See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/278737864

A selected literature review of efficiency

improvements in hydraulic turbines
ARTICLE in RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS JUNE 2015
Impact Factor: 5.9 DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.023

READS

97

4 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
Xin Liu

Yongyao Luo

Tsinghua University

Tsinghua University

8 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

29 PUBLICATIONS 54 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

SEE PROFILE

Bryan W Karney
University of Toronto
369 PUBLICATIONS 1,403 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Available from: Xin Liu

Retrieved on: 16 October 2015

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A selected literature review of efciency improvements

in hydraulic turbines
Xin Liu a, Yongyao Luo a, Bryan W. Karney b,n, Weizheng Wang a
a
b

Department of Thermal Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, 35 St. George St., Toronto, Canada ON M5S 1A4

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 21 October 2014
Received in revised form
27 April 2015
Accepted 1 June 2015

Knowing the efciency of a hydraulic turbine has important operational and nancial benets to those
who operate a plant. Historical efciency and other data on turbine performance are essential for the
informed selection and use of turbines. So having such a database from different manufactures is
attractive. However, at present it is almost impossible to get a universal database to reect the turbine
characteristics. This paper reviewed a set of empirical equations to replacefull database which denes
the peak efciency and shape of the efