .02 .0)1 .0)) .0,6 :gn .OIIZ ·' ,01.18 .051 .055 .osa .062 .065 .069 Oi7
·" .oe5 .0'90 .091+ .1'199 0.10 0,11 0.11 0.12 0.12 :1 0,1) 0.1" o. 1" 0.15 0,16 0.16 0,17 0.17 O.lti 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 o.n 0.2) 0.24 0.25
:~ . 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.23 0,)0 0,)1 0.)2 0.}2 o. '" 0.)5 0,)6 o.,z 0.) 0.), 0.)9 0,110 0.111 .9 0.14) 0.1416 0.45 0,11 0.47 0,4 0.49 0.50 0.51
1.0 o.u o.il4 o.as o.u o.ia 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 1 .1 o·. o. 5 o. 7 o. q. 9 o. 70 0.72 0,7) 0.7'<
v. 00 .01 .02 .0) .04 .a, .06 .01 .oe
1,2 o. 77 0.78 o. 77 0.81 0.82 0.8) 0.85 0.86 I 0.87 I 1.) 0.90 0.91 0.9) 0.94 0.96 0.91 0.9~ 1.00 1.01
1.4 1,04 1.06 1 .07 1.09 1.10. 1.12 1.1 1.15 1.17
1., 1.20 1 .21 1.2) 1.25 1.26 1.28 1.)0 I 1. )1 I l.}}
1. 1.)6 1.)8 1,140 1.41 1.14) 1.145 1.47 1.48 1.50
1.7 1. 5" 1.56 1.59 1.59 1.61 1,6) 1.65 1.67 Lo9
1.8 1,7) 1.7:& 1, 76 1. 76 1.80 1.82 1.e~o 1.86 ! 1.85 I 1.9 1.92 1.~ 1.90 1.98 2.00 2.Q2 2.04 2.0! I 2.C9
2.0 2.1) 2.15 2.17 2.19 2.22 2.24 2.26 2.2 2.}0
2.1 2.'a I 2.)7 2.)9 2.41 2.104 2.46 v .. a 2.51 I 2.5} I 2.2 2.~ 2.60 2.~2 2.65 2.67 2.69 2.72 2. jli 2.77 I 2.) •· 2.c2 2.64 2.66 2.89 2. 91 2.94 2.97 " 2.99 ).01
2.4 I ).07 ).09 ),11 '. 14 ).17 ).20 ).22 ).25 I ).27
2.i '·" ).~5 ).)S ).~1 ).4) ).46 ).161j ).')2 ,.,It
2. ).6-J ).o) . >.c5 ,.~a ).71 ).711
'· i7
).QO }.~}
t~ II :s.ae I ).91 ).94 ).97 4.00 11,0} 4.05 4.08 I ~. 11
) ~-11 4.20 4,2}. 11.2~ 1.1.29 4.)2 4.35 4. ~s 11,1:1
2.9 i 4.11~ I; .51 4.54 4.57 4.60 4.6} :...66 ". 70 ~.;}
;
v. I 00 .01 I ,02 .0} .04 .05 .06 I .o; j .03 !
).0 4. ?9 4.82 4.8i 4.tJ9 11.92 4.9l 4.913 5.02 I 5 .o, I
).1 5.11 5.14 5.1 5.21 5.24 5.Z 5. '1 '·"' 5. );, l ).2 5.45 5.48 5.52 5.55 5.59 5.62 5.~6 5.69 ' 5. ?!
'·' f!O ,.9) ,.87 &·9" i·9l ,.97 o.oo I 6.~ 6.01 l '·" .15 ,19 .22 .26 .}0 o.}) 6.)7 6.41 £ '·'· ·-· ).5 6.52 '·'' 6.60 6.6) 6.67 6. 71 6.7li 6.?a 6.52
).6 i 6.90 6.94 6.9a 7.01 r.os ~:gJ ?.1) ? .17 I 7.21 I '·l 1:~ 7.)) 7.)7 7.1&1 7." . 7.52 7.56 ., ,,
i a-~ }. 7.n ;.77 7.81 7.65 7.89 7.9) 7.97 i ,Oi
).9 8.09 8.14 8.18 8.22 8.26 8.)0 a.,, &.~ I 6 ... , l 4.0 8.51 8.56 8.60 8.64 8.69 8.71 8.(7 8. I 8.5~
lt,l 8.95 tl.9~ 9.0) 9.00 9.12 9.1 9.21 9·25 9.}0
'·' '·a% 9.4) 9.118 9.52 9.57 9.61 9.60 9.1\J 9.75
1&.:: 9.S9 Z·'' 9.~9 10.02 10.07 10.l2 10.1& 10.21 .... ,X: :so 10.]5 1 .110 10. ,. 10.4~ 10.54 10.59 10.6) IO.eS
... 1 1o.ra 10.8) 10.81 10.~2 10.~1 • 11.02 ll.H 11.11 11. lei
'· 11.26 "·i' 11.D 11. I 11. 11.51 11. 11,61 11.66
'·1 11.76 11, 1 11. 11 .91 11.96 12.01 12. 6 12.11 12.1 r)
TABLI Ol VELOCITY BEADS IN INCHES ·01' WATER FOR VELOCITIES
from O.l0to.4.79 Knots by .01-Knot Intervals
h • .5~217 v• ·
FIGURE 8
All I-17
oq
.019 l
·~~5 0 1
0.1'
o. ~~ 0.2
o.,
0.112
0.52
0.6)
o. 75
.09
0.69
1,0)
1.1 s
1. )5
! . ~~
• ~ I '
1 .90
2.11
2.)2
2.55
2.79
),Vlo
).}0 '·r }. s
4,111
1.;,1::.,
1<.76 I
.c;
5.07 I 5.11:
5.76
c. 11
6.Lo~
6.85
7.25 ., ., c·o ~.o;
!) ,,...,
..., ... I
8.90
9. }It
9.7i 10.2o
1o.n
11 • 21
11 .7i
12.21
v.
... 8
16,g
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.)
,,16
5·i 5.
5·1 5· 5.9
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.)
6.4
6,5
V.
6.6
6.~ 6.
6.9
7.0
I 7.1 I
7.2
7.)
7.4
7.~
II 7.
7.7
7.8 ~ $·9 .0
8.1
8.2
8.)
v. II
8.4 8.2 8.
8.~ 8.
8.9
9.0
9.1
9.2
9·l 9·
9·5
9.6
9·1 9.
9·9 10.0
00 .01 .02 .c, I ~ .... .05 .06 .07 .ca
12.26 12.i1 12.~il 12.1o2 l 12.'•7 12.52 12.57 12.62 12.67
12.78 12. ) 12. a 12.9) 12.99 1).04 1) .09 1 ).1~ 1).20 1).)0 1 '.)6 ,,,:., 1' ,lo 7 1).52 1).57 1).6) 1).6 1).7)
, ) .84 1) .,0 1).95 ... 01
I
1-..96 114.11 lij,17 1~.2§ 114.~8 14.)9 14. 5 14 .5() 1~<.56 111 .61 1~.67 14.72 14.7 14.84
116.95 15.01 15.06 , 5.12 15.18 15.2) 15.29 15.)5 15,40
1~.52 1~.58 '2·6' 1,.~2 I 12.75 15.~1 1,.87 1,.92 '&·98 1 • 10 , . , 6 1 .22 1o.2o 1 .)) 1b.)9 1 .45 , .51 1 .57 16.69 16.75 16.81 16.S7 16.9) 16.99 17.05 17.11 17.17
17.29 17.)5 1~ ,Ill I '1·14 1 I 1A.5' ~~-59 1~.6~ ,A. 12 1~.78
1&.90 1&.97 , .02 1o.09 I ~a:ii 1 .21 1 .27 1 ,)4 1 .40
1 .52 , .59 18.65 16.71 18.84 18.90 18.97 19.0)
19.16 ,. 19.22 19.29 19.)5 I 19.~<2 19.48 19.54 I 19.61 19.68
19.80 19.87 19.9) 20.CO i 2:1.06 20.,) 20. ,z 20.26 20.))
20.46 20.52 20.59 20.ES 20.72 20.79 20.8 20.92 20.99
21.12 21.19 21.26 21 .'52
I
21 .)9 21 .46 21 .5) 21 .60
I
21 .66
I 21.80 21.87 21.~ 22.0:1 22.07 . 22. , .. 22.21 22.28 22.)'-22.48 22.55 22. 2 u .c9 22.7o 22.8) 22.90 22.97 2).04
00 I .01 I .02 I .0'5 i c·· .0'5 I .06 .07 I .c8 I . .. I
2). 18 I 2}.2~ I 2).)2 2).~9 I 2).106 I 2).5) I 2).60 I 2).68
I
2).7, I 2).89 2).~ 2;..cJ 2:0.10 I 2 ... 13 24.25 211.)2 24.)9 24.4o I 24.61 24. 8 214.75 2~<.ZJ I 2:..89 21+.97 25.C~ 25.12 25.19 I
2,.)4
I 2~ ·'", I 2,.~oa
I
2~.55 i 2,.6~ 2&. !1 2,.78 I 2~.e5 j 2~.~~ I 2o.08 2 . , 5 2~.2~ i . '0 I 2:1.) 2 .:.; 2o.5~ 2 .50 2 .o
26.8) 26.90 I 2o.9 i7.:5 27.,) 27.21 27.2 27 .)6 i 27 ,i;:.O
2~.5~ I 2~.66 I 27. 7" J 2I .S2 I ~AJo I 2~.97 2~.05 I 2~.,, I 2:3.20
I 2 .)0 2 .1>4 28.52 2c.;J 29.'-I 2 ·~ 28.8) 28.91 I 28.9~ 29.14 29.22 29.,0 29.) I 29 .. 29.62 ·29.70 I 29.7
29.9) )O.Oi l )0. iO '0 • ~ ! )0.25 )0.)) )0."2 1 )C.50 )0. 55 : J •• o i )0.7'-)0.82 )0.90 1J ~;l )1 .06 ) , . 111 )1 .2) i ) 1. )1 ' . Z" i ! ~ . 39 : ,, .55 )1 . 6:. }1. 72 3i .:0 31 .sa ,, .96 )2.05 )2. 1) I )2.21 I
)2.)8
I )2 ... 6 I )2. s:! )2.6) I }2.71 I )2.l9 )2.88 I )2.~5 I )) .05 I )).21 )3. 30· )'5.)8 )).:07 )) .55 )). ) )).72 )). 0 I )).89
)~.06 }10. 15 ):0.2) 34. )2 )19.100 }11.49 }11.57 ;11.66 i ~4.75
)4.92 ,5.00 I J5.0l
I
)~. 18
I
J2.2S I '&·'5 '2·:04 )~.,2
I
'& .61 I
'&·18 '&·87 '&·2 ' .05 3~.1) J .22 ' .)1 )o. ·o ' ... 9 I
) .o6 ) .75 ) .04 )6.;} }7 .02 )7 .10 )7 .19 )7.2d }7.}7 I
I I
I ! I I I .0'; .cj I
00 .01 .02 .CJ .010 .07 I .09
'a·a 5 I '&·64 I 'rP I }7.52 I '~T I J5.:N )8.09 I ,a. •a I )~.27 I ' .. , ' .z4 ' . ) J8.12 3 . , J8.~ 38.99 )9.07 }9. 13
J9.3o )9. 5 39. 5" J9.c .. J9.n J9. 2 :39.91 40.00 '-0. ~0
40.28 40.)7 lt0.47 i40.56 I :.o.6; I 40.l'" 40.84 I 40.~} I ltl .0)
I 41 .21 It 1 . }1 ~~ .110 111 ... ~ .. ~.59 41. a It, • 78 41. ; I Ill .97
162.15 162.25 102. )It 42. 1.4 1>2.5) ; 42.6) &.2.72 &.2.62 ! 1.2.92
103.11 43.20 .. ,.,0 .. , . ~i i<3.11~ .. ;.;~ -~.w.l ~>'S.7o ' "'a·--~ I 44.07 44.17 44.26 4i; .}:. :. ... 40 lo4 .;o 1.4.65 ~1;.7; I 4' 05
45.01' 45.14 45.24 "5· '" 45.44 45.5) 45.6) 45.n 45:5}
46.0) 46. ,, I ~>6.2) 1t6.)) :06.1t2 I 46.;2 ! 46.62 I ~t6.72 I 46.Ez ~.02 ~.12 41.22 4!·'2 "1·"2 .. &.52 4~.62 16~.12 .. ~.e2 .03 • 1) .. .2) ... )) 4o.4J ... 510 I 4 .64 " . 711 , " .e:o
49.oa. lt9·'a 49.2i '-9·'i I '-9.1+~ 49.5o '"9·~0 :.9.':. I '-9.37
50.07 50.1 50.2 50.) 50.49 50.29 5C.69 5o.ao I 50.;0
51.11 51.22 51.)2 51.42 51.5) 51. 3 51.710 51.64 51.95
52.16 52.26 52.)7 52.~~ 5l.&: 52.~? ~:A! 52.90 5).01
53.22 "·" "·"' 5).510 5J. 5J.75 5).97 ;4.07
TABLE OF VELOCITY HEADS IN INCHES OF WATER FOR VELOCITIES
From 4.80 to 10.09 Knots by .01-Knot Intervals
. h a .53217 v~
AI II -18
FIGURE 9
. c; I ,z.n I
1).25 I 1).79
1:0.~4
111. ' 15.46
1~.04 16.6)
, 7.23
le;. 1 .46
19.10
19.74
20.39 21 .c6
21.73 !
22.42 I
2).11 I
.C9
z; .32 l 214 c:.
2;:2:
26.c~ I '' ~. f .0. I J ! 27.51 I
28.29 ! 29.06 I n.as i
30.o5 I 3, ,:;.7 '
)? . !0 '
3}. 1' i }) .~7 )4.o3
,~. 10 I
' -57 }7 ,IOC I
I .O:j
J8.)o I }9.27 I
&.o. ~9 I
&.1 .12
1
102.C6
ii}.Ol
16).)7 ! 44.95
45.93 I
4:.92 I "J-92 14~.9 ..
1t9.97 '
51.01 I 52.05 I 5}., 1
511.18
FLOW RATERS fOR
SMOKE BOTT\..E.S
TO
FLOW
FAC.I~.
DOUBLE 5UC.
CENT.
pUMP
To FLOW fAC.IL.
·~
AIR
R~MOVAl
NO"TH
WAI-~
C:WC. WAU
(sou .... )
C.UfCULATING
WATER
CH.I\N~EL
TANK
..
·. 4 •..
. '. ~·.·
Air Remov 1 end Filtering System
FIGURE 13
L
FRCM
FIL..n=:..!..
PLAI'i--:"
D;G~~~~~~~~~~~ .. ~~-~AI 11-19 ~ ..•. '.~. ~ -~ jj_~_;;·.~~ -:~·i~·.:t~·;:.'...:~?J ... =:;;;'-~ ~ ... ~=:·~;:"0~:""":_~·:~ .... 5 ... -:-... :-..... -. -~~-/?:·.::,~_:.:1,~ !...: .,._~-~-~:::~.r .. --.... -·--
KINETIC HYDRO ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEM
PHASE II AND Ill MODEL TESTING
FINAL REPORT
December, 1984
~YU/DAS 84-127
KINETIC HYDRO ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEM
Phase II and III Model Testing
Final Report
NYU/DAS 84-127
December, 1984
Gabriel Miller*
Dean Corren**
Peter Armstrong**
This project was perforaed under contract to the
New York Power Authority (Contract No. NY0-82-33), New
York State Energy Research and Developaent Authority,
and Consolidated Edison Co•pany of New York, Inc.
*Principal Inveatiaator
**Research Scientists
NYU/DAS 84-127
Table of Contents
l INTRODUCTION
2 ROTOR BLADE DESIGN
2. 1 First Test Set
2.2 Second Test Set
3 TEST MODEL
3.1 First Test Set
3.1.1 Test Model Design
3.1.2 Data Acquisition and Control
3.2 Second Test Set
3.2.1 Test Model Design
3.2.2 Data Acquisition and Control
4 TEST PROGRAM
4.1 First Model Test Set
4.1.1 Test Procedure
4.2 Second Test Set
5 MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
5.1 First Teat Set
5.2 Second Model Teat Set
5.2.1 Load aatching
6 CONCLUSIONS
7 RIFIRINCIS
1 APPBNDIX. NACA Blade Shape Generation
2 APPINDIX. Glauert Blade Deai&n Theory
3 APPENDIX. Firat Teat Set Rotbr Blades
4 APPENDIX. Second Test Set Rotor Blades
5 APPENDIX. Circulating Water Channel
4
8
8
14
21
21
21
26
33
33
34
36
36
37
45
57
57
70
72
99
101
102
103
104
105
106
NY(j/DAS 84-127
A
B
L
r
R
p
p
Q
u
X
X
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Rotor frontal area = rrr 2
t
Number of blades
Section lift coefficient = L/(.5)pAU 2
Power coefficient = P/(.5)pAU3
L1ft force
Turbine radius
Radial distance from the axis of the turbine
Blade tip radius
Pressure
Power
Volumetric flowrate through rotor = AU
Stream velocity
Local speed ratio = wr/U
Tip speed ratio = QR/U
GREBK SYMBOLS
a. Section angle of attack
p Density of water
ADgular Velocity
SUBSCRIPTS
max Maximum
o no-load
~ Free stream value
NYC/DAS 84-127
The possibility of installing turbines directly in waterways
has been studied by a number of investigators recently (Refs.
1,2). In the New York University Phase I study, conducted for the
New York Power Authority, a number of conclusions were reached
with respect to the New York State resource, and with respect to
the types of kinetic hydro energy conversion systems {KHECS)
which could be utilized to exploit it (Ref. 3). This study
established the following:
A kinetic hydro energy resource (estimated to be on the
order of approximately 300 MW) warranting the development of
devices to exploit it has been found to exist in the State
of New York.
Significant resource potentials exist for both river
(unidirectional) and tidal (bidirectional) flows.
Whereas rated power for wind energy conversion systems is
usually at a power settiDI significantly above the average
power point (sometimes an order-of-•agnitude greater), this
effect is usually not true for hydro energy conversion
-4-
,.
NYC 1 DAS 84-127 Sec. 1. INTRODUCTIO\
systems (whose velocity distribution curve shows
considerably less variability). Such an effect is important
in determining cost-effectiveness.
A technology assessment yielded a nuaber of devices, and
versions of devices, which could be practical. However,
criteria relating to engineering siaplicity, cost
effectiveness, and near-term commercialization show a
benefit for axial flow propeller type aachines in both tidal
flows and rivers of reasonable depth.
These favorable results led to a Phase II program (Ref. 4).
An engineering and economic analysis has been carried out to
determine the approximate cost per kilowatt installed of
representative KHECS units. The econoaic analysis was developed
for a series of moderate sized {approxiaately 4• rotor diameter)
units suitable for an established baseline condition, which is a
river of moderate depth {greater than 5a), span (greater than
20m), and flow rate (2 m/s exceeded 25' of the tiae).
A teat aodel was built and tested to quantify the
effectiveness of the KHBCS aystea enviaioned. A teat program was
designed and 4 •odel blades were tested during the week of 9 May
1983, at the David Taylor Naval Ship Reaearch and Development
Cecter (DTNSRDC) in Bethesda, Md.
In conjunction with these efforts, preliainary site specific
-5-
NYC/DAS 84-127 Sec. 1. INTRODUCTION
investigations were also carried out both upstate and downstate
to identify suitable sites for prototype and demonstration-scale
testing.
These investigations centered on the geological,
hydrological, legal, and environmental factors influencing
kinetic hydro development at the sites.
The results of the Phase II study were reported in the KHECS
Phase II Final Report (NYU/DAS 83-103, August, 1983). That work
was followed and extended in a Phase III study which included
expanded rotor model tests.
This report is specific to the model rotor testing component
of the ongoing KHECS study at NYU. It augments and supercedes
sections IV and V of the Phase II Final Report.
This report includes the second set of aodel tests performed
at the David Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center
(DTNSRDC) in Bethesda, Maryland. This second set of tests (DT2)
took place fro• December 12 to 23, 1983, and was a significant
iaproveaent upon the first teat set (DTl) in teras of both the
quantity and quality of the data.
Additionally, this report presents again the reaults of the
first test set which were subsequently found to have erroneous
rotor angular velocity readings. These data were corrected using
a function derived from repeating the B2X4 rotor tests in the
-6-
NYU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 1. INTRODUCTION
second set. All of the test parameters have been reconciled so
thut all of the model test results could be plotted together.
The rotor blade design calculations, based on Glauert
airfoil theory, are described in Section 2. The water channel
tests carried out at DTNSRDC are described in Section 4, which
follows the description of the engineering design and fabrication
of the test model in Section 3. Presentation and analysis of the
data gathered during the water channel tests conducted appears in
Section 5.
-7-
NYU/DAS 84-127
2.1 First Test Set
The efficiency of the KHBCS is a function of a number of
n /(;:. t-· r .. • ·"· .. . b. .
parameters, j)wt ~t ie •e• t · ae11s it i•ef l-e the power coefficient of
the rotor. This coefficient is defined for unaugmented systems
as the power delivered to the rotating shaft to the available
power, that is torque times angular velocity, divided by
(l/2)PAU 3 (where p is the water density, U the stream velocity,
and A the area of the rotor disc), and must be less than the Betz
limit of 59.3*·
The design of the rotor blades is thus the ao•t critical
factor affecting turbine perforaance. rundaaentally, the design
is siailar to wind turbi~e blades, but a nuaber of effects unique
to water turbines aust be noted. The fir•~ is the possibility of f;' k· i; r)
cavitation, particularly near the blad~1tiP•· The •econd is the
high power per unit area produced by hydro energy systems (as
compared to wind energy devices operating at reasonable
velocities) due to the relatively high density of water. This
-8-
l C..\' r· .
r c.
'· r . I I
I
\ •
\;' \.'
I· '· .
fl
(t
'
Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DES:G\
effect leads to high torque loadings, since rotation rates for
KHECS and WECS are comparable. These two factors lead to a
design which must be rugged (particularly at the hub to withstand
the high torque loading) and. in addition, the pressure on the
suction side must yield values above the critical cavitation
number; particularly near the tips.
{·. (
The blade shapes chosen for the •odel tests were the NACA
44XX series (Ref. 5). Figure 2-1 shows a NACA 4420 profile and
the generation of these shapes is explained in Appendix 1. It ~as
. determined that if the test results for these sections were good,
such blades would be satisfactory for the generic or larger
systems. These asymmetrical sections were chosen because of
their high lift coefficients, availability of data for these
sections for thickness between 12% and 24%, and power performance
as wind turbine blades. They are not so cambered so as to have
any concave profiles. For a good co•pro•ise between strength and
performance, a linear thickness taper fro• 24' at the hub to 12%
at the tip was used for all rotors. The angle of attack at each
"' ,~'~;~radius was chosen near the peak lift coefficient with an
"' \: r'
'' ,1. ,z, appropriate "safety margin" fro• stall. Fi1ure 2-2 presents the
,-...r ~: ~
~ /1 lift coefficient cc 1 ) and angle of attack {a) distribution
......
utilized for both the two-and three-blade desicns tested.
The nominal rotor radius was chosen to be 0.343• based on
test model design constraints as discussed in Section 3.
\:-.
\
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIGN
A comment is in order with respect to augmented structures,
particularly since both Refs. 1 and 2 have tested such designs
for hydro energy applications. For such units the power
coefficient based on turbine blade area can be well above the
Betz limit. The basic principle utilized is to develop a low
pressure zone behind the blades so that the exhaust pressure does
not return to the free-stream value downstreaa of the blades.
This factor increases the disc loading, increasing the power
available. For a ducted design the power coefficient, even based
on exit duct area, can be well above the Betz limit, the
theoretical maximum being approximately 75%.
While the power coefficients for augmented systems will be
higher than for unaugmented ones, questions of economics and
overall performance were carefully considered. The low levels of
aug•entation shown in Refs. 1 and 2 led us to the conclusion that
complex ducted blade designs would not be cost effective or
practical. Thus, non-ducted blade designs (free rotor designs)
were adopted in this study. '' · 1• ,..;. :.. <!' __ _ !)~...,
To aaxiaize the power available, the design of the blades
(their chord and twist distribution for each tip speed ratio and
blade nuaber) is accomplished utilizing Glauert airfoil theory.
A description of this theory is contained in Appendix 2. The
chord and twist distributions for four designs are listed in
Appendix 3 along with the blade drawings below. Blades for four
-10-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIGS
rotors were designed and fabricated for testing. These designs
were chosen for two and three blades (B) and tip speed ratios at
peak power (X) from 3 to'S (where X= OR/U). The following
combinations of blades were tested:
X 3 4 5
8 r~
2 + + _/
·""·
3 + +
Since X tends to be inversely proportional to the number of
blades, a lower blade number permits the desirable higher values
of X for practical blades. Unfortunately, the size of the test
model did not permit testing a one-bladed rotor (due to lack of
room in the hub for counterbalancing the blade).
For convenience, the rotors and specific blade designs for
each rotor were referred to by the blade and tip speed ratio
nu•bers as follows:
B2X4
B2X5
B3X3
B3X4
-11-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIGS
FIGURE 2-1. SACA 4412 Airfoil
-12-
I
NYU/DAS 84-127 0 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLACE DESIGN c::: 0 r----------t-----------r·----------t----------4·----------~--------~------~ ("'.; / ~ .. --· ----~-...... -·~--~·-···--·· -... -..... -. ,. ·~---? -· <::""
1--------·--.......
I / / :/ / / / / : / . ·/· ----y --··-
·/ /i . / I
0 0 '
/
' /
N ~ I N
!
I N
~N
I
l~
I N
I
---·--... ···--·--· -·--------------;--__:_/_ ______ .. _
: ' /
, I 0
·-----··--"'•--~ N : I
~ I //
~ / ~ 1//
....... ····r:: -·· ---· ........ ·---. ---···e-o···----··--------
0'1 / -~ ~/
(!.1 /
~ . I
0 /. ---~. -·-· ---... -. ·-/~I ------· ..
~ /'/
/ ' 0 0
/' I
1------+---·-f ---·: >.. ""c:: ···-·-····
~ •.-i
;.1.....!.~----~ ~ --....;;...., r--11111:1
Ill E
:
, I
I (TI --' ~ '
' I , I l : ' ... -·--· .. ·-·--·---·----·-a:
c
0'1
·ri en
C.l
"C
.. -·····-+·-...
,~
i _r--
~
' . _ _;_ 1.0
~
_. !..""\
t.-1
I
! __ .""'
ir-1
-~""'~
·~
' ' ' l . I
---·-.. ·---L·--------· .. -·-·-"·---N --... _ ..... _~----·-··
I I
I
! i . .-!
;
I
I
I
r------------------~--:---------~~--~----~--------~:---------------~~ ~-0 0\
FIGURE 2-2.
c.. 0 ....
~-
Lift Coefficient and Angle of Attack
Distributions for NACA 4412-4424 Airfoils
-13-
1
I -
~YU/DAS 04-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIG~
2.2 Second Test Set
Although the ordinary Glauert theory design provides
effective blades for kinetic hydro axial-flow turbine blades, we
believed that this design could be i•proved upon. When used for
kinetic hydro blades, it can be seen that unlike windmill blades,
the hydro blades develop chords with lengths which are on the
order of their radial distance. This is due to the differences
between the air and water resource in density and fluid speed.
In water the density is about 850 times greater and the speed is
normally 2 to 10 times less. This results in a •uch higher
portion of the rotor power being extracted from the flow as
torque rather than as rotation rate. Also, the design chord
lengths becoae relatively large at saall radial distances, i.e.
near the hub. These chords are further increased by the
structural require•ents of the blades which handle •uch higher
energy densities than windaill blades. Since for strength the
airfoil thickness aust increase towards the hub, the lift
coefficient is lowered, which, under the Glauert theory yields a
longer chord.
The relatively large ratio of chord length to radius results
in non-optimum shapes for the blades if the sections (or ribs)
are set up flat and tangent to t~~ blade axis, since a point on
NY~!DAS 84 127 Sec. -· ROTOR BLADE DESIGN
the blade must describe an arc as the blade turns through the
water. With flat tangent sections a blade will have a noticeable
flow discontinuity where the innermost hub section leaves contact
from the hub. Flow in the area near the hub will be disturbed
and will not fully contribute to the power of the blade.
Therefore, an improvement has been developed which is to create
blade shapes by (physically or mathematically) curving each
section (or rib) to follow the surface of a cylinder which has as
its axis the rotor axis and a radius equal to that of the given
s~ction. Since each section must be set at a particular twist .
i angle as determined by the Glauert theory, the chord of each
blade section finally describes a portion of a helix. This
construction, termed "conformal" is illustrated in Figure 2-2.
The possible improvement in the water flow pattern near the hub
from conformal construction is shown in Figure 2-3.
For the second set of model tests five new rotors were
prepared, all of which were conforaal. These blade designs are
shown in Appendix 4.
A conforaal version was aade of 82X4, a rotor which had been
previously tested, so that the effect of the coaforaal design
could be directly assessed.
The rest of the new rotors were •ade with a longer blade
length (0.413m nominal radius) in order to increase the scale,
Reynolds nuaber, and power towards full-scale conditions. The
-15-
' .
i
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIGN
maximum Reynolds numbers based on apparent velocity and section
chord l~ngth were about 400,000 (independent of radial position)
for these model rotors which is about one-fifth to one-third of
the maximum values for a full-scale KHECS. These blades also
incorporated slightly lower values for lift coeffecients for the
thinner airfoils which correspond to lower angles of attack and
results in longer chords for a given blade section. These values
were considered to be more conservative, and were expected to
make the blades more resistant to stall at high loadings.
Because of the structural failures encountered in the first
set of fabricated blades, it was decided to make the new blades
out of solid cast metal, which for convenience was stainless
steel. Blade patterns were made by hand in a manner similar to
the previous blades with the nxception that the ribs had to be
set up for brazing in a jig with individual curved mandrels to
create the conformal shape. The patterns were used to sand cast
two or three steel blades depending on the blade auaber of a
given rotor design. These blades were designed with integral
flanges which were bolted to a solid steel bub. After casting,
the blades had to be smoothed and the aounting aurfaces aachined
before •••eably. Once •••••bled, the entire rotor• were
dynamically balanced. The resulting rotors were extremely
strong, though quite heavy (20 to 40 lbs).
-16-
NYU/DAS 84-127
The new rotors constructed were:
B2X4C
B2X4CL
B2X6CL
B3X4CL
B3X5CL
Sec. 2. ROTOR BL!<.DE DESIGN
where "C" refers to conformal and "L" refers to the longer radius.
-17-
1
TIP.......;...._..
I I I
I I
' I
\
I
I
LEADING EDGE I
I
\TRAILING EDGE
/
I I
\
I \
~r· \
' ' . '
I
I
\
\
FLAT SECTION
~ '= c . 2 . R 0 T 0 R B L A D E D E S I G ~;
I I
, -. 1
FLOW I
\
1\
i
CONFORMAL
FIGURE 2-3. Conformal Glauert Blade Scbeaatic
-18-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIGN
FLAT SECTION
FLOW NEAR HUB
CONFORMAL
I •
FIGURE 2-4. Flow Around Simple and Conformal Blades
-19-
NYU/01\S 84-127 Sec. 2. ROTOR BLADE DESIGN
.. -.. .
I ..
FIGURE 2-5. Secon~ Test Set Rotors, Two-Bladed
L-2.: ::.2X4(from DTl), S2X4C, B2X4CL, B2X6CL
·. ~ -· .;... : -.. _.,;;,;. .. ; ..
' ~ . ..
·~ .7·:: ·. . _ .. -~ ..
:,.. r , • , - .
. ~ ::_J-~ .·. ~ . :.:1 /-=-~2~
. ·.. ..
. ;.. -_..
. I
, ..
FIGURE 2-6. Seco~c Test Set Rotors, Three-Bladed
l-3: 33X4CL, B3X5CL :o~e blade removed)
-20-
~YlJ/IJAS 84 127 Sec. 3. TEST MOD.r::.
3.1 First Test Set
A KHECS test program was designed and carried out to
determine the power available from practical free-flow water
turbine blades. Secondary goals of the test included testing
various system design concepts for the turbine itself which are
useful for the eventuAl full-scale implementation.
3.1.1 Test Model Design
The model for water channel testing of the KHBCS was
designed to satisfy the test mission to collect blade performaoce
data and to perform in such a way as to ensure efficient and
extensive data collection during (initially) a one-week test
period. Previous similar e•pirical testing by Aerovironment
(Ref. 1) was not adequate for free flow turbines either in terms
of quantity or precision of data, or in its nature (low Reynolds
nu11ber).
-21-
NYC!DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
Major components of the KHECS test model include the rotors,
shaft, shaft seal, shaft housing, shaft bearings, shaft coupling,
brake, tachometry transducer, torque transducer, nacelle,
fairings, mounting pylon, mounting boom, and aounting brackets.
(See Figure 3-1.)
The KHECS test node! was designed to achieve aims of
accuracy and repeatability of blade data , along with reliability
and ruggedness. Tbese criteria necessitated maximum possible
simplicity in the drive train and shaft loading device which is
also the heart of the tes~ model. For the aodel testing
proposed, it was decided that a brake would be more effective
than a generator or other type of power absorber in terms of
size, i.e., it could be smaller, especially in diameter, for a
given torque absorbed. A magnetic particle brake was selected to
permit smooth chatter-free braking action over a wide range of
speed (virtually fron 0 to 3600 rpm). Using this device met the
requirement that the loading and aeasureaent system be
direct-coupled, with no gearing which would have been a potential
aource for aeasuremeat inaccuracy, breakdowns, and a ainiaum
torque limitation. The maximum practical brake size that would
permit a reasonable KHECS teat rotor diaaeter was rated at 100
lb-ft (136N-m) torque, which, according to blade performance
estimates, allowed a cominal rotor radius of 0.343m (13.5") for
the higher torque (lo"er tip-speed ratio) rotor versions. With
-22-
.
' f
~
NYC/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
water cooling, the brake could absorb a maximum power of 6kW,
more than the rotors could be expected to provide at a current
speed of 3.05 m/s (6 knots). The brake is electrically actuated
with a 90-volt DC supply, and its torque is proportional to the
brake coil current. Figure 3-3 shows the brake assembly being
placed in the nacelle.
Again, for simplicity, ruggedness, and directness of
measurement, a reaction torque sensor was selected. This
eliminated the need for another rotating component and
potentially problematic slip rings. Accordingly, a sensor unit
was selected with the required range and precision, and with the
ability to carry the weight of the brake and coupling in
cantilever without affecting the torque reading. Thus, all of
the loading torque is reacted through the sensor which is mounted
on the rear end-head through the torque sensor.
As the brake and the watertight nacelle which houses it is
./~) •· L
of a significant diameter relative to the rotor, the rotor was -------· ---. ..._. __
placed upstream of the nacelle as far as was practical, with the
original intention of minimizing the effect of the nacelle in the
rotor. To achieve this, a shaft housing or sting of 0.8m (35")
length was located between the rotor and nacelle. At the
upstream end of the shaft is the forward bearing housing which
supports a spherical roller bearing with oil chaabers. Also
mounted in this houstng, ahead of the bearing, is the shaft seal
-23-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MOO::L
which is of the graphite/ceramic face seal type. :his seal was
selected to provide high performande sealing with ainimum
residual torque. Figure 3-4 shows the shaft housi~g assembly.
A rear bearing housing which holds the rear s~aft bearing is
located on the inside of the forward nacelle end head. The model
was designed so that the entire front end, includicg the shaft,
could be removed from the rest of the nacelle. To accomplish
this the rear end of the shaft was a keyed slip fi: into the
flexible shaft coupling which was mounted to the b~ake shaft.
Mounted by a clamp to the brake housing is an optical
encoder tachometry sensor driven by a toothed belt from a pulley
on the shaft. This unit was selected for accuracy and
reliability, and resolution in that it provides 600 pulses per
revolution. A signal conditioning circuit pro~ides a linear
analog voltage for the data acquisition system. Figure 3-3 is a
photograph showing the physical arraogeaent of the tachometer
sensor between the brake and the shaft coupling (at the top of
the photograph)·.
The KHECS teat model is supported approxiaately four feet
below the water surface by a pylon consisting of a four-inch
diameter pipe, flange-aounted to the nacelle top, ~eld by support
clamps to a abort horizontal boom which is attachec to a column
on the facility's test carriage. The KHECS souoti~g components
are shown in Figure 3-5. A lifting shackle at the !op of the
-24-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
pylon is used to maneuver the model by overhead crane. Figures
3-6 and 3-7 are photographs which show the completed KHECS test
model, and Figure 3-7 is a perspective drawing of the entire
model system.
All non-rotating underwater seals are accomplished by the
use of 0-rings, permitting diaaaseably and reassembly. For these
to be reliable, the sealing flanges are all stainless steel. In
the case of mild steel structures such as the nacelle and pylon,
stainless flanges ere welded to the mild steel piece. Just
behind the shaft seal is a leakage drain area which is connected
to the nacelle body by a surface-mounted, clear bose which
permits visual inspection of the seal status, even during
operation, end allows limited operation time even if a seal leak
occurs. Backup moisture detectors in the nacelle are designed to
alert operators of significant water in the nacelle before any
components are damaged.
Other instrumentation in the nacelle includes three
vibration sensors aounted orthogonally to the brake aountiag
spider, the front end-head, and the rear bearing housing, and
theraocouples aeaauring the teaperature of the brake coolant
water and the brake surface.
All electrical cables and cool~ng water hoses pass into the
nacelle through the pylon, the top end of which is well above the
water surface. An ambient water temperature thermocouple mounts
-25-
NYU/OAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TES':' MCDEL
to the outside of the pylon, submerged in the channel flow. The
brake coolant water supply hose, like the electrical cables,
comes from the control panel, but the coolant drain bose
terminates as it leaves the pylon, simply wasting into the
channel.
3.1.2 Data Acquisition and Control
Signals form the torque sensor strain gauge, tachometer,
thermocouples and thermistermoisture detectors are monitored,
stored, and manipulated by the data acquisition and control
system (DACS). All signals are converted to analog voltages which
are scanned by the data logger. In addition, the data logger is
able to make quasi-real-time calculations of power coefficient
based on instantaneous angular velocity and torque data, along
with stored constants. The data logger prints a set of data at
intervals of ten seconds and transmits a set through an RS232C
data link to a microcomputer for etorage on aagnetic disc.
Several signals were given alarm set-points for protective
purposee, e.g., aoisture detectors and coolant te•perature, or
for operational purposes, e.g., low speed indicating rotor
stall.
Along with the data logger and computer, the test model
control station includes power supplies and circuitry for the
-26-
NYU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
brake, the termistor ~oisture detectors, and the torque sensor
strain gage. There is also a measurement and control system for
the brake coolant, and an oscilloscope to monitor the vibration
sensors. Figure 3-8 is a photograph which shows the entire test
system under final checkout and calibration prior to shipment to
the water channel.
-27-
NYIJ/DAS 84-l2i
ROTOR
SCREEN
SHAFT SEAL
FORWARD BEARING j
AFT BEARING
Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
PYLON
TACHOMETER
MAGNETIC PARTICLE BRAKE
FIGURB 3-1. KRECS Water Channel Rotor Teat Model Schematic
-28-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
FIGURE 3-2. Test Model Brake Asee•bly
FIGURE 3-3. Test Model Macelle Aaae•bly
-29-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MOJEL
FIGURE 3-4. KHECS Teat Model Shaft Housing Assembly
FIGURE 3-5. KHBCS Test Model Mounting Coaponents
-30-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
FIGURE 3-6. Assembled IHECS Test Model Without Fairings
FIGURB 3-7. Complete KHBCS Teat Model Mounted To Pylon
With Fairiaa• Attached
-31-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TBST MODEL
rotor
fairing
flow
FIGURE 3-8. KHBCS Test Model Isometric Drawing (With Rotor B3X4)
-32-
~YU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
3.2 Second Test Set
3.2.1 Test Model Design
For DT2, new larger and heavier rotors were used which gave
increased power, but still within the constraints of the torque
and power limitations of the magnetic particle brake. The
initial rugged and conservative design of the test aodel itself
permitted the increased stress and power levels without any major
changes.
For this set of tests a screen was constructed in scale to
simulate the effect of a full-scale protective screen. Its
design was the same as that anticipated for a full-scale KHECS,
i.e. the "pluab-bow" screen which has a single, vertical leading
edge connected by horizontal bars to a hoop around the rotor disk
(see Figure 3-9). It was supported by four araa bolted to the
sting and steadied by a vertical cable froa its forward edge to
the support carriage above the water. The aounting peraitted it
to be moved in the axial direction to teat the relative effect of
its position on rotor perforaance.
A larger set of fairings was constructed to cover the
-33-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
nacelle as a check o~ its influence on or interference with rotor
performance.
3.2.2 Data Acquisition and Control
For DT2, the test model iostruaentation remained unchanged
except for the additional use of two extra tachometers for
calibration, one magnetic and one photoelectric. The increased
operating experience and increased testing period permitted a
drastic increase in the volume of data which could be collected.
This was accomodated by the use of a portable 16-bit computer
which was able to receive data from the data logger via a serial
link and store the data to floppy disk, all at the top rate
the data logger. After the test period, the computer was
connected to the NYU mainframe computer as a terminal so that t~~
data could be transferred at high speed for post-processing and
plotting. This unit can be aeen in the •onitoring and control
atatioo photograph, Figure 3-9.
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 3. TEST MODEL
FIGURE 3-9. KHECS Test Model Screen
~--........ "'::-::--. .. "' . . . . . .. . .
FIGURE 3-10. Second Test Set Data Acquisition and Control
-35-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
4.1 First Model Test Set
KHECS model rotor testing took place at the Circulating
Water Channel (CWC) facility of the David W. Taylor Naval Ship
Research and Development Center (DTNSRDC). Figure 4-1 shows the
essential arrangement. Photographically clear filtered water is
circulated at speeds variable from zero to five meters per second
through a test region of generous cross section (width 6.7 meters
and depth 2.7 meters), ensuring a uniform free stream velocity.
At the highest velocities (greater than 6 knots), air bubbles are
entrained in the flow to a degree significant enough to i•pair
visibility. Figure 4-2 shows the CWC test section, and Figure
4-3 shows the test model prior to aub•ersion. Windows at various
locations in the sides and botto• allow visual observation and
photography, and in this case stroboscope and video camera
operation also. A pitot tube •ounted in the free stream, and
connected to a calibrated water manometer, indicates the water
velocity within 0.1 knot; the actual water velocity was checked
and found to agree with this calibraton (see Figures 4-4 and
-36-
NYU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
4-5). The ewe facility includes an overhead traveling crane
assists in moving models and a regulated power supply is
available for instrumentation.
4.1.1 Test Procedure
Appendix 5 gives the operating procedure for the CWC.
Essentially, the channel operator brings the impeller motors up
to speed, adjusts the blade pitch until the water velocity is
steady at the desired value, then gives an audible signal to the
model test operators.
With the water circulating at the chosen rate and the rotor
turning, the datalogger takes an appropriate number of readings
of the angular velocity and torque, from which it calculates the
power and power coefficient. By increasing the brake current,
the load is raised and a new set of readings and photographs
taken. This process is repeated until the point is reached at
which the loading ia so high as to cause rotor stall.
A new water speed is then established. and the aeasurements
carried out again at increasing torque. Readings are checked as
needed for repeatability, with angular velocity both increasing
and decreasing until it is felt that the particular rotor
performance has been completely quantified.
-37-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
Circulation is tben stopped, the model raised from the
water. and a new rotor installed. The procedure is repeated for
the next rotor.
Figures 4-6 and 4-7 show the KHBCS test model submerged in
the ewe in still and flowing water, respectively.
Figures 4-8 through 4-11 are photographs of rotor B2X5 under
test showing the clear appearance of tip-cavitation helices.
Figures 4-10 and 4-11 also show the shaft seal drain tube which
could be monitored visually during testing for indication of
J
' leakage.
-38-
I
I
I'
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
DAVIOW. TAYLORNAW.lSHIPRESE.ARCHftOEVELOPMENTCENTER
BETHESDA. MARYLAND 200&112Q2J 221·1515
CIRCULAnNG WATER CHANNEL C1M4J
Gwiclt Vanec
UNITED STATtS
•.. . ..
': ·· · · ~<r . .;:;;;;:t;;:;,""~;u;;,&:;!;;ii;;c;;:;_;;w~IF··~ a· ::iiF.ii\ili~.ni~x;x .,ii(;:;::~~;;.:;;;fj,••,: ::: .. :1 1----4Umne.etd '.
Approx. ~th o! wctw cir::;vlt rMftUnld ataund tbG Clllftteflinea • t9 m (125 ftJ
I ·.
CJ 'CJ .,_---Uml~ ftl---
CJ c::J
Pmlt (t.v•~fllim of Ri19inp g!
Dtt:iCFisrTION OF FACIUTY:. vertlalplll:te. open to 'lhocrt~noapt.. i.t •ctlon wtlh • .._ ...._. ... c c:lolotld
Mcin:ule1ing wewr circuit. variable aPMd. ,........, cro~~~~41011tiOMisMpe with eo,..nt IMide wlltth of 1.7 m f22 fll
tua.pt ot tho pumpal, 1.1 m 130 tU long enlafgelftlnt IIIIC1ion with 11ft .... .,....._ eurface controllp et tM u:-ctream en.l
cf 1tla tes1 •ctlon. 10 largo vt.wing w!ndOWII on eh:har .acto of the tiiSt Mction ld dlffenmt elentionl & S tn the botton,,
ftlO'IIablo bride• apona 1M teat Mction for eno It ve••*r In ~ modda. rf811ft81Hideo Ia ea;:.abk o'l taking
towfng loads ct •ny en. of "'--IIMrous pofma up to J1.114 N CIIOO Ibid. ...,...,d 1niVellng ....,... for hilNilfuag lergQ £~
tt.a¥y modtlls. filbtnl koep Miter phcrtO'IfSpftlcdr ...
TYPE Of DFIIVE SYSTEM: two 3.1 m t12.S ftJ dill,...., lid~ pltl:h two....._ ulal flow lmpehra oparEtlng In perollcl,
Impeller blltde anglo Ia controlled by an .,.._. MrVO ....-n upeble of llllllintaiaing t11et INICdon watw wSocity within
:tG.Ot knot. · ,
TOTAL MOTOR POWER: two •ch I3Z kW na lrtt. i'PLIO rpm eot-nt ~~peed. pumpe rotntlft .,..tl• dltec:'tiOM
WORKtNG SECTION MAX. VELOCrrY: 1.1 m/a no k_, . .
WORIC.ING SECTION DIMENSIONS: lentth • 11.3 m (10 td. width • 1.7 m az N. milL wetet ..,., • 2.7 m CS f1l with 1.0 m
&1.3 N of ft .. bOIIrd above tho fleo water aurtace, it 1t1 pouiblo to lower tho water depth & openat• at Nd~ 1pee<!s.
FIGURE 4-1. DTNSRDC Circulating Water Channel
-39-
~Yl/DAS 8~-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
FIGURE 4-2. CWC Test Sectioa
FIGURE 4-3. Test ~odel Prepared for Submersion
-40-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
I
FIGURE 4-4. CWC Current Speed Calibratioa Chart
FIGURE 4-5. CWC Reference Pitot Tube Maoo•eter
-41-
~YU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-6. Test Model Mounted in Subaerged Test Position
FIGURE 4-7. Test Model Duriug Teat
-42-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-8. Rotor B2X5 Under Test (Side View)
FIGURB 4-9. Rotor B2X5 Under Test
-43-
/I;YC~DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-10. Rotor B2X5 Under Test (Botto• View)
FIGURE 4-11. Rotor B2X5 Under Test
-44-
\
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
4.2 Second Test Set
Testing procedures during DT2 were substantially the same as
in DTl. Figure 4-12 shows the test aodel tachoaetry being
calibrated in between test runs. Figures 4-13 and 4-14 show the
test model with rotor B2X4C installed, the latter including the
protective screen. Rotor B2X4C is viewed under test at light
loading in Figure 4-15, and at heavy loading in Figure 4-16. As
before, the tip cavitation helices are clearly visible, with no
indication of face cavitation.
Figures 4-17 through 4-26 are a selection of testing
photographs which show various configurations and effects. In
particular, the degree of loading can be clearly seen from the
axial spacing of tip cavitation helices. Also, in DT2 it was
found that the now longer and thinner •ections of the high tip
speed rotors developed significant face cavitation when operated
at low loadings, i.e. above de•ign values of X. This can be seen
in Figure 4-21 in which rotor B3X4CL is not loaded and has face
cavitation. In Figure 4-22, the rotor is near optimal loading
and the cavitation is gone, with only the tip helices visible.
Interference due to the .large fairings (Figures 4-23 and
4-24) and the screen (Figures 4-25 and 4-26) looks aaall in terms
-45-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
of the disturbance to the helices. The reduced data later proved
this to be the case.
-46-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-12. Test Model Taehoaetry Calibration
NYU/DAS 84-12i Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
.
l
I .,
~
FIGURB 4-13. Test Model With Rotor B2X4C Installed
-48-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-14. Test Model With Rotor B2X4C and Screen Installed
-49-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
FIGURE 4-15. Rotor B2X4C at Moderate Current Speed, Low Loadicg
r -so-. s
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
... :.;..-.,
l
1
FIGURE 4-16. Rotor B2X4C at Moderate Current Speed, Optimal Loading
-51-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-17. Rotor B2X4CL at Moderate Current Speed, Optimal Loadin
'
FIGURE 4-18. Rotor B2X4CL at High Current Speed, Optimal Loading
-52-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-19. Rotor B3X4CL at Low Current Speed, Optimal Loading
FIGURE 4-20. Rotor F3X4CL Viewed Froa Below
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
j
FIGURE 4-21. Rotor B3X4CL, Moderate Current Speed, Low Loading
'
'·
FIGURE 4-22. Rotor B3X4CL, Moderate Current Speed, Optimal Loading
I
-54-
J
f .
1
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRAM
FIGURE 4-23. Rotor B2X4C, Large Fairings, Moderate Current Speed
'
FIGURB 4-24. Rotor B2X4C, Large F.airiacs, Hich Current Speed
-55-
' ' •
. .
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 4. TEST PROGRA~
FIGURE 4-25. Rotor B2X4CL with Screen, Low Current Speed
FIGURE 4-26. Rotor B2X4CL with Screen, Moderate Current Speed
-56-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
5.1 First Test Set
Throughout the week of testing, after an initial problem
with assembling the shaft seal, the teat •odel performed
flawlessly. Visual inspection of the seal status during
operation was very effective, and showed absolutely no detectable
leakage during the entire week.
During the testing process, data was carefully marked with
special data logger channels as to whether it was valid with
regard to equilibrium conditions of both the water channel and
the model. Transient effects were thereby eli•inated. Still, a
total of 1700 valid data points were acquired for the four rotors
tested.
Random errors in the •easure•ent of rotor power include
those in angular velocity and torque, and for power coefficient
include the uncertainty in channel current speed. However,
according to the ewe calibration record, current speed
uncertainty is less than 0.1 knot from the nominal speed over the
-57-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
range of speeds used. This would yield a potential error of
between +/-1.7~ for a nocinel speed of 6 knots, and +/-3.3% for a
speed of 3 knots. Errors for angular velocity and torque are
below +/-1% each. Thus, the total uncertainty in power is +/-2%,
and in power coefficient is from +/-3.7~ at high current speed to
+/~5.3~ at low speed.
After the first test set results had been reported, it was
discovered during the preparation for the second set of tests
that a systematic error had existed in the angular velocity
measurements for the first test set data. This was true even
though the calibration had been checked during checkout prior to
shipment and rechecked several times during the tests with
another instru~ent. By repeating the tests on rotor B2X4 in DT2,
the suspicions regarding the original tachometry were comfirmed.
Therefore, the DTl data were corrected using a function derived
from comparing the B2X4 rotor tests between DTl and DT2.
Presented here are the corrected DTl data.
Torque versus angular velocity curves are shown for each of
the four rotors in Figures 5-l, 5-3, 5-5, and 5-7. These curves
_../..,;-!fh ~,.. ~ ~ ~-r
clearly show the ~ted fi~ar relationship-between these two
parameters. The data presented here are those collected by the
DACS which were already calibrated in engineering units modified
only by adding to the torque values the constant, peraanent
dynamic torque of the shaft seal and bearings (those components
-58-
NYU/DAS 8~-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESC~7S
not sensed by the reaction torque sensor) which had been measured
to be 1.56 N-m. Although in practice it is impossible to achieve
zero loading, due to residual seal and bearing friction in both
the front end and the brake, these plots allow linear curve fits
which can be extrapolated back to a "zero torque" condition. The
angular velocity at this intercept is equivalent to the no-load
rotation rate, w . 0
There are no curve fits for rotor B3X5, the blade of
smallest chord, which suffered rapid physical deterioration and
provided no useful data due to construction deficiencies. Rotors
B3X4 and B2X5 had minor damage which probably lowered their
performance slightly. In each of the data graphs it is clear
that most of the variation in the test data is due to
fluctuations in angular velocity, even while the torque loading
was held steadily constant. Such rotation rate fluctuation could
often be easily observed visually, e•pecially at high loading
values, and can be attributed to ainor variations in blade
aanufacture and resultant flow field irregularities. Still,
however, the data is eminently coherent and repeatable.
Figures 5-2, 5-4, 5-6, and 5-8 are plots of the rotor power
ver•us angular velocity. Bach figure •bows, for a •ingle rotor,
the family of power curves, each curve at a differernt current
speed. Fit by least-squares to each set of data ia a curve of
the theoretical parabolic shape which uses the derived no-load
-59-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
rotation rate and the origin as x-intercepts.
In the case of rotor B2X5, Figure 5-6, the data does not
extend to a high enough level of torque (or power) to support the
parabolic curve fit for the power at maximum power. Because the
blades were designed close to the aaxiaum angle of attack (near
stall) for each section, the power curve drops sharply when the
rotor is loaded beyond the aaximum power point. This blade
design is appropriate for a unidirectional river resource with
overspeed potential where it is desirable to have a rotor
connected to a fixed-speed induction generator, thus causing the
rotor to stall when current speed increases beyond the design
point (tip speed ratio drops below a minimum value). A small
number of data points which were clearly part of the blade stall
were not used for the parabolic curve fit since they would cause
errors. For B2X5, stall occurred before the power output
peaked.
.., ' . .. . '
I '
-60-
NYU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B2X~-TORQUE vs ANGULAR VELOCITY
70
\ -;
I
3.09H/S !
I 60 ....;
·: ' ~-! . I
\ i
....i
2.83H/S \
soL \
~ ·~ \ .. U1 * 0:::
UJ \ c , ... .. , .
1-2.57M/S .... ~. UJ \ I ~
40 ~ i i
( z .. ;~ \ -0
1-
~ I . ·~
UJ ' 2.31M/S \~. • • J. • +
z I ....; \ ~·~ 30 r-2.06M/S \
' + + \ -\ ' I
l I UJ I ~\\ .. ::::l
0 r ·· .. ~
0::: . ........ -,
0 •• ..&... 1-I i I ' 20 ~ \ l I . . ""
'
r
\ ....
\
i
I
10 1.54M/S ~
i
0 ~~--~~--~~~~~--._~--~~--~~--~~--~~---
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
ANGULAR VELOCITY lRADIANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-l. Rotor B2X4 Torque Vs. Angular Velocity
-61-
NYU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR 82Xq-PQWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2600
2400 I 3.09 H/S . . ..
2200
#
2000 . •
1800 ~
,.. 1600 l-en
1-
1400 ~ 1-+ a:
:X
1200 !-
et:::
UJ
:X
0 1000 c...
M/S
800
600
400
200 ..
0
0 10 20 30 40 so 6J 70 80 9[
ANGULAR VELOCITY lRAD ~Rr~/S::Cl
'
FIGURE 5-2. Rotor B2X4 Power Vs. Aogular Velocity
-62-
(,/") a:::
i.J..J
1-
LU
l:
z
0
1-
3:
UJ z
:.u
;::J
0 a:::
0
1-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESCLTS
ROTOR B3X~-TORQUE VS ANGULAR VE~CCI~Y
45
-I
40 L L
! ·-' ' ~ ....
35 ~
~ r-r-30 :-
-I
I
I-
25 '-
1-
I r .....
~ 20 ;.....
I
;-,..
15 l-
~
10 E ~
5
1. 8J M/S
2.57 M/S
2.31 M/S
2.06 M/S
\ T-~---~---~--,-
\ ..
' \
\
\
\
' ' ...
\
0 .___...___.__ __ .___.~....__..___"'--_ _J_ -·-. j
0 10 20 30 40 s:
RNGULRR VELOCITY fRROIRNS.'SECl
\
FIGURB 5-3. Rotor B3X4 Torque Vs. Angular Velocity
-63-
' \
60 70
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTC~ :3X~-POWER VS RNGULRR VELOCITY
• 2. 57 HIS
1200
1000 t-.t
(.(') I + 2.'31 M/S
t-I t-a: r ++ 3:
I
BOO t
Ck: ~ .2. 06 M/S w
3: I ..
0 I \ a.. 600 I-
400
\
\
200
\_
I
0 ~--~--._--~--~---._--~--~--~--~~_.---~~~~~--~
0 10 2a 30 40 so 60 -I
A~.~U:..RR VELOCITY lRADIANS SECl
FIGURE 5-4. Rotor B3X4 Power Vs. Ang~lar Velocity
-64-
(/)
0:::
UJ
~
UJ
~
z a
~
3:
UJ z
UJ
::J
(3
0::: a
~
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
55
I...
t-
so t
:t
tiS !-r-....
f-
tiD r
~
~ ....
I'""
35 -
'
~
L
30 .....
-:...
25 .....
-20 -,..
~ .... ....
15 -,.. -i-....
10 ~
r
t: ..
5 t-
~ -!-
0 t
0
ROTOR BZXS-TORQUE VS ANGULAR VE~OCITY
10
\ 3. 09 M/5 \
\ \
2. 83 M/5 ~.
\ -.ol\
~ -.~. .+ .. " ..
\ ~ ~. ~.
\ ..., ....
-\ :;.:+
2. 31 M/5 \~ '.._, <~~
2.31 M/5 \.". (OFF-AXIS~'\., ~.
'. \ \ \
··~ ... ....w ' . \ +.......,.
\'
\ ~
' \ .......
oft..
~ \ ....
\
\:· ·' \. ~ \
20 30
ANGULRR VELOCIT~
·t
~
,\
so 40
(RAOHINS/SEC l
FIGURE 5-5. Rotor B2X~ Torque Vs. Angular Velocity
........
'
60
....
I
' I
-..
\ ' -: \-
\·
\-
\j
72
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TBST RESVLTS
ROTOR BZXS-POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2200 t
3.09 M/5
2000
1800
2.83 MIS
1600
' -1400 r
(/")
1-
1-c: 1200 ~ ::z
' ~ 2.31 M/5
2.31 M/S \
• \ et: 1000 1-
I I
I.I.J ::z ,...
a I
Cl.. 800 I-.. ~. I \ ~ \ 600 \ _;
\ -
I 400 \
\
' ;
\ ...:
200 \
\
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 7C
ANGULAR VELOCITY lRADIANS/SECl
fiGURE 5-6. Rotor B2X5 Power Ya. Angular Velocity
-66-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR 83XS --TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2.0 f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I
1.8
1.6
-1.4
(/) a::
u.J ......
UJ
:&: 1. 2
z
0 ......
3
UJ z 1.0
u.J • 8
:::J a a::
0
t-
.6
.4
.2
' _j
!
.J
' I
I
l
' l
!
l
l
1
I
J
0 ~._._~~~~~~~~~--~~~._~~~~-L~~~~~~
0 10 20 "30 40 so 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RADIANS/SEC)
FIGURB 5-7. Rotor B3X5 (Damaged) Torque Y£. Angular Velocity
-67-
~YU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B3X5 --POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
200
...,
!
180 ~
i
I
I
160 J
• ~
140 J
I
I
-120 i en • • .....,
t-J .....
a: :z I • J 100
• J
0::: ! UJ •
:3: eo • 0 -0... ""' I •
• ~ so
•
40 •
20
0 ~~._._._~~~--~--~_.~~~--~~~~~._._._~~
0 10 20 30 40 so 60 70 80 so 100 110 120 130
RNGULRR VELOCITY (ftROIANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-8. Rotor B3X5 {Damaged) Power Ys. Angular Yelocity
-68-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 5-9. First Test Set Rotor• After !eating
FIGURE 5-10. Rotor B3X4 (Slightly Damaged)
-69-
NYU/OAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESCLTS
5.2 Second Model Test Set
The increased number of variables and time available in DT2
resulted in an increased number of runs. This set produced
almost 6500 valid data points. The runs accomplished were
assigned names which begin with the rotor used and are suffixed
with any special conditions, as follows in Table 5-l:
E!:!n £b~r~£1!r!!!i£.!! f.!t!!r~ ~2~.:.
82X4 Repeated test of same DTl rotor 5-ll, 12
82X4C Conformal version of B2X4 5-13, 14
B2X4CL Conformal, long, version of 82X4 5-15, 16
B2X4CM Conformal, large fairings 5-17, 18
82X4CSA Screen installed aft 5-19, 20
B2X4CSF Screen installed forward 5-21, 22
B3X4CL Conformal, long 5-23, 24
B3X5CL Conformal, long 5-25, 26
B2X6CL Conformal, long 5-27, 28
B2X6CLM Conformal, long, large fairings 5-29, 30
TABLE 5-l. Second Test Rotor Data
.. As before, all of the torque versu• angular velocity
~ .
I ' relationships clo•e to linear, and the angular •, are power ver•u•
i velocity data are well fit by parabolas.
A general comparative overview of rotor performance is
provided by Figure 5-31 which plots maximum Cp against U for all
rotors tested (except 82X6CL which had very poor performaoce).
-70-
• '
\'tCtL:AS 8..; 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESlLTS
Figure 5-3le shows the exact dRta. and for ease of distinguishing
each rotor, smoothed curves are shown in Figure 5-3lb. This
figure should be interpreted with caution, and the curves must
not be extrapolated.
In the cases in which stall occurred prior to the power
curve peak, so that no data exists to support the curve fit, the
highest Cp data actually achieved for a given current speed was
used for this graph. For example, the parabolic power curve fit
""7
for B2X5 (Figure 5-6) is unconservative as substantiated by the --------fact that if the projected values for maximum Cp are plotted in
Figure 5-31 tCp vs u~), an unreasonably sharp slope results --max
due to the exaggerated Cpmax at low values of current speed.
Therefore, the more conservative values of actual Cp data have
been plotted in Figure 5-31 .
. ----
This figure demonstrates a high efficiency for rotor B3X4CL
over a relatively wide range of current speed. Rotors with tip
speed ratios both higher and lower ahowed poorer performance.
Also, a comparison of the B2X4 aerie• indicates the relative
effects of conformality, length, and the installation and
positioning of the screen.
Based on a comparison of 82X4 and B2X4C, conforaality
resulted in an average absolute perforaance improveaent of about
.03 in Cp or a relative improvement of about 9*. This result max
indicates an extremely valuable contribution from this design
-71-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESCL7S
modification.
Comparing B2X4C with B2X4CL showed a slight (about 2.5~)
increase in the average Cp for the larger rotor, probably d~e max
to its relatively reduced hub losses since the larger diameter
rotors still had the same hub diameter as the smaller rotors . .
Bven though the full-scale turbine would have a similar relative
hub area, the improvement with increased rotor diameter is
welcome considering the further scale-up required for a -------~-
full-scale machine. There may also be a slight Reynolds Number
effect which improves performance with increasing size.
The effect of the protective screen can be seen by comparing
B2X4C with the B2X4CS curves. The average relative performance
reduction was about 10%. Comparing B2X4CSF (forward position)
with B2X4CSA (aft position), there is, as expected, a slightly
higher average Cp for the forward screen position since the
increased distance between screen and rotor permits better flow
recovery.
5.2.1 Load aatching
The ideal IHBCS load absorber would have an operating curve
which matches the operating curve of the rotor, thus permitting
efficient use of the available rotor power at any current apeed.
-72-
KYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
Poor load matching (along with poor efficiency) was a fatal
problem with prior kinetic hydro efforts. This is a problem with
a constant-speed load like an electrical generator when a turbine
is used to extract power from a variable-speed resource like
water or wind. It is impractical to use variable-pitch blades to
ac~omplish the load matching with these small underwater turbines
which must be simple so as to be reliable for long periods
without servicing.
Figure 5-32 is an idealized operating curve for a rotor
which at each speed has a Cpmax strictly proportional to u 3 • Such
a curve would not coincide well with the nearly straight line
operating curve of an electrical generator. Fortunately, the
maximum power curve of the rotors tested differ from the
idealized maximum power curve of Figure 5-32 in such a way that
the rotor is actually better suited to a generator, with its
straight-line operating curve than is the idealized rotor.
Furthermore, the use of an induction generator slightly improves
matters since ita operating curve is tilted in proportion to its
slip.
The power curves for the B3X4CL rotor in Figure 5-20 are
duplicated in Figure 5-33 along with a theoretical maximum power
curve and a generator operating curve. It can be seen that the
experimental result gave better than theoretical load matching.
Over the range of current speeds tested, the load matching
-73-
t-;YU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
efficiency would be near 100% for most of the practical
generation range, an excellent result.
'-
-74-
I
I
J •
70
60
-en
0::
UJ
1-so ~
6
1-.x
~ 40 -
UJ 5 30
f5
1-
20
10
NYU/D . .A.S 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESCLTS
ROTOR B2X4,TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
3.02 MIS
2. 5'1 M/5 '\.. • ~~·
2. 26 MIS "" • + : +.: .. ~
1. 76 MIS
1. 53 M/S
·"" ' ~ ..
. ~.
0 uu~~uu~~~~uw~~wu~~~~uu~~~~uu~~~
0 5 1 0 15 20 25 30 35 . 40 45 so 55 60
ANGULAR VELOCITY . lRAOIRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-11. Roto~ 82X4 Torque Ys. Angular Velocity
-75-
NYC;DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR 82X4,POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2400
2200
2000 • •
• • • • • • .
1800
1600
-Cl)
1400 , .... .... a:
.%
1200
0::
LU 1000 :3:
0
0-
800 .....
I
I
600 I
-
400 j
J
zoo I
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 so 55 6C
ANGULAR VELOCITY lRADIRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-12. Rotor B2X4 Power Vs. Angular Velocity
-76-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESC~T~
ROTOR 82X4C,TORQUE VS ANGULRR VELOCITY
60
50
tn a:::
LU
1-
LU
%:
z 40 0
1-
3:
LU z
30
LU .:::> a a:::
0
1-
20
10
.....
10 20 30 40 sa 60 7(
ANGULAR VELOCITY IRAOlANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-13. Rotor B2X4C Torque Vs. Angular Velocity
. "'!7-
NYU/DAS 84 i27 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESCLTS
ROTOR 82X4C,POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
3..03.11/S
• 2000 .
lBOO·
1600
1400 -en .... ....
I !f 1200 -
a:: 1000
LIJ e
G.. BOO
600
400
200
0 ----------------------------------------------_.--~-----0 10 20 30 so 60 70
ANGULAR VELOCITY lRADIANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-14. Rotor B2X4C Power Va. Angular Velocity
-78-
-en
0:: w ..... w
!C
z
0 .....
:1: w z
w
:::J a
0::
0 .....
NYL/DAS g.;-121 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTO~ 82X~CL,TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2.54 H/S
60
so
2. O:S tVS
40
30
1.54 MIS
20
10
-I
J
l
!
'
J
I
l
I
J
j
J
0 ~~~~~--~~~~~--~------~--~~ .. ~~~~~~~ a 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
AN~RR VELOCITY (RROlANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-15. Ro:or B2X4CL Torque Vs. Angular Velocity
-79-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST R~Sl~TS
ROTOR B2X4CL,POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
2000
1800:
• , • •• ,. . . . . ' . •
1600 • I • • .. "" .,. • •
I
1400 -(/)
1-
1-a: 1200 % -
0:: 1000
LIJ :z
0
Q.. BOO
600
400
200
0 ~----~~~----~~~------~------~~--~------~--~ 0 s 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 sc
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RAOIANS/SECl
FIGURB 5-16. Rotor B2X4CL Power Ya. Angular Velocity
-80-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B2X4C,LG FAIRINGS,TORQUE V ANG VEL
40 2.54 M/5
35
.--
tn 30 ~
UJ ._
LU ~
z +
Cl 25 ._
%
UJ z
20
UJ
~
0
~ Cl 15 ._
10
5
0 uu~uu~uu~uu~uu~~~~~uu~uu~~~~~uu~~~
a 5 10 15 20 2s 30 ss •a 45 so ss 6o 65
RNGULRR VELOCITY lRRDIRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-17. Rotor 82X4CM Torque Ve. Angular Velocity
-81-
SY~ DAS 8~ 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST E~SC:Ts
ROTOR B2X4C,LG FAIRINGS,POWER VS ANG VE~
1200 I
1100
1000
900 +
+ +
BOO
-Cl) ,_ 700 ..... .. a: i :::r:
600 .2.02 H/S
0::::
I.LJ 500 a
D..
400
300 1,
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 e:l 65
RNGULRR VELOCITY lRADlANS/SECl
FIGURB 5-18. Rotor B2X4CM Power Va. Angular Velocity
-82-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B2X~C.SCREEN AFT.TORQUE VS ANG VEL
60
so -en a:: w
1-w ~
~ 40
1-+ :X
UJ z -+
30
w
::I a
~
1-
20
10
0 ~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--4---4-~L---L-~~~
0 10 20 30 40 so 60 10
ANGULAR VELOCITY lftADIANS/SECl
FIGURB 5-19. Rotor B2X4CSA Torque Ya. Angular Velocity
-83-
' I
' .
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B2X4C.SCREEN AFT,POWER VS ANG VEL
2000
600
400
200
0 L-~~~~~--~--~--~---L---4---L--~--~--~*-._~
0 10 20 30 40 so 60 10
ANGULAR VELOCITY lftADIRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-20. Rotor B2X4CSA Power Vs. Angular Velocity
-84-
NYC/DAS 84 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B2X~C,SCREEN FWO,TORQUE VS ANG VEL
60
so -en et:::
LU
~
LU
~
z 40 0
~
:%
LU z
30
LU ;:::,
0 a::
0
~
20
10
10 20 30 40 50 60 '70
ANGULAR VELOCITY IRAOIRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-21. Rotor 82X4CSF torque Ys. Angular Velocity
-85-
-(f)
1-
1-ex
.:3: -
0::
UJ a a..
.·
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. HODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
2000
1600
1600
1400
1200
1000
BOO
600
200
ROTOR B2X4C~SCREEN FWO,POWER VS ANG VEL
10
3.04 MIS
•
l • . . . 1 •• • I .. . . ,
• .. .. . •
20 30
ANGULAR VELOCITY
.
•
••
~ . .,..
• • • ••
•
40
(RADlANS/SECl
60
FIGURE 5-22. Rotor B2X4CSF Power Va. Angular Velocity
-86-
70
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B3X~CL-TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
120
110
100 •
•
90
-U) eo a:: w 2. 53 H/S ~ -i! 70 ~ z
0
~
so [ .z w z I ~ so f 2.02 HIS
w •, .::::> r-l a a::
0
40 ~ -1 ~ ~ 1.53 MIS 30
'
l
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 tO tS 50 55 60
ANGULAR VELOCITY lftADIANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-23. Rotor B3X4CL Torque Ys. Angular Velocity
-87-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 5-24. Rotor B3X4CL Power Vs. Angular Velocity
-88-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
80
iO
-~ 60
UJ
1-
~
a 5o 1-:r
~
40
~ a::
c 30 1-
20
10
ROTOR B3XSCL,TORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
. 3. 01 HIS :.
2.52 HIS
2.03 HIS
• ••
0 ~~~~uu~~~~~~~~ .. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 so 55 60
ANGULAR VELOCITY (RADIRNSISECl
FIGURE 5-25. Rotor B3X5CL Torque Va. Angular Velocity
-89-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR 83XSCL,POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
3000
2800
2600 J
~
I
2400 I
....;
I
2200 J
I
2000 l .....,
I -1800 .J U") ..... I ..... j j 1600 -~ 1400
a::: J UJ ~ 1200 c..
1000
800 ••
•• •
soc
400
200
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
AN~~-RR VELOCITY fRADIANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-26. Rotor B3X5CL Power Vs. Angular Velocity
-90-
NYU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
ROTOR B2X6C~-iORQUE VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
28
26 ' 3.01 1 24 l \:· !
22 l
l 2.76 M/S .. , . ·. 20 _.
I
(I') \. 1
Q:: ...... ··, I i UJ 18 \ -1-i UJ
::E: l
I z 16 J 0
1-
:% i UJ 14 -1 z -J • I ' 12 -I
UJ I ::,:)
0 10 a::: I p i .... ,_
J 8
6
4
z
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
ANGUL~~ VELOCITY lRROlRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-27. Rotor 82X6CL Torque Ya. Angular Velocity
-91-
NYu/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESCLTS
ROTOR B2X6CL-POWER VS ANGULAR VELOCITY
900
!
""' i
I
800 I
I ~
I
700 _j
J
I
I
600 _J
en l 1-
1-sao a:
3: l .....
I
a::. 400 l LIJ
3:
0
0.. I
I
300 I
200
100
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
ANGULAR VELOC11l lRRDlRNS/SECl
FIGURE 5-28. Rotor 82X6CL Power Vs. Angular Velocity
-92-
' l
NYU/DAS 8~-l27 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RES~LIS
28
26
24!
22
-:Q 20
UJ t-w 18 ~
z
0 t-16 .z
LU z -14
LU 12
:;)
CJ a::
0 10 t-
8
6
4
2
0
0
ROTOR B2X6CL,LG FAlRING,TORQUE V ANG VEL
ljiiiiJIIIIIIr j
3.02 tvS
• •
2. 76 tvS
•• •
s 10 15 20 25 '30 35
ANGULAft VELOCITY fftADlANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-29. Rotor 82X6CLM Torque Va. AD(Ular Velocity
-93-
J
~
j
J
~ ..,
~
i -
40
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
800
700
600
-en
1-
~ 500 :z -
a:: 400
UJ a
0..
300
200
100
ROTOR B2X6CL.LG FAIR!NGS,POWER V ANG VEL
3.02 HIS
2.76 HIS
•
10 15
ANGULAR VELOClTY
• •
. •.
30
fftADJANS/SECl
•
..
FIGURE 5-30. Rotor 82X6CLM Power Vs. Angular Velocity
-94-
' '
"
'
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. ~ODEL ROTOR TEST RESCL7S
/
POWER COEFFICIENT VS CURRENT SPEED
.46
.44
.42
.40
~
Ll.l -~ .38 u.. u.. ~ u
a:: • 36
Ll.l a
0.. .34
.32
.30
.28
.26~~_. ____ ~_.--~~_.--~.__.~~.__.~~.__.~--~~
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2
CURftENT SPEED lt£TERS/SECl
FIGURE 5-3la. P.otor Performance Summary, Cp Ys. Currect Speed
-95-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RES~LTS
POWER COEFF1CIENT VS CURRENT SPEED
.46 . B3X4CL
.42
.40
t-z
I.LJ -u .38 -Lr...
1.1...
I.LJ
0 u .36 a::
I.LJ
6
0.. .34
.32
.30
.28
~26 ~~~~--~~~~--._~~--~~_.~~~~----~~--
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.~
CJ.ftRENl SPEED lHElERS/SECJ
FIGURE 5-3lb. Rotor Performance Su•aary, (Smoothed)
-96-
•
t-:YU/DAS 84 127 Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
POWER
.42PO
.t25Po
.25Wo
MAXIMUM
, ___ POWER
CURVE
.swo
ANGULAR VELOCITY
.75WO
FIGURE 5-32. Idealized Maxiaum Power Curve {or Rotor
With P Proportional to U
-97-
Wo
NY{j!DAS 84-127
200
Sec. 5. MODEL ROTOR TEST RESULTS
2.02 M/5
1.53 M/S
I
Q ~~~LWUU~~LW~~LWI~~~UU~~~~~~~~~~~
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
AN~~LP.R VELOCITY (RROIANS/SECl
FIGURE 5-33. B3X4CL Experimental And Theoretical Maximum Power
Curves Coapared With Induction Generator Operating Curve
-98-
NYU/DAS 84-127 Sec. G. CONCLUSIONS
From a total of three,weeka of •odel testa of rotors for
axial-flow KHECS turbines it is possible to draw the following
conclusions:
1. Glauert theory-designed rotor blades. otm be ~ff~~v-e--and
au. f ic ient ly eff ic i eo t -f'o"i-coaaercial HtCS-lffilft J '-1 ,.v -~, · ~ · ..,..
~ ~ ,.. ~ I • ,..-..it"',._/ • • ...,. -, :,. ' . • •I ...,.t
(Ultimate commercializability will depend on
balance-of-system considerations.)
,. ......
2. ,~he conformal design ae4ifieation •• •he blades produces a ... . .
significant f.about 9~) iaproveaent .i.n f.ree-exi-el-flow-
/
3. Since a reasonable portion of the Betz liait was obtained
(about 78') with the B314CLrotor, this design woul4 ee
' ' ..... . "_; C-.~--,..-----·. f..
~prppriate for use in a full-scale prototype teat.
4. Full-scale IBICS rotor perforaance can be expected to be at
least slightly better due to a higher Reynold'• Nuaber and
better relative blade-shape tolerance. r.,
5. It is feasible to use fixed-blade rotors with induction
generators, provided the gearbox ratio is &elected
-QQ-
SYU/DAS 84--127 Sec. 6. COSCL~SIONS
carefully.
6. Cavitation is not likely to be a problem in full-scale
rotors which are cot operated at high current speeds ~bile
in an unloaded condition.
-100-
1'\Yl!/DAS 84-:21 Sec. 6. CONCLCSICSS
1. Redkey, R.L and Hibbs, B.D., "Definition of Cost Effective
River Turbine Designs," Aeroviroament Report AV-FR_81/595,
Pasadena, CA., 1981.
2. Nova Energy, Ltd., "Vertical Axia Ducted Turbine Design
Program," Renewable Energy News, Ottowa, Canada, Spring
1982.
3. Miller, G., Correa, D., and Franchesci, ~ •• "Kinetic Hydro
Energy Conversion Study for the New York State Resource,"
New York University Dept. of Applied Science Final Report -
Phase I, No. NYU/DAS 82-08, for The Power Authority of the
State of New York, Contract No. NY0-82-33, 1982.
4. Miller, G., Corren, D., Franchesci, J., and Peter
Armstrong, "Kinetic Hydro Energy Conversion System Study
for the Kew York State Resource," New York University Dept.
of Applied Science Final Report -Phase II, No. NYU/DAS
83-108, for The Power Authority of the State of New York,
Contract No. NY0-82-33, March 1983.
5. Abbott, I.H. and Von Doenhoff, A.B., "Theory of Wing
Sections Including a Suaaary of Airfoil Data," Dover
Publications, New York, 1959.
6. Glauert, H., "Windaills and fans," in Aerodyna•ic Theory,
Vol. IY., W.F. Durand, ld., 1934, reprinted by Peter S•itb
Publicationa, 1976.
-101-
NYl;DA.S 84-127
'
(After Ref. 5, Chap. 6)
The NACA blade section numbering scheme is: "apt"
where:
m = maximum mean-line ordinate, as a fraction of the chord
p = chordwise position of aaxiaum ordinate (aaximum camber/
expressed as tenths of the chord length
t = saximum thickness, expressed as a percentage of the
chord length
For example, a NACA 4415 section has a 4% caaber at 0.4 of
the chord from the leading edge, and has a aaxiaua thickness of
15%.
A section is developed as follows:
1. A mean line is constructed, consisting of two parabolic
arcs tangent at the maximum aean-line ordinate :see Figure 1),
according to:
Yc 1 = a/p 2 (2px-x 2 )
Yc 2 : m/(l-p)2 [(1-2p)+2px-x 2 ]
2. A thickness distribution, perpendicular to the mean line
and syametrical above and below it (see Figure 2), is calculated
according to:
.5 2 3 4 ±yt = (t/0.20)(0.2969x -0.126x-0.3516x +0.2843x -O.l0l5x)
(This equation has been •odified slightly froa Ref. 5 to go
to zero at x=O and x=l.)
3. The coordinates of a point on the upper •urface (•ee
Figure 3) are liven by:
xu = x-ytsin8
Yu = yc+ytcos8
and for the lower surface:
x 1 = x+ytsin8
y 1 = yc-ytcos8
where tan8 is the slope of the •ean line.
- 1 -
m
0 X
p
Fig. 1. Mean line
I
Fig. 2. Thickness Distribution
Fig. 3. Surface Coordinates
t\Yu;DAS 84-127
1. Actuator Disk Theory
Wind turbine theory was developed
about 50 years ago as part of the P
general theories of airfoils and
airscrews needed to make progress
in the new industry of aviation.
A good general reference is the
section by Glauert (1934) on airplane
propellers in the 1934 compendi~
Avr..odyrr.am.i..c. Tkeolf.Y edited by to:.F. Durand. · . . ...... · .. ·:· .·."!"' .:;_;:· -~.
The following development is based on much of this
early material which is surpr1sin;ly applicable to the contemporary horizontal-
axis wind turbine.
In actuator disk theory, the ~urtine blades are replaced by a hypothetical disk
which rotates at angular velocity n in a uniform freestream of velocity U normal
to the disk surface. Because m~~;~tum is extractec from the stre~~ the flow dece11er-
ates from U to some velocity u at the disk and finally to a still lower wake velocity
"w· The flo..,·is assumed to start fro:n a freestrear: pressure P. gradually increasing
to p+ •• in front of the disk in acc~rdance with Bernoulli's equation as the flow
decellerates. At the disk, there is a discontinous pressure drop Ap • p+-p-
corresponding to work done by the environment on the disk which bri~gs the loca1
pres~ure below ambient. This is fJllowed by a rise back to ambient pressure in
the wake, again described by the Sernoulli equation. As the flow decellerate>, the
cross-sectional area of the strar~ube containing the disk expands · in accord with
a constant massflow m = pAo'J = :ArJ. = p~. ·
Consider a ring of differential area dAr • 2w~ passing a massflow dm • pudAr·
Applying conservation of axial monentum to a stre~tube control volume bounded by
the capture and wake areas 9ives ~he differential axial force on this disk at
radius Jt as dFn = (U -"w)diit • Pt:.!U-~,)dAr= 2'll'l'..pu.(U-~)dJt. Applying Bernoulli's ·
equation to the flow upw1nd and d~wnwinCJ of the turbine gives APr • ltP(U 2 -U,1 ,2 ).
S!nce the.axial velocity is const!nt across the constant-area turbine ring~ tne .
G1fferent1al axial force can alsc be written dFn • 6~ • ;p(u2 -~2 )dAr. Equat1ng
the two expressions for dFn and solving for the wake velocity gives ~ • 2U -u.
Eliminating ~gives the following differential equation for the axial force,
dFn
-• 4•Jtpu.(U-uJ • 4w~tpU2(1-ct)4 {1)
dJt
. where 4 5 .l· .... ~a/U. fs the o.xJ...a.l b~oeJLUlu 6cetoJt.
·If. in addition to extraction of axial momentum from the stre~we allow that the
rotation of the disk imparts an c:-;ular velocity ~ ·tc) the fluid as it passes dovm-
wind, we can derive an expressior. for the Torque per unit radius of the form
(Glauert, 1934, p. 326; S~rensen, 1979, p. 420)
Prepared by Prof. Martin I. h:7fert, NYU/DAS
(2)
where a' = w/2n is the tang~ inte4ae4ence 6aeto~.
In practice, a and a' can both vary along the radius of the disk. But sup~ose
for the moment that we ignore the effect of the induced rota:ion w and take a
equal to a constant average value independent of radius. The tot!1 power expended
by the wind on the turbine disk is uFn• or from (1)
R.
P = uf (dFn/dlt)dlt = 2nR 2pU 3{1-a)2a.
0
The value of a that maximizes the power output may be found ty setting
aP ---= 2nR2pU3(Ja 2 -2a + 1) = 0
a a
( 3)
The quadratic has two roots. Discarding 4 • 4/3 as nonphysic!l since it implies
an acceleration, rathar than a decelleration,. fre~ the capture area A0 to the disk
leaves a= 1/3. at peak power. Accord.ingly, Pmu = (8/27)pU3-r:~2 .. =..11d the dimensionless
power coefficient corresponding to this so-called Lancheht~-Betz limit of an
ideal wind turbine is ~
Pmax 16 c = = --= 0.593 p,max ltPU 3nR 2 27
The corresponding peak pressure drop across the turbine is
~Pr ~. ~(u2 -Uw2) = 2pu(U -u) = 2pU~(l -4)«
~n-= {4/9)pU2.
• 1 ,max
(4)
(5)
Consider now the effect of imparting an angular velocity w o~positelyoodirected to
the disk rotation o on the power output*. A basic asstDpticn, •·hich can be
justified by airfoil theory,is that the turbine •sees• an effective angular
velocity~ • o(l+«'). The power expended by the fluid on the turbine can be
related either to the product of angular velocity and torque on the fluid or the
product of axial velocity and axial force
dP dT dfn
--• (1+4')o--• (l-4}U~
dJr. . dJr. . . dlt
( 6)
*rn propellers and fans the induced angular ve~ocity has the~ rotational sense
as D behind the disk; also the streamtube contracts as it ap~-oac~es the actuator
disk the flow accelerates,. and the disk imparts a pressure rise ~ather than a • • pressure drop.
-2-
Substituting (1) and (2) into equation (6) gives an expression r~lating a tc a'
and the dir.ensionless ~;~ along· the rotating disk x: rvt/U:
~~~~~~;~I v~l~~~~
a'{l + a')x2 = (1-a)a. (7}
It is helpful also to define a dimensionless ratio of the turbir;e tipspeed to t~e
freestream veocity
OR
X : -(8) u
In addition to ufn used in equation (3), the turbine power output rnust also eq~~l
nr, in which case
R R
P = nf (aT/a~)~= 4~pun2f (1 -a)a•~3~
0 0
Allowing that a and a' are functions of x in general gives the power coefficier.:
as a function of the tipspeed ratio in the form
(9)
There are severa1 possibilities for evaluating this integral. One is to use
airfoil theory for a· specific turbine blade design to evaluate the axial and
tangential interference factors along the blade (see below). Another, is to
derive an expression which maximizes the power output of an (ideal} rotating
turbine as follows. The power output from (9) at any x will pe ~maximum when
the integrand peaks, or when
a[{l-a)a'J/aa = (1-a)aa'/aa-a' • o.
We will also need equation (7). Differentiating (7) with respect to a gives
(1 + 2a' )x2 aa' /oa • 1 -:.2a.
. .
Now, we can first eliminatP. 34'/34 between these expressions to get (1 + 2~')a'~2
• (1 -a)(1 -2a). Using (7) again. this time to eliminate x2. gives a relation
beteen the tangential and axial interference factors at peak ~~r ·
1 -34
4'. --. (10)
44-1
The integral in (9) can now be evaluated for the ideal (peak power) turbine sir.~e
a and a' are related to x through (7). A useful expression is derivable here
by writing from {10) 1 + a' = 4/(44 -1) which is substituted in (7) to yield
a'x2 = {1 -a)(4a-1) (11)
If, for example, we choose a value of a, the corresponding values of a' and x a~e
readily calculable from (10) and (11). From our earlier work on the Lanchester-Setz
limit. we know a has the P.eak value of 1/3 at large rotation rates where the
-3-
the tangential interference factor becomes negligible. If, at high rotation ra:~s,
a approaches a constant 1/3 over the entire disk, we can write
(1 -a)a'x2 = (1 -a)2 (4a -1) • 4/27,
in which case the power coefficient at high tip speed ratios is
8 4 X 16
C = -· -· f xdx = -p,max x2 27 0 27
which is the same result obtained in equation (4).
The table,at·right, from Glauert (1934) -I may be helpful in the numerical integration • ., I •'r %
of equation (9) for C~ as a function of X. O.Jt IJIOO I 0.0116 0.073 Note that for each va ue of X which is the 0.11 !.171 0.01* 0.157
upper limit of inte{ration, one should eval-D.2S U33 I O.OSM 0.255
0.2~ O.IJJ 0.1131 0.374 uate the integrand 1 -a)a'x 3 from 0 to 0.30 o.JOO i 0.1400 0..529
X and evaluate the area under the curve. 0.31 0.292 I 0.1156 0.753
Glauert actually suggests, in his pre-0.32 0.143 I 0.110' 1.15
computer age, that graphical integration 0.33 0.011 I 0.11-M 2.63 .I would be appropriate.*
2. Airfoil Theory
The actual interference factors a(x) and a'(x) which can be realized in a
given wind turbine design depend on the aerodynamic forces on the blades which
in turn depend on the blade shape, blade number, airfoil geometry and the pitch
angles of the blade sections. These factors can be incorporated into the theory
with the help of airfoil theory. There is a well-developed theory of wing sections
including the influence of both inviscid potential flow around the blades and
boundary layer theory which describes the skin friction. In addition, The National
Advisory Commitee on Aeronautics (NACA, the predescesor to the present NASA)
conducted extensive wind-tunnel tests on· various airfoil sections sunmarized in
the excellent volume by Abbott and von Doenhoff (1959). For an airfoil section
of chord e and span b in an airflow of velocity i at angle of attack o, the
lift and drag forces are represented by the di.ensionless lift and drag coefficients
and (12}
The variation of el and eJ with a for a given airfoil section can be found from
model force measurements ln a wind tunnel (Pope and Harper. 1966). For a symmetrical
section about the zero-lift line c1 (0) • 0 and· ~tO) • ed • •. • · Also, it
1s useful sometimes to plot ed versus cl, rather '~ a directly. Figure 1,
X
*In numerical of graphical solutions for CP(X) = (8/X2)f 6(x)dx, remember to
evaluate 6(x) • {1 -a)a'x3 between x •0, 0
where a= 1/4 and a•·~ •, and x + • where 4 = 1/3 and 4' • 0. Well, x + • isn't
necessary or possible in the graph; just use a big enough value to see you are
approaching the right limit.
-4-
• U'l •
;p
~ :~
"«:J
"«:J
Ql
3
.f
~ ~
V)
I .
'
(4)
s r
(per cen' c) (per eea& c)
(b),
0 0
0.1 ..... .. . .,.
1.21 l.ltM
2.5 2.GII
6.0 3.1165 '· •
~ ..
~ .a ·c ;::;
7.6 4.200 ..
JO UiS3
15 5.345 I 20 r..737
2(, r •. CHI I
:tel n.oo2 I -Ill 6.K03
r.n A.:.!OI
M 4.1103 l 70 3.GCH
r -r--............ .. r--------~ ~-··--
• -\
--IIIAC'A OOIZ -- -
-
"" v--'--
I.
(\i)'
1.61•1 1.1 ~
0.1. 1
~
0 .I
't l
RO 2.4\23 ! IJ(J. 1.4·1R I
em O,Hfl7 :
ICJ(J 0.1211 I
~
.I •• (.(} ·"
------• aft: ·•
•
(). 9·0 •
:±C~ .~·.:. ll
. <llr4 1
tM"t o • ,, 'I
·~ •·· j ,_.,..,-
I ~ ~ .. ±:ttJ .. 'I ! ·I+ rn llnn J.: 1-4+ Ot,O • '"' , I ~~ ~ : i ' ,., '
1
' " DIO . ' ' lo.D20 •: -·r ·. :,;:...,. _ .. ' 1 ' ' · ,. ?:
.r,-
6
, •• a,. . 'J~ ·I. rrr . • . t , ~
':" ... . • • ·• . .. -1~ H ' I . -.1: ~.. . 1-
0.011 l"t. 11 . . . .. . ; . . . ~ . li' . . c... '"' -: ~, j_ . '.· ,... I" "L· ~· ~ ~ I .
.. .J!!I',. .' ,._. .•• -. • . _.... .. • ., o 011 H o:: • ' "' -1. .:Y "'-· ,.... • l··r J.~ ~!!' N • r:r:: t:i• r r· , .. I 'I ~ :r.<' .. I ; . l. .-:-. ·1-... 1" !':: ~ [" • . . . • ~ l'j· ..i .
. ltll •t~•· ~=-I •
0
! 0 001 4 .. " .... ; . J.. I . . .. ' i ·• • • . ;--r'" . t . . t ,. ' ,..... t . r--~·~: ·1' . . 'l ,:,. TIJ' . ; j . ·I ! . ..f. +
r-"fl i· .J.. -t--, I · .. ,. ;o.ONI+HI;~~~utrrdl~[!~!~'l' I I
" -1.1 .. -1.2 -o.~ -o.• o o.« 0.1 1.2 t.l
I
d .. ... a ·o s
I ...
I
J "" (~)
F\q,l
t .....
-o.t
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-24 -10 10
Sect.loa anal• or attae., «o, dc:r.
MACA 0011 Wil11 BoaUoD
. . jdJ..
Section fift ~~~?~I ---··-.
DATA ON NACA 0012 AIRFOIL FROM ABBOT & von OOENHOFF (1959): (a) Coordinates; {b) Sketch of shape;
(c) section drag versus lift coefficients; (d) Lift coefftcient versus angle-of-attack. R is the
Reynolds number; airfoils are aerodynamically smooth except as noted; unflapped airfoil used in
wind turbine is symmetrical about zero angle of attack in both lift and drag.
24 l
' '
for example, shows data taken on the symmetric NAf.A 0012 section which has a
pee~ thickness some 12% of the chord about 30% of the chord back from the lEading ec!:
The blade geometry and surface velocity distribution at zero lift are shown in
pa~els (a) and (b). The profile drag coefficient ed = ed(et) is plotted in (c)
at various Reynolds numbers, R = pWe/p,for laminar ooundary layer flow over smooth
su~faces. Also shown is the curve for standard surface roughness which increases
the drag. The lift curve el(a) plotted in (d) is ont.isynmetric about the zero
lift line at a = 0, and roughly linear for lal < 100, after which the lift begins
to drop off. Ultimately, at an angle of attack of about 16°, the section ••stalls"
and further increases in angle of attack will only make matters worse, from the
standpoint of lift. In the linear range, the lift curve slope is given by potential
flow thin airfoil theory as 2w per radian, or
2w radian 4w 2
-= x ----= -• 0.11 deg-1
aa radian 360 deg 360
--a fairly good approximation to the experimental data for the 0012 foil when
laJ < 10 deg. ·
AXIS OF ROTATION I
I
...
FIG. 2 WINDMILL BLADE
GEOMETRY AND
AERODYNk"!IC
FORCES
df" • .,W2c.dlt( C..tt!D-'• -4c,t6ht+)
ciF .t • vWZc.dltC c..t """+ + c..cfD"• >
-·· -
Illustrated:above;in-Fjg~t 1~ a~ air.fotl s~tton incorporated into a propeller-
type wind turbine. The blade is moving to the right, and the force and velocity
vectors are those seen by the blade in its MOving coordinate system. The ge~etric
pitch angle e(Jt) is a function of radius in general •. partfcularly for efficient
designs incorporating aerodynamic twist. The section pitch is the distance it
would advance forward in one complete revolution around the axis of rotation at.· a= 0, assuming zero slip between it and the fluid, l.e., 2w~e(~). This is
basically the same ~efinition as that used for a machine screw or threaded rod.
If. however, we want the entire blade to have a single (constant) pitch. then
the geometric pitch angle is given by
-6-
ta.t.'? (Jt) = (R/Jt)..tane(R). (13)
This means a decreases progressivly from a hypothetical axis pitch angle of 90c
to some value e(R) at the blade tip. We wll show later that the blade tip pitc~
angle defines the tubine rotation rate under zero load conditions in a wind of
speed U.
Referring ag&in to Figure 2, notice that the blade at radius ~ sees the relative
wind vector W wit~ axial and tangential· components U(1-a) and n(1 +a'}~. Its
magnitude squared is therefore
w2 = U2(1 -a)2 + n2~2(1 + a')2.
It follows also from the geometry of Figure 2 that the relative wind of each
section is at an angle to the plane of rotation equal to
-[ l(l -a) l ' = e + a = tan-1 • m.(1+a')
'
{14)
Using (14) and the trigonometric id:ntities 1 + eot2+ • (~in2 ;)·1 and ~1¢ + cct9 = (4in~co4+)-l yields the alternate forms of the relative windspeed squared,
W2 =:U2(1 -a)2J~in2; (lSa)
w2 =:U~(1-4){1 + 4')/(~in9coJ;) (lSb)
Now consider an actual wind turbine with B identical blades of chord distribution
c(~) under load in general. Res~lution of the·lift and drag forces acting nonma1
to and along the relative wind vector into components fn the turbine axial and
tangential directions :gives ... ~e differential axial force and differential
torque acting over a differential radius (Cf •. Fig. 2),
d ~ Be.pU 2 et(l -a)2 eo.r.+
-= ltBcPw2(eteo~+ -e ..&hr.+) • , dlt 4-24.iJt2.
(16)
(17)
•
To get the approximations on the f~r·r.h.s.•s we used (lSa.b).and neglected the
influence of the profile drag teres on grounds that ~/eL << 1 over most of the
usable angle-of·attack range. This is not striCtly speaklng true at zero angle
of attack, of course, but frictionless conditions ~ be assumed there any-
way .• which recovers the condition of no slip between the rotating blade ~~d fiuid
at zero load conditions. Comparison of (16) and (17) with the e!rlier actuator
dis~ ~xpressions of (1) and.(2) yields two equations relating the toea! ~~in~
~olidity a(~} : Be/(2w~), l1ft coefficient e1 (a) and effective pitch angle e(~,:)
• 6(~) ~a in terms of the axi!l and tangent111 interference factors,
4 aelc.o~+ a.' ael {18)
-= and •-•
1 -4 44in 2+ 1 + a.' 4eo~+
Using (18) to eliminate~ and c' from {14) gives tr.e fcrm
x(44~n2~ + oclco4~) = 4~~(4co~¢ -acl) {19)
.Since a(~) is· fjxed by the design, and e(~) is either fixec or a function of
n {in a variable-pitch horizontal axis turbine such as the HASA/OOE Mod series),
and since ~ and ~l are functions of a, we may regard (19) as a relation between
X • aR/U and a.·' For example, under no-load conditions cf a freely spinning
turbine with frictionless bearings a= 0, + = e(~), and a • n. Under these
conditions (19) reduces to 0
tana(~) = (R/~)tane(R) = 1/x = U/{n~)
which is just equation (13) for a constant-pitch turbine b~t with the additional
piece of information that the pitch angle at the tip is related to the no-load
tipspeed ratio X0 =·a 0 R/U simply by
(20)
Thus is fairly easy to design a propeller-type turbine that will spin freely
at a given rotation rate in a given wind. The hard job is to design one that
produces power outputs approximating thc~e of the ideal rotating turbine
discussed earlier.
In order to obtain maximum power under given conditions of operation the factors
a and a' must be related by equation (10). After substituting from (18) this
condition can be reduced to
acl = 4(1 -co.6+) (21)
and then combining with {19) above gives
.&i.n+ { 2co.6 + -1)
x= --------(22)
(1 + 2eo.6+){1 -co.6+)
This equation determines the optimum variation of the ~ngle Q along the blade
of the wind turbine. and (21) determines the corresponding values of ael • This
analysis does not determine the shape of the blade uniquely but only the product
of the chord and lift coefficient in the form
·Benet 46.i.n.+ ( 2e.06+ -1)
-• xaet •
2.U . 1 + 2co.6+
The table and figure to
the right give the numer-
ical values determined by
these these equations.
This curve represents
. -'
the shape of the blade if ' ' • & '
•
...,.
10
40 .,
• !••D C Ti"V I.
I o I 0
O.l.S ; un
0.£: i O..ti.DO
1.:.:•) ; ....
(23)
--
• Iff I.!:.E..c 2 :r l' L
10' l.i'l 0.418
16 2.42 (!.329
JO 3.73 0.:28
I 1.00 O.IIG
the blade angles are adjusted _ .
to give a constant 11ft coefficient. For a slow-running wir::::-:,111, whose blade
tip is represented by x = 1, the chords should increase ou~•!rd along the blade,
I
-8-
-t
but for a fast-running windmill, whose blade tip is represented by x = 4, the
chords should decrease outward along the blade except in the innermost quarter
or the blade. This indeed is ~1hat modern horizontal-axis blades look like.
The total blade area S of the wind turbine is also defined by (23) if the lift
coefficient has a constant value along the blade {constant a). This area is
R 2wU~ X Bene!
S = 1 Bc.dlt = -1 -dx,
0 o2 e! 0 2wU
and hence the solidity of the windmill is
s : 2 X Bene!
a0 = -= -J · -dx
wR2 X2e! 0 2wU
(24}
Some numerical values for a0ei· are ·tabulated below versus X. These were obtained
by assuming numerical integration of the previous equation (23) function in
equation (24). If e is assumed near unity (corresponding to a constant
a = 10° for the NACAt0012 airfoil of Fig. 1), these may be regarded as solidities.
The solidity increases from roughly 0.2 for a fast-running windmill (X • 4) to
1.0 for a slow-running windmill (X • 1). Thus the fast running windmill should
resemble an ordinary propeller with rather wide blades, while the slow-running
windmill must have a large number of blades with large blade angles. Indeed,
modern wind turbine.blades look very much like those of helicopter main rotors
which are basically vertical propellers (If the engine fails due·to a •flameout"
the helicopter has to turn into a windmill with a high axial force upward on.the
disk if the machine and human occupants are to survive).
X = 1 2 3 4 5
• 0.98 0.48 0.29 0.19 0.14
REFERENCES
Abbott, I.H., and A.E. von Doenhoff (1959) Theory of Wing Sectfons:Including
a Summary of Airfoil Data, Dover Publications, NeW York.
Eldridge, F.R (1980) Wind·Machines, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Glauert, H. (1934) Windmills and fans. In Aerod~1c Theor~;.Vol. IV, Chapt.
XI, Div. L., edited by W.F. Durand, repr1n y Peter ith, Glouster,
Mass., 1976, pp. 324-340.
Gessow, A., and G.C. Myers (1967) Aerodynam1es of the Helicopter, Fredrick
Unger Publishing Co., New York •.
Goulding, E.W. (1976) The Generation of Electricity by Wind Power, John Wiley
& Sons, New York.
Hoffert, M.I., G.l,-Matloff and B. Rugg (1978) The Lebost Wind Turbine:
Laboratory Tests and Data Analysis, Journal of Energy, Vol. 2, No. 3, 175-181.
-9-
l
Pope, A. and J.J. Harper (19E~) L:w-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing, John Wiley
& Sons, New York.
Scott, D. (1981} Worlds bigges: ~~nd machine is a one·armed monster. Popular
Science, January 1981 •.
S¢rensen, B. (1979) Renewable :ne-g¥, Academic Press, New York; particularly
his section 4.3 on Conversior. o WinG Energy.
-10-
NYC/DAS 84 127
~y~·/c . .:= s:-1
B= 2.0
RO= .343 CX1GO= I ., -.-"":.~I~ tJO= 2. 2.50
XO= 4.0000 AO= • 3:::.8 CP.-' .. ;x= • 5515
PR R P:-11 ·-·::u::; THICK S!GCL c ALPHA CL .10 .0343 45.466 3S.033 .0478 1.195 .1898 -7.433 .678 .12 .0411 42.906 35.394 .0494 1.070 .1987 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 40.501 32.9Q9 .0498 .958 .2024 7.591 .714 .16 .0548 38.254 30.583 .0491 .859 .2022 7.671 .732
----;».18 .0617 36.164 )S. 41¢:' .0478 .771 .1992 7.750 .750
• 20 .0686 34.227 25.398 .0461 .693 .1943 .7. 829 • 768 .
. . .22 • 0754 . 32.435 2~.526 .0440 .624 .1881 .7.909 • 786 .
.24 .0823 . 30.779 22.792 .0419 .. 563 .1811 ·7.988 .804
• 26 .0891 29.251 21.184 .0397 .510 .1737 8.067 .822 : .28 .0960 27.840 19.694 .0374 .(63 .1662 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 26.537 13.311 .0353 .421 .1587 _8. 226 .858
.32 .1097 25.332 17.028 .0332 .385 .1513 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 24.218 15.634 .0312 .352 .1441 8.384 .894
• 36 .1234 23.185 1". 722 .0293 .323 .1373 8.463 .912
..,.,.. • 38 .1303 22·. 227 :J3.6S4. ~ .0276 .297 .1308 8.543 .930 .• 40 .1371 21.337 12. 715-' .0259 .274 .1245 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 20.508 11.807 .0243 :.254 .1187 ·8. 701 .966 .
.44 .1508 19.736 lJ. 956 .0228 :.235 .1131 ·8. 780 .984 .
. .46 .15i7 19.015 1~.156 .0215 .218 .1079 8.860 1.002 .
' .48 .1645 18.341 9.402 .0202 .203 .1029 8.939 1.020 .so .1714 17.710 8.E92 .0190 -.190 .0983 .9.018 1.038
.52 .1763 17.118 S.020 .0179 .177 .0939 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 16.562 7. 385 .0168 .166 .0898 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 16.038 e.7S2 .0158 .156 .0859 9.256 1.093
~(·58 .19C8 15.545 ~:21ll~ .0149 .146 .0823] 9.335 1.111
. .60 • 2057 15.080 ~~~ .... .0141 .138 .0789 9.415 1.129 . .62 .2125 14.640 5.H6 .0133 .130 .0756 .9.494 1.147 .
.64 .2194 14.225 <4. 651 .0125 .123 .0726 .9. 573 1.165 .
• 66 .2262 13.831 4.178 • 0118 .. 116 .0697 .9.652 1.183 .
.68 .2331 13.457 3.725 .0112 .110 .0670 9.732 1.201
.70 .2400 13.103 3.292 .0106 .104 .0644 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 12.765 2.875 .0100._ .099 .0620 .9.890 1.237
.74 .2537 12.445 2.475 .0095 .094 .0600 9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 12.139 2.090 .0091 .089 .0584 10.049 1.253
.78 .2674 11.848 ~19 .0087 .085 .0569 10.128 1.259 ,.80 .2742 11-.569 · .. ~-362~ .0083 .081 .0554 10.207 1.264 . .o&i .2811 llu39C :~en .ee'' a898 .0540 l:lh·
.82 .2811 . 11.304 1.017 • 0079 .078 .0540 10.287 1.270 .
.84 .2880 . 11.049 .683 • 0075 ~o074 .0526 10.366 1.275 .
.86 .2948 10.806 .361 • 0072 ;.071 .0513 10.445 1.281 .
.88 .3017 10.573 .049 .0069 .068 .osoo 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 10.349 -.254 .0066 .065 .0488 10.604 ' 1.292
.92 .3154 10.135 -.549 .0063 . .062 .0477 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 9.929 -.833 • 0060 .060 .0465 10 .. 762 1.303
.96 .3291 9.731 -1.110 .0057 • 05'3 .0455 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 9.541 -l.3SO .0055 .ass .0444 10.921 1.314
~ 1.00 .3428 9.357 '-.:r:"643 -., .0052 .053 .0434 11.000 1.320
1
t\Y',.;/J/l.S 83-108
RO= .343 01GO= 4.179 UO= 1.800
XO= 5.0000 AO= .332~ Cl?Mil.X= .·5704
PR R PHI THET~ THICK SIGCL ,.. ALPHA CL "" .10 .0343 42.290 34.857 .0416 1.041 .1654 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 39.357 31.845 .0419 .907 .1685 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 35.672 29.081 .0411 .792 .1672 ·1. 591 .714
.16 .0548 34.227 26.556 .0396 .693 ~ .7.671 .732
:;:>.18 .0617 32.009 (24.-259j .0377 .608 7.750 • 750 .
.20 .0686 30.000 21:lii-.0356 .536 .1503 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 28.182 20.274 .0335 .474 .1429 7.909 .786
.24 .0823 26.537 18.549 .0313--.• 421 .1355 _7. 988 .804
.26 .0891 25.046 16.979 .0292 .376 .1281 8.067 .822
.28 .0960 23.692 15.545 .0273 .337 .1210 8.146 .840 .
.30 .1028 22.460 14.234 .0254 .303 • 1142 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 21.337 13.032 .0237 .274 .1078 8.305 .876
• 34 .1166 . 20.310 11.926 .0221 .. -.249 ~1018 .a. 384 .894 .
.36 .1234 19.370 ~ .0206 •226 .0962 ·8.463 .912 .
:>.38 .1303 18.506 <-? .0192 .. 207 ~g~ ·8.543. .930 .
.• 40 .1371 17.710 9.-088 .0179 .190 8 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 16.976 8.274 .0167 .174 .0816 8.701 .966
.44 .1508 16.296 7.515 • 0156 -. -.161 .0774 -8.780 .984
j .46 .1577 15.666 6.806 .0146 .149 .0734 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 15.080 6.141 .0137 .138 .0698 8.939 1.020
.so .1714 14.534 5.516 .0128 .128 .0664 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 14.025 4.927 .0120 .119 .0632 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 13.549 4.372 .0113 .111 .0602 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 13.103 3.846 .0106 • 104 .Q..m. -9.256 1.093 .
)[•58 .1988 12.684 /-3 .. 348 \ .0100 .098 /70549.,..: .g. 335 1.111
.60 .2057 12.290 ', _2. 875_) .0094 .. 092 '--0525) ·9. 415 1.129 .
.62 .2125 11.919 2:-425 .0088 .086 .0502 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 11.569 1.996 .0083 .081 .0481 9.573 1.165
.66 .2262 11.239 1.586 .0078 .077 .0461 .9 • .652 1.183
.68 .2331 10.926 1.195 .0074 .073 .0442 9. 732 1.201
.70 .2400 10.630 .819 .0070 .069 .0425 9.811 1.219
.72 .2469 10.349 .459 .0066 .065 .0408 9.890 1.237
.74 .2537 10.083 .113 .0062 .062 .0395 9.970 1.247
• 76 . .2605 9.829 -.220 • 0059 -.059 .0384 10.049 1.253 .
.78 .2674 9.588 ~ .0057 .. 056 .0373· 10.128 1.259 .
-=,-.80 .2742 9.357 ') .0054 .o53 --'.0363\ 10.207 1. 264 .
.82 .2811 9.138 .. 0052 .051 • 0353,; 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 8.928 -1.438 .0049 .048 .0344 10.366 1.275
.86 .2949 8.728 -1.717 .0047 . -.• 046 .0335 10.445 1.281
.88 .3017 8.536 -1.988 .0045 .044 .0326 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 8.353 -2.251 .0043 ~042 .0318 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 8.177 -2.506 .0041 .041 .0310 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 8.008 -2.755 .0039 .039 .0303 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 7.846 -2.996 .0037 .037 .0296 10.841 1.309
' .98 .3359 7-.690 ~31 . • 0036 .036 .0289 10.921 1.314
ri1.00 .3428 7.54o -3.46o-; .oo34 .035 ,.o282\ 11.ooo 1.320
z
NYU/DAS 83-108
RO=· .343 O.tGO= -... _.. 4.179""-UO= ' 1.500 . -.. ~--
XO= 6.0000 AO= .3327 CPMAX= .5759·
PR R PHI THETA THICK SIGCL c ·ALPfJ!'\ CL ·
.10 .0343 39.357 31.925 .0363 .907 .1441 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 36.164 28.652 .0356 .771 .1431 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 33.313 25 •. 722 .0341 .657 .1388 .7 .591 .714
.16 .0548 30.779 23.109 .0322 .563 .1326 7.671 .732
)' .18 .0617 2a. 532 ....:..... 20 :-~~D . 0301 .486 (.:J-156 .. -'-7. 750 .750
.20 .0686 26.537 18.708 .0280 .421 .1182 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 24.764 16.856 .0260 .j68 .1109 7.909 .786
.24 .0823 23.185 15.197 .0240 .323 .1038 7.988 .804
.26 .0891 21.774 13.707 .0222 .. 285 .0972 -8.067 .822 .
.28 .0960 20.508 12.362 .0205 .254 • 0910 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 19.370 11.144 .0190 .226 .0852 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 18.341 10.036 .0175 .203 .0799 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 17.409 9.025 .0162 .• 183 .0750 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 16.562 8.098 .0151 ·.166 .0705 ·8. 463 .912. > .38 .1303 15.788 ~) .0140 .151 G:®6b 8.543 .930
.40 .1371 15.080 6:458 .0130 .138 .o62c 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 14.430 5.728 .0121 .• .126 .0591 -8 .. 701 .966
.44 .1508 13.831 5.050 .0113 .116 .ossa 8.780 .984
.46 .1577 13.278 4.418 .0105 .107 .0528 8.860 1.002
• .48 .1645 12.765 3.826 .0098 .099 .0501 8.939 1.020 • so .1714 12.290 3.272 .0092 .092 .0475 .9. 018 1.038 .
.52 .1783 11.848 2.750 .0086 ... o8s .0452 .9.098 1.056 .
.54 .1851 11.435 2.259 • 0080 "079 .0430 -9.177 1.075 .
.56 .1920 11.049 1.793 • 0075 .074 .0409 9.256 1.093
>[·58 .1988 10.688 !'1:".~ .0071 .069 • 390 9.335 1.111
.• 60 • 2057 .. 10.349 '......._g,Js,.. .0067 .. 065 .0373 ·9. 415 1.129 . . .62 .2125 . 10.031 .537 • 0063 .061 ·9.494 1.147 . .
.64 .2194 9.731 .158 .0059 .058 .0341 ·9.573 1.165 .
.66 . .2262 9.448 -.204 .0055 • 054 .0326 9.·652 1.183
.68 .2331 9.181 -.551 .0052 .051 .0313 9.732 1.201
.70 .2400 8.928 -.883 .0049 .048 .0300 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 8.689 -1.201 .0046 .CM6 .0288 9.890 1.237
.74 .2537 8.462 -1.508 .0044 .044 .0278 .g. 970 1.247 .
.76 .2605 8.246 -1.803 .0042 .. 041 .0270 10.049 1.253 .
..• 78 .2674 8.041 ~ .0040 • 039 .01§2. 10.128 1.259 .
>-80 .2742 7.846 .0038 .037 ~10.207 1.264
. .82 .28ll 7.659 -2.627 .0036 .036 • 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 7.482 -2.884 .0035 •034 .0242 10.366 1.275 .
.86 .2948 7.312 -3.133 • 0033 ~033 .0235 10.445 1.281 .
.88 .3017 7.150 -3.375 .0032 ~031 • 0229 10.524 1.286
.90 . • 30'35 6.994 -3.609 .0030 .030 .0223 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 6.846 -3.837 .0029 .029 .0218 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 6.703 -4.059 .0027 .027 .0212 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 6.566 -4.275 .0026 .026 .0207 10.841 1.309
. .98 .3359 6.435 <:=!.48h .0025 .025 .0202 10.921 1.314 -~1.00 .3428 6.308 .692 .0024 .024 (.019~ . 11. 000 1. 320 .
3
NYU/OkS S3-108
S=. 3.0
RO= .343 01GO= 4.179 UO= 3.000 I ..... ) XO= 3.0000 J\0= .338i CPMAX= .5454 l
PR R Hi I THETA THICK SIGCL c ALPHA CL
.10 .0343 48.867 41.434 .0365 1.369 .1450 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 46.801 39.289 .03a9 1.262 .1562 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 44.812 37.220 .0402 1.162 .1636 7.591 .714
.16 .054a 42.906 35.235 .040a 1.070 .1679 7.671 .732
~.1a .0617 41.087 33.337 • 0407 :gas .1698 7.750 • 750 .
.• 20 .06a6 39.357 31.528 • 0402 :907 .1696 "7 .829 • 768 .
.22 .0754 37.717 29.80a .0393 :836 .1680 '7 .909 • 786 .
.• 24 .Oa23 36.164 28.176 .0382 • 771 • 1652 7.9a8 .804 . .26 .0891 . 34.697 26.630 .0369 • 711 .1615 a.067 .a22
.28 .0960 33.313 25.167 • 0354 .657 .1573 a.146 .a4o .
.30 .1028 32.009 23.7a3 .0340 .6oa .1526 ·a.226 .a58
.32 . .1097 30.779 22.475 .0324 :s63 .1477 a.305 .a76
.34 .1166 29.622 21.238 .0309 .523 .1427 a.3a4 .894
.36 .1234 28.532 20.068 .0294 .4a6 .1376 a.463 .912
-7-38 .1303 27.505 18.962 .0279 .452 .1326 a.543 .930
.• 40 .1371 26.537 17.915 .0265 .421 .1276 8.622 .94a
.42 .1440 25.625 16.924 .0252 .393 .122a a.701 .966
.44 .1508 24.764 15. 9a4 • 023a .36a .1180 ·a. 1ao .• 9a4 .
.46 .1577 23.952 15.093 .0226 :344 .1135 ·a.a6o 1. 002 .
.4a .1645 23.1as 14.246 .0214 .323 .1091 8.939 1.020
.so .1714 22.460 13.442 .0203 .303 .1049 9.01a 1.03a
.52 .17a3 21.774 12.676 .0192 .2a5 .1008 '9.09a 1.056 .
.54 • 1851 21.124 11.947 .01a2 • 269 .0970 9.177 1.075 .
.56 . .1920 20.508 11.252 .0172 .254 .0933 9.256 1.093
.sa] .1988 19.924 [10.589) .0163 .239 [.oaga] 9.335 1.111
"7.60 .2057 19.370 9.955 .0154 .226 .Oa64 9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 1a.a43 9.349 .0146 .214 .Oa32 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 1a.341 a.76a .0138 .203 .0802 9.573 1.165
.66 .2262 17.864 8.212 .0131 .193 .0773 9.652 1.183
.6a .2331 17.409 7.678 .0124 ~183 .0745 9.732 1.201
.70 .2400 16.976 7.165 .0118 :174 • 0719 9.811 1.219 .
.72 .2468 16.562 6.671 • 0112 ~166 .0694 '9.890 1.237 .
~74 .2537 16.166 6.197 .0106 .158 .0674 9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 15.788 ~.739 .0102 .151 .0657 10.049 1.253
.78 .2674 15.426 5.298 .0098 .144 • 0641 i0.128 1.259 .
....,.80 .2742 15.080 4.873 .0093 ~138 .0626 i0.207 1.264
.82 . .2811 14.748 4.461 .0089 :132 .0611 10.287 1.270 .
.84 .2880 14.430 4.064 .0086 .126 .0597 10.366 1.275 .• 86 .2948 14.124 3.679 .0082 .121 .0583 10.445 -1.2a1
.88 .3017 13.831 3.306 .0078 .116 .0570 10.524 1.286
.90 .3085 13.549 2.945 .0075 .111 .0557 10.604 1.:92 .
.92 .3154 13.279 2.595 .0072 .107 .0544 i0.683 1.298
.94 .3222 13.017 2.254 .0069 ·.103 .0532 ~0.762 1.303
.96 .3291 12.765 1.924 .0066 .099 .0521 lO.a41 1.309
~ .9a .3359 12.523 1.603 .0063 .OS5 .0509 10.~21 1.314
. 1.00 .342a 12.290 1.290 .0060 ~092 .0499 ~1.000 1.320 .
4
NYU/ DAS 83-1C3
,
RO= • 343 0'-~GO= 4.179 . UO= 1.800
XO= 5.0000 AO= • 332~ CPMAX= .5704
PR R mr THETA '!lUCK SIGCL c ALPHA CL
.10 .0343 42.290 34.857 .0278 1.041 .1103 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 39.357 31.845 .0279 .907 .1123 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 36.672 29.081 .0274 .792 .1115 7.591 .714
.16 .0548 34.227 26.556 .0264 .693 .1087 7.671 .732
'? .18 .0617 32.009 . 24.259:1.0251 .608 .1048 7.750 .750
.20 .0686 30.000 ·-22 :1 ii . 0238 .536 .1002 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 28.182 20.274 .0223 .474 .0953 7.909 .786
:.24 .0823 26.537 18.549 .0209 .421 .0903 7.988 .804
.26 .0891 25.046 16.979 .0195 .376 .0854 8.067 .822
.28 .0960 23.692 15.545 .0182 .337 .0807 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 22.460 14.234 .0169 .303 .0762 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 21.337 13.032 .0158 .274 .0719 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 20.310 11.926 .0147 .249 .0679 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 19.370 10.906-.0137 .226 .0641 8.463 .912
., • 38 .1303 18.506 ~3~.0128 • 201 c:~ o.6o7J 8.543 .930
.40 .1371 17.710 • S' .0119 .190 .0574 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 16.976 8.274 .0111 .174 .0544 8.701 .966
• 44 .1508 16.296 7.515 .0104 .161 .0516 8.780 .984
.46 .1577 15.666 6.806 .0097 .149 .0490 8.860 1.002 . .48 .1645 15.080 6.141 .0091 .138 .0465 8.939 1.020
~ .so .1714 14.534 5.516 .0085 .128 .0443 9.018 1.038
\ .52 .1783 14,025 4.927 .0080 .119 .0421 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 13.549 4.372 .0075 .111 .0402 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 13.103 3.846 .0071 .104 .0383 9.256 1.093
>["58 .1988 12.684 r 3. 34!1 .0066 .o98 r .03661 9.335 1.111 -. .60 .2057 12.290 -2.875-.0062 .092 .... 0350.; 9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 11.919 2.425 .0059 .086 .0335 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 11.569 1.996 .0055 .081 .0321 9.573 1.165
/ .66 .2262 11.239 1.586 .0052 .077 .0307 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 10.926 1.195 .0049 .073 .0295 9.732 1.201
·• 70 .2400 10.630 .819 .0046 .069 .0283 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 10.349 .459 -·.0044 .065 .0212 9.890 1.237
: .74 .2537 10.083 .113 .0042 .062 .0263 9.970 1.247 ~ ....... 76 .2605 9.829 -.220 .0040 .059 .0256 10.049 1.253 ' .78 ! .2674 9.588 -.540 .0038 .056 .0249 10.128 1.259
>.so .2742 9.357 · ~. ssO) • 0036 .053 .0242 10.207 1.264
.82 .2111 9.138 -1 ... 149 .0034 .051 .0235 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 8.928 -1.438 .0033 .048 .0229 10.366 1.275
I • .86 .2948 8.728 -1.717 .0031 .046 .0223 10.445 '1.281
('\ .88 .3017 8.536 -1.988 .0030 ,044 .0218 10.524 1.296
.90 .3085 8.353 -2.251 .0029 .042 .0212 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 8.177 -2.506 .0027 .041 .0207 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 8.008 -2.755 .0026 .039 .0202 10.762 1.303
'.96 .3291 7.846 -2.996 .0025 .037 .0197 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 7.690 -3.231 .0024 .036 .0193 10.921 1.314
:--::;>1.00 .3428 7.540 . "' .035 .0188 11.000 1.320 -3.460 ·, .0023
6
NYU/ OAS 83-108
. RO= .343 01GO= 4.179 UO= 2.250
XO= 4.0000 ~0= .3318 CPMAX= .5615
PR. R PHI THET~ THICK SIGCL c ALPHA CL
.10 .0343 45.466 38.033 .0318 1.195 .1265 7.433 .678
.12 .0411 42.906 35.394 .0330 1.070 .1325 7.512 .696
.14 .0480 40.501 32.909 .0332 .958 .1349 7.591 • 714
.16 .0548 38.254 30~83 .0327 .859 .1348 7.671 • 732 7 .18 .0617 36.164 (28 .• 4i4J .0319 .771 ~ 7.750 .750
.20 .0686 34.227 26.398 .0307 .693 . 7.829 .768
.22 .0754 32.435 24.526 .0294 .624 .1254 7.909 .786
.• 24 .0823 3!1.779 22.792 .0279 .563 .!207 7.999 .804
: .26 .0891 29.251 21.184 .0264 .510 .1158 8.067 .822
• 28 .0960 27.840 19.694 .0250 .463 .1108 8.146 .840
.30 .1028 26.537 18.311 .0235 .421 .1058 8.226 .858
.32 .1097 25.332 17.028 .0221 .385 .1009 8.305 .876
.34 .1166 24.218 15.834 .0208 .352 .0961 8.384 .894
.36 .1234 23.185 14.722 .0196 .323 .0915 8.463 .912 -;> .38 .1303 22. 227 cu_._(i84) .0184 .297 <;:Q872 -' 8. 543 .930
.40 .1371 21.337 12.715 .0173 .274 .0830 8.622 .948
.42 .1440 20.508 11.807 .0162 .254 .0791 8.701 ·.966
.44 .1508 19.736 10.956 .0152 .235 .0754 8.780 .984
• 46 .1577 19.015 10.156 .0143 .218 .0719 8.860 1.002
.48 .1645 18.341 9.402 .0135 .203 .0686 8.939 1.020 .so .1714 17.710 8.692 .0127 .190 .0655 9.018 1.038
.52 .1783 17.118 8.020 .0119 .177 .0626 9.098 1.056
.54 .1851 16.562 7.385 .0112 .166 .0599 9.177 1.075
.56 .1920 16.038 6.782 .0106 .156 .0573 9.256 1.093
r-581 .1988 15.545 (6.210 .0100 .146 .0549]' 9.335 1.111 __, .60 .2057 15.080 ~6~ .0094 .138 .0526 1 9.415 1.129
.62 .2125 14.640 • :46 .0089 .130 .0504 9.494 1.147
.64 .2194 14.225 4.651 .0084 .123 .0484 9.573 1.165
.66 .2262 13.831 4.178 .0079 .116 .0465 9.652 1.183
.68 .2331 13.457 3.725 .0074 .110 .0447 9.732 1.201
.70 .2400 13.103 3.292 .0070 .104 .0429 9.811 1.219
.72 .2468 12.765 2.875 .0067 .099 .0413 9.890 1.237
.74 .2537 12.445 2.475 .0063 .094 .0400 9.970 1.247
.76 .2605 12.139 2.090 .0060 .089 .0389 10.049 1.253
.78 .2674 11.848 1.719 .0058 .085 .0379 10.128 1.259 -'.80 .2742 11.569 ~..::1..-J~-:"} .0055 .081 (. 0369 ' 10. 207 1.264
.82 .2811 11.304 1.017 .0053 .078 .0360 10.287 1.270
.84 .2880 11.049 .683 .ooso .074 .0351 10.366 1.275
.86 .2948 10.806 .361 .0048 .071 .0342 10.445 1.281
.88 .3017 10.573 .049 .0046 .068 .0334 10.524 . 1.286
.90 .3085 10.349 -.254 .0044 .065 .0325 10.604 1.292
.92 .3154 10.135 -.548 .0042 .062 .0318 10.683 1.298
.94 .3222 9.929 -.833 .0040 .060 .0310 10.762 1.303
.96 .3291 9.731 -1.110 .0038 .058 .0303 10.841 1.309
.98 .3359 9.541 -1.380 .0036 .055 .0296. 10.921 1.314 -7 1.00 .3428 9.357 --1.643 .• 0035 .053 .. .0290 \ 11.000 1.320
5
' :c 8.3-1J3 ;~ Yu1 ~,..-. .J __ _ ~-\ \.\ -. t-z -r: ..• ~ ;:'.,.
....
(l~ Jr z,
'tl '
..J ,._
..-:: 2•
If i !... ....
~• ,;)
g
-
~ .
I ;:,.. \/ ..---(
__ , ...
, /'
tO'
.,
~--.?--
J ...,.. \
; ~ ·-'•, 0 .,
.: ~ . .. . -~ :S .. • . ~ ;; ~ .; , -" " "' J .. .. j < >
i~~ 1 -« I ... :"'
i * * ~ I-~~ / 'i~ ; l ~
' ;-L
::>
I
·-
v
7
--
............
..
i
<( .
~
"" )
---,:-
'(
-· 0 .• 1 l\ ... "' ~ . ""' ~ -< : ..,!-~ ~.o .... .( '.. . .a ... _,. I L-.J ::::_, .--. ........ 2:::: s " '
I
'-/') 13 > .. v ~ 5 .. w "' ..;: --. 'Z -'-~ ( r
~ .,. " • z 'J
-::::_
~
----l I
--. --------
-------J
<
.,..
NY~· :;;..s 8 3-L3 -=-=<ll
0 ....... _
I ., I •
i ... -4 ~
\ '
-~
I ';-
....
{
. .;. t '. ~ : i. ..... £ r .:....
..... -
~;~
I
~,j;~
\),_,_
... .4>·
8
.. i • .:5
0
:! .,
"' l c .. ....
·--~
~-----.. "'
c. ----~
7 J 'f ~ I '""1 , I~~~ ,l_J I;: I~ 1,; · I a f"'-" t Q_ It I i ..J! :LJ I Oi 01 2: . I ~' ' I .. "' ' !
I wJ I ..
I I I II
I z
:II) I~ e v c::
' oJO v .uJ ~ z .::r
" <( ·~ '> .,
2 -
:::: ____ _
----"'
I.
I. L
:l \
i ;~
!! I
~---~
cl
, .• -~
.. ,~
/ ' I
"' i
)
~
I .... ," -·,j ,,
"' 3
:· .,
-·
~
.;
.:
..
: .:. ... !
J. ~ 1
'
\j < • ~. .. ,,
~
•'
.
.,
""
~
~ , f
~ ..
0
)
I, . .
.,
.~
.,.
"1-
~
.-
10
II.
._,
;:-r "·
-~
!
c
:::
.... -----
~ ,--.. " _. '--I.) ,, C' .. .. ~ •:. ·"' ) ~ c .. ~ .. .. .. " "' .. ll . .. ~ .. .J .j '8 L
b1
uJ
I-
:1 , • ,1 . :r • u .. ' " ,.
.._ ' 0 ~ <
..... 2 -
::s::::
:;;) <( ! ~~~ ~
-
...,..-:
i
'
--...
<
·,..
~
I ~., \ ·~\
I\ . ~ \\ I
;;, ~~.
<.)' -
'' ' ;( : \ I ..
... ·-
-
~
if
~
. •
r;
~
;:.:.
!'
1. .. ......._
:~TI ·~ ;
J! ......L ' : -L..t. /1'1-r / '
/ --' --~ s " .,
"' "' g "' .. .. C>
<::> Q
"'
--5 t.
:!
~ .. ... 0
'!!
Q 0
Cl
0
;. ____ _ ...... ________ Cl
J
9
1
tO
. ~.
~:-~ ... :}~~~
tto
So
:t-
f-o . ,-
-· .. .. ~
0
·-. ~-...... ·---~ .. -.-.E:'.---
"' :!
c
\'
~
"'
. c-:;
.. ....
~·
•:: ...
..
"'
t
11
! ~· 0
8 ... c.:
I ...
... '£ c ~ ,-
'')0
l:.l'
---
----
.. c
0 .,
t:!
ci
···~/ f/ v"
; ~
'
..-
:,0 e..'
~
a..:: if~
~7
-..
•
== 1. ..
~ ;--'it e:._ . ai wJ 0 ,.-.. "'-\ 2: ~
,/J w_;:
1-;
\...;
0 " L.J • ~ -. .,
<
1.:::(. .~ ' -
NYU/DAS 84 127
I
L,:.-s .. ~oo
- -g.. 7o& -· -
BLADE 82X 4 ··~c--.. ,.,_
SEC-T I ON R . . ·.
CHORD 7. 891 I~~ . . . .. .
RADIUS 2··. 50 IN
StALE . Fu'LI~.
< • •
l:\.~00
d =-•OS/
BLADE B2X4C ·--
SECTION I
CHORD · 1 • 732 IN .
: . . . ..
RADIUS 13.64 I
SCALE FULL· -
IW\~T · ~ t. (;~ 1)£' --.......
.oSo
~~t _j_~-b-' __..;--------··.. /0(
= '3.\'ZS
BLADE B2X4 --CL
SECT ION R ... 8J
. . . . ~., CHORD 8. 056 I·N .,_
RADIUS 2.50 -IN
SCALE FULL
TW\~~ 31.72· ~EG.
I
I
I
G I :::=---..
BLADE B2X'l CL
SECTION J (TIP)
CHORD 1.732 IN
RADIUS 16.68 IN
SCALE FULL
'fW \ S'f ...r l. b4-'])['
·• ··. BLRDE
TRPER
SECTION
CHORD
RADIUS
TWIST
B3X4 __ CL T
21 To-·· ··1
R (HUBJ
4 a 04 IN
2 a 50 IN
30a9l DEG
SHEET 1 OF 10
NYU HYDRO 11-1
KHECS TEST HODEL
CORREN/ARHSiRONG/Hlt
DIMENSIONS EXPANDED
FOR CASTINC
ONE ONLY RECUlREO
StALE FULL
BLADE B3X4 CLT
TAPER 21 TO 12
SECTION J (TIPJ
CHORD 1 I 18 IN
RADIUS 16.68 IN
TWIST .36 DEG
SHEET 10 ·OF 10
NYU HYDRO 11-: 6-8::!
Kt£CS TEST MODEl.
CORREN!fW'\STRIJ\~/~: LL~
DU1ENSIOHS EXPR.~DD .
FOR CASTING
ONE ON.. Y ftEQUl REO
SCALE FULL
d.
BLADE B3 · CLT
SECTION A ( UBJ
CHORD 3.37 IN
RADIUS ·z.so IN
TWIST· 26.92 DEG
st£!T 1 CF 10
11YU tmltO 11-1
ICJ£CS TEST KOtEl
C~RWUARHSTR~G/Ml
DJJEHSIONS EXrAND.EI
rmt tAS'TlNC
liE ON.. Y JtSIJIR.ED
sau fW.
~!' ~ 4
= -· o44
,
BLROE B3X5 CLT
SECTION J (TIPl
CHORD .86 IN
RADIUS 16.68 IN
TWIST -1 • 20 DEG
SfEET 10 OF 10
NYU HYDRO 11·
ICtECS lEST ltDDEl
I:CIMEN/AMS'TitONC/,.
Dli&SlDNS EXPNQf
FDR tAS11NC ·
liE IN. 1 REDUlltEJ
Sal.! F1ll
_ 4.o2.o
= l. s~z
I
BLADE B2x6''
SECTION R (HUBJ
CHORD 5.38 IN
RADIUS 2.50 IN
-TWIST 23.76 DEG
SHE!T 1 OF 10
NYU HYDRO 9-2!
II£CS TEST HODEl.
aRtfNIARHSTRONG/MI~
DIMENSIONS EXPANDED
FOR CASTING
atE ON.. Y R!.QUJRED
SCA...E FW.
Gt ......,
BLRDE B2X6 CL
SECTION J (TIPJ
CHORD .79 IN
RRDIUS 16.68 IN
TWIST -2.69 DEG
St£ET 10 OF 10
NYU HYDRO 9·
IO£CS TEST HODEL
awtENIARHSTRc:wG/t
DIJ£NSIDHS EXPAN.Of.
Flit CASTING
CIE ONLY REQUIRED
saLE FULL
NYU/DAS 84-127
.-
"' ..
...
APPENDIX III
CIRCULATING WATER CHANNEL
OPERATING AND INSTRUCTION MANUAL
NAVAL SHIP RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER
Central Instrumentation Department
Control Systems Division
· Prepared by
L. Shuman
March 1965
Revised September 1972
I. INTRODUCTION
CIRCULATING WATER CHANNEL
OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS
1.01 The Circulating Water Channel is a basic research
facility or the Naval Research and Development Center in
which the model under going testing is held stationary in a
moving water stream or regulated velocity.
1.02 The Channel is powered by two 1,000 hp synchro-
nous motors mounted on top or the Channel structure. These
motors drive impellers through vertical shafts with the
hydraulic thrusts acting against gravity forces on the
rotora and counterbalancing the weight or the rotating ele-
ments. Although it is usually operated with both motors
running, the controls are such that the Channel can be run
with only one motor. A longitudinal section or the Channel
is shown in Figure 1.
II. OPERATING CAPABILITIES
2.01 The synchronous motor speed is 80 rpm for the 90
pole, 3 phase, 60 cycle, 2,300 volt impeller motors.
2.02 Since the impeller speed is fixed, water speed is•.
adjusted by varying the impeller blade angle. This is done
by admission or oil under pressure to the upper or lower
side or a piston mounted in a hydraulic cylinder at the
upper end or the drive shaft. The beade angee is controlled
remotely and gan be varied from +,.o to +~2 With an accu-
racy of l/100 • Blade angle can be adjusted either independ-
ently or simultaneously on both motors.
2.02.01 The clearance on the impeller blades 1s
not close to any fixed value. At the time of construction
assembly there was interference between aome or the blades
and the throat ring. The condition was remedied by hand
grinding the blades where neceaaary. 'l'he clearances uy be
said to ranse between 0.070 and 0.125-inch.
2.0, Each main motor ia rated at 1,000 hp, I&0°C rise, r. :. .;-continu~ duty. They will deliver 1.25Q hp tgr 2 hour!.-.-t,E ~,.;·~_.:..·
W1 th a 55 0 C riae and develop 1, 750 hp for 8 llinutes, also J/l --~-.~· .. :-· with a 55 C rise • ~-~;,a..:;. · .,,. · · --.
2.~ The approximate speed limit for the Channel is
10 knots for 20 minutes with a 0.6 knot minimum. With the
2 hour elevated duty cycle a maximum water velocity of 9.5
knots results, while the 8 minute elevated condition w1l~
give a top speed of 10.5 knots.
2.05 The best operating range is between 1 to 6 knots
where water speed can be held constant to within 1/10 of a
knOt.
2.06 Water speed can be changed at any time during a
teat, but 3 minutes must be allowed for water to resettle
and assume uniform flow after a change has been made.
2.07 A maximum thrust for the 8 minute duty cycle rate
per motor:has been calculated at ~0,200 pounds force.
2.08 The efficiency or the pumps at rated load has
been estimated at 81~.
2.09 Tow points can be located above, at or below the
water surface, at the centerline or ne8r one aide of the
Channel test section, a 22 foot wide by 60 foot long area.
There are also miscellaneous mounting holes located on the
bottom of the Channel. Water depth can be ad.juated up to
a ~aximum of 9' in this section.
2.09.01 The towins beam is constructed from e
~ 14" x 10" x 61 lb. beam 26-reet long. The beam is at-
tached at each end to a pipe at8nchion which allows conttn·
uous adjustment between the bottom of the beam and the 6-
root waterline from 5·3/4 inches to 33-3/4 inches when the
beam is attached to the stanchion at a point below the
bridge clamp. When the beam is att~ched to the atan~h1on
eo that it is above the bridge clamp the continuous ed.1ust-
ment between the bottom of the beam and the 6-foot w~terline
ranges from 4'-3 1/8" to 6'-10 1/2". The model is attached
to the bottom~lange or the towing beam by any or the stend-
ard towing struts used on Carriages 1 and 2. Drawings for
the bridge structure which supports the towing beam over the
Channel are A-8484 to A-8~9~ inclusive. The towing beam
drawings are E-1659-1 through E-1659-5. ·
2.09.02 The design loads for the towing beBm are
•• tollows:
TOWING BEAM LOADS
Steady state drag(truas wheels blocked)
Side force (at 6 ft. waterline, mid-beam-span)
Yaw force
Maximum model weight
3,000 lb. ;,ooo lc.
10,000 lb.-ft.
10,000 lb.
Nodela up to 27-feet long may be tested in water depth that
~an be adjusted up to a maximum or 9-!eet. Modele '0-feet
long may be tested in water to a maxi~m or 6-teet deep. ·
2.10 Electrical servicea available at the Channel in-
.clude 125 VAC~ single phase: 220 VAC# three phase delta: 6
VAC, aingle phase, 12? VDCJ and 15-400 VDC. (See aection
·~Electrical Services and Figure 2).
2.11 A three ton crane ia availa:le tor local moving
along the Channel but a 6-toot clearL~ce over the Channel
uall limits its use. Also available, but primarily intend-
ed for lifting the pump motors, is a 20 ton crane with very
restricted travel in the east-west direction.
2.12 There are 48 dye tubes available ~hat can be con-
nected to a test model and will admit dye·under variable
pressure from 0 to b? psi.
2.13 The Channel has 29 windows ~or viewing tests, 10
each on the north and south walls L~~ 9 underneath the test
!ection. The 7 upper windows on eacr. aide ~ave 2' x b•
openings while the lower 3 and all -~~dows underneath h~ve
1-l/2' x b• openings.
2.lh Banks of hb floodlights are located on both the
north and south w~lla and each bank is controlleJ by a
variac and safety switch located o~ t~e north center of the
test section, second tloor. Meters a:op the v~riac show
the ac voltage applied to the ligh~s.
2.15 The Channel ia equipped wit~ a system or three
filters and the necessary pumps to pe~it the 670,000
gallons or water in the Channel to pass through in little
more than 24 hours. See Figure 1,. This figure also shows
the a1r removal tank and associated eQuipme~t which removes
the a1r from the upper east elbow hu~. This system depends
on the filtering and water circulat~~g system in order to
function# aa ia readily seen in the ~igure.
2.16 A lip exists og the eeat e~d of t~e test section
that ia adjusted from -1 to +2 i~ erder to smooth out
water flow at the various speeds. See Figure 1.
.... g
. .;
\ ., ;
~ ~ ...
0 ~
.. t ~ ..
"' r. u -.: t ~ ~ ...
~
~ "
0
"" . I
...
~
l ...
'""
... · .. , ~ :i'll -...
•• lol
I= ~
''""
-~ ..
.. ,~
c
J/1. ·= ""~ v ~ ... ( -;
'
Cl
:-q: ~ ~
~i
!
~~ ~
~~~
..
8 "
\
"
...... ~ ~
•
,..
§
'I
-.1
'i .. ~ " t! ' ~
.-
\.:>
~ lj C)
'-l "I :1
~
1:5
D Woq_--. s~NC.H
1N
_,~TT-· ··-;~r--
lu-.. .. ,. .. .u.. PA.MU .. ··~.. \J~:~..ou.ac;. Rt:C.I P"T,
2.tOVAt p._ .. u.•P ..
/ _,
.,\
_________________ r·l ____ _
C u::tCULI>. ,.., N C. \J .._ T E R
400 VOC, 100" Sw1TC.H
I
WC.I.OINfi RE.Cl.~T •
. JJ --bn
nu .. ~..~.-. 'R.:u ... , ._,___..
o-400VOC, 4 C.kT"·
440V"'C, 3tt!l~----
2eow:.~+1100A-'·• · ..
fe.V"C, 1'2.5VOC
W-.u:R F"Low
CH~NNEL-AVAIL"~LI: ELECTR\C~L Powt:.~
11ICURE 2
-'
·-
.
I .
f •
v. 00 .01 .02 .0) .Oil ,05 .06 .&7 .08
,1 .005 ,006 -~ .oo, ,010 .ou :m ::n ,017 .I .021 .02) .Oio ·~~~ ·U1 :U~ .o ' :rn .) .Oil8 .051 • oss .o 8 • z •
·-I .oes ·* .0916 ·~' 0.10 0.11 o.n 0.11 o.t, :i 0,1) 0.1 .. 0.14 o. l 0.16 0,,, 0,1 o.ll 0.1 0.19 o.zo o.zo o.z o.zz o.u o.z . 0, o.z5
:I . 0,26 0.27 o.ze o.ze ··u 0.)0 0.)1 ··a o.lf 0.)1& O,)S 0.)6 0.}1 o. o.u 0,)9 o. o. 1 ·' 0.11} 0.~ o.•s o.• O.IJ7 o. o ... , 0.~ o:s1
1,0 o.u o.t ::n o.u o.u o.l' 0.60 0,61 0.62 1,1 0~ o. 5 o. o. 9 o. 0 o.n 0.7) 0.7'
Y. 00 .01 .02 .0) .Oil .os .06 .0? .oe
1.2 ~ 0.77 0.78 0.77 0.81 o.12 0.8) o.tt 0.86 I 0.87 1,) 0.90 0.91 o., O,f" 0.,, f:tl o. 1.00 1.01 1,1l l,Ok 1,06 1,07 1.09 '· o. 1,1 1.15 1.17
'·i 1.20 1.21 1.2) 1.Zl 1.2~ 1.2! '·H I 1,}1 I 1.}) '. ,,,; 1.)8 1.1&0 1.11. '·'' '·'~ 1. 1 1.118 t.z; 1.7 1.~ "'' t.SS 1.S9 1.61 1.6 'l.6S 1.&7 1. 9
1.8 1,7) 1. 711. 1. 76 1. ;a '.eo 1.12 I 1 ... 1.86 1.8a
'·' 1.92 1.914 L9o 1,98 2.00 2,Q2 2.01& 2.0. 2.09 2.0 2.1) 2.15 2.17 2.19 1.2% 2,21& 1.16 1.1 ~-~
2.1 2.)1 l '·U '·U 2,1&1 z.~ z • ..o z.-a
'
'·li '·ll 2.2 ,,, 2. 2. 2.65 1.67 '·" z.n 2. '· 2.) Z.cz 2.61& 2.66 2.69 2.91 '·"' 2.97 2.99 ),01
2.1& I ).07 ).09 ).11 '· 111. ),17 ).20 I ).22 ).25 ).27
2.1 '·" '·i' ).)S ),111 ),1!) ),&a6 ,,., ).~2 I '·fl 2. ).60 '· ' >.cs ,.~a ).71 ),71&
'· 77
).iiO '· ' 2.& ).88 ).91 ).91& '·'I ... co 1&,0) ... os -·~ I ... 11 z. 11,1l 1&.20 1£,2). 1£.2 4.29 "·H 1&.~1 "·' &a.lll
2.9 k,ll. 1;,,1 1.1.~ •. ,1 ll.OO .. ' :. .. 11,7\1 ~>.;)
1 I .o~ .06 i .oa V. 00 .01 .02 .0} ,011 .o; I
).0 I 11.79 ... ~~ -·~i a..o9 I ... 92 •.;, "·90 i.oz I s.o, ),1 ~·" ~.11.1 ~·1 ~.21 5.21& s.zo ~·u :l; S.)o
).% ... , ,1&8 .sz ·'' s.si s.oz '· · s.n
).) i·so 1·8' ,.87 i·'., I i·" i·'7 i·oo l 6.~ E.O'?'
J,l& .15 ·u .22 .26 ,)) ,:~ 6.•n 6.11.11.
'·' 6.52 6. 6.60 6.6) 6:~ '· 71 6.78 6.82
'·' j 6.90 ,,,.. 6.90 7.\ll I 7.05 l·Gf I !.1) ! ·'l I 7.21
'·l 1·11 7.)) 7.}7 7.&11 I f,lo4 i 7.52 "$\I • ,llo
t:i7 I ). 7. 1.1) '!.77 7.81 T.is r.as 7.9) ~:o1
i:Z 1'09 1. , .. 1·'8 ~~22 I 1:26 l;lV I:~ l:it 8.1i)
:~ :~ .60 .ill ·'' ·7J 8.66
'·' t.O) t.Oi 9.12 9.1 t.21 '·" 9.)0
'·' i'l t·~ i' .. J•;z 1l:il l·'' l" I·"~ z·rs ... , ·" . 8 1 .01.
1 =~~ ' • i6 1 ·u '"' 1 :, , :,s 1 .110 1 ,1111. 10.1l~ 10. SJ. 1~. 9 10,6) 10.
'·t 10.R 10.8) 10.B 1o.1z I ~~:U . 11.02 "·H 11.11 11,16
'· n.z 11.~ 11. 11. 1 "·11 11. "·'' 11.66
11.7 11.7 "· 11. "·'' , ·'' 12. , 11. 11.11 12.16
TABLE Of VELOCITY BEADS IN INCHES .OF WAtD I'Ol VELOCrriES
From O.lOto 4.79 IDota by .Ol•IDot Iatarvala
h • .53217 , ..
I
I
I
I
I
I
FIGURE 8
OQ
,019
:=~
0,1.)
0.1~; 0.2
o.n 0.1.2
0.52
0.6J o. i5
.o;
o.e;
1.oi 1.1
I.J~
1.~2
l • I~
1.S~
2.11
z. '2
. '·~' 2 •• 9
,.~
).}J
'·"'' ,.!;
"· :~o 1.1.1:~
"·71$ I
.:~
s.o7 ,
~.lo: s.:o
E.: 1
6.148
6.!S
7.2S ., ·s •• o ... c;
: ..... 8:96 .
j. '" 9.7: 1C.2o
10.:) , : . , ~ I
11. 7'· 12.21
V.
"·' 11.9
5.0
~.1 .2
'·' i:i
i:l ·' '
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.) 6 ...
6.5
Y. l
6.6 I 6.,
6.
I 6.9
7.0 7.,
l·2 ·' 7 ...
7.1 I 7.
7.7
'
'
1 .a ' ,.,
.0
•
8., I 8.2
8.)
' v. I
a:;
8.:»
8., 8. a.,
to .1
.z
j:l
·5
t·~ :I
9·9 10.0
t ;,qz a ac:ws • a a =
00 .01 ,:2 .c, I .o-.0~ .06 .07 .08 ·-I ... ,
12.26 ,2 ·r 1-' 12.'-2 I 12 .lt7 12.52 12.57 12.62 12.67 12.73 I c.~ 12.78 12. i 12. 12.9) 12.99
'·' .Oit
1).Q9 ''·U 1).20 1).2~ I 1).)0 1).) ,, .. , 1).1i7 1).52 1).57 ,,,,, 1). 1).7) 1) .79 I
1).~ ''·zo ''·'' . ... 01 I 1~.q• , ... , 11J.17 111.~ , ... ~~ 11; ·i" l 116.)9 , ... s 11t.SQ 111.56 , •• 6, n.6T 116.72 111. 111.816 , •. i '"·" 15.01 15.06 ,,, 12
''· 18 15.2) 15.29 ,,,, 15.110 15.1i
'1·52 ,,.5$ '1·'' I ,,.~2 I '1·75 ,,.~, '2·~7 12.n ~a:rz 1~.o-, • 10 , • 16 , .22 1o.2o , ,, "·" 1 .liS 1 ,,, 16.6) 16.69 16.75 16.81 ~6.!7 16.9) ~'·" 17.05 17.11 17.17 17.25
17.29 17.)~ 'i ·'' 1J.~7 I '1·" 'j·" U:~ ,,.72 ,,.7~ ,,.~
11·'0 ,,,, 1 ... 02 1o.09
1 ~.:;a ' .21 1 .,. , .IJO , ,li6
, .,2 , .59 ~9.65 1&.71 , .ill 18.90 18.97 19.0) 17.10
19;16 . 19.22 1~.29 I ,,,, I 19.111 ,,,Iii 19.511 ,,,,, 19.68 19. 7• 19.80 19.87 ''·" 20.00 I 2~.0 20:~ ro.u 20.26 2o.n 2::L'; 20.116 20.52 z=., 20.E6 10.72 ro. 20. 20.92 20.99 21.C I
21.12 21. ,. 21.26 11.)2 I ''·'I 21 ·"' 11 ·i' 11.60 21.66 21 .n !
21.80 21.8 21 ·t 12.0~ 22.0 . 22. , .. 12. , 12.28 zz.~ 22.'-2 I zz.-a 22.55 22. 22.69 22.7 12.8) rz.to 22.97 2). 2)., 1 I ..
00 .01 .02 I .0, j ,Cl£ .~ I .06 .07 .o8 .:o
23.18 l 2).2' 2).)2 I 2),, I 2).11~ I "·'' I 2).60 2).68 25.7l I 2).!2 I
2).89 2'·U 2 ... c, 2•. 10 I 2~. 15 2:0.25 2'1.)2 21l.)9 2i6.11 2;..5 .. I 211.61 211. z;..75 21t.e, I 21i.S9 z-..,; zs .Oit 25.12 25.19 2~.?6 ,,,,1; I 2,.111 2,.100 2i·s 6 J 2 2·'~ 2,.1, '2·78 '2·85 I&:U 2:U:~ ;
Zo.08 2 .15 2D.2l 2 • 0 I .)o zo.:os
17:ii
2 .60 2o.1s I 26.8) 21i.90 2&.9 27 .cs 27. 1) 11.11 27.)6 "·""' 27.51 I
2l·'Z I 2,.,, I 2T. 7'< I 2I.C2 I 2l·H I 2,.,7 ~,.~ I ~~· ,, I 2~.20 I 2:.2: I
2 ·' 2 ·"" 2:.s2 L 2G.S~ 2 . ~ 2 . ~ 28.8) 28.,, I 28.n 2s.o6 ' I 29.111 29.22 29.,0 ~ 29.) ! 29.&.: 29.~ 29.62 ·29. 0 29· n.a~
29.9) )0.01 I )0. ,~ ,o. ~a 1 ,o.z6 1 ,o., )0,612 3c.5o I )o.~ I ,::.~= ! )0.711 )0.82 ,~.90 ,o.ze I )1.o0 i )1 .1• )1.2) ,, .)1 )1.)9 ,, .;o7 ' )1.55 )1.01. )1.n )1. 0 )1.80 ,,,, )2.05 )2 .1) )2.21 '~ .,c
)2.}8 I )2 .166 I ,2.~ I ,2.63 ~ 32.7~ I n.1~ 32.~ 32.~6 I 3).05 '~. 1' :
)).21 )}.)\) ,.,a n.:q )). S )).c) )).72 )). ~ I )).69 :~.27 ! )61.o6 )lt.15 ,~.2~ ,:. • )2 '" ,,0 )16 ... , )ll. 57 }ll.oo ' ')4.75 )l..~~
)1;.92 35.00 I )5.Cl I 'i·1a I 'i·25 I ,,_,; 'i·"-'it~ I ,,.6, '" . ..,_, I ~t. , .. 'i·l8 'i·87 I 'i·:~ ' .os ' .1) )0.22 ' .)1 ' • 0 ' .119 ':::·5~ i '.&6 ' .75 ' .0:0
,,,;, )7.02 I )7,10 )7. ,, )7.28 37 .)7 '• .•c I I
00 .01 I .02 I .C') I .010 I .05 ,C,j .07 .09 .0~ I
U:Z 5 I ,,.6A6 I 'i:Z' I '1·52 I 'l·i~ I ,a.~ Je.09 )8. ;a I ,~.2l ,a.,5 . , .z .. ' . ' ' ·12 ) .c1 I )8.fO )8.99 )9.09 )9., 39.27 ' ,.,i 39. 5 )9.5• )9.c• ,.;, );.:2 )9.91 160.00 ItO. 10 1.~. ~9 i
160.28 110.)7 I 0.0,1>7 160.56 I -~.c5 I 100.7 .. '0.816 40.,) I 111.05 I 1.'. 12 ' .. 1.21 .. ,.,, .1.110 111.:z .. ~. ~; "1 .ca ll1.78 161, 7 161.97 1>2.C6 I ~az. 15 laZ.25 a;z .,.:. liZ.· 42., 112.63 lt2.72 lt2.8Z &.2.92 .. , .01
li).11 lt).ZO I .. ,.)0 I ' ' ,_ .. , ... ~ I .. )-:J'..J ;.(·~ ~s.ro "''·~ I "'I ! -... , -.,.):
.... Ol ..... 17 I llll.Z& 160;.) "" .... ~H ,,:11 "·l' ...... ; lol;.~; I
IJS.Oi' .,.1, 115.~ .. ,.,.. "·" .. ,. ' ''· ' "5.e~ :05.9) I
I
1t6.0) .. ,.,., i ..:6.23 1t6.)) .. , ... 2 I ... H "·U "·Pz ia6.Ez :;~.9? I
:l·oz :1.12 a-1.22 :1·'2 :l·lo2 aof 2 :1· :1· 2 11&.c2 1.7.92 I
.0) .n I I; .2) . ·" .4) li • "' .... .74 11 .e-. ~.:.9-I
' u·M .. ,.1i I 119.21 .. ,.a 1 .. , ... ~ t·':ii r,·~ p,:~ ~>9.S7 .. ~.17 i .Ol r,·1 50.2 r,· r,··' r,· J :~ so.7o 51 .0~
51.11 .22 51.)2 • 1.,, 1, 1.816 51.95 52.C5
52.16 sz.z6 52.)7 r,·-a I ;l.~3 I r,·ot f,:U f,·90 5).01 ;, . 11 I
5).22 ''·" ,, .. , .SA> 5).&4 ).75 ·97 . ~.07 ;•. 18 I
TABLE OF VELOCITY READS IN INCH::S· OF WATER FOR VELOCITIES
From 4.80 to 10.09 Knots by .01-lnot Intervals
. h •• 53217 ~
AI II-18
FIGURE 9
F\..OW RATER$ P'OR
SMOKE eoTTL..ES
TO
fLOW
FACIL..
( ~----------------------
C.llt'C UL.A TIHG
WATER
. :1 CKftHNEl
t~~--------------~~--~~~·~·~ ..
I~ •
Air lemov l and riltetic& Syatem
fiCUU 13
AIR
ln.I10V.AL
TANK
·~ :·4 .. ..• .. ..
I
I
I r-1·~~!.-
FRCM
'FH.TF.;
PL.A r-. ·
~ .. "· ...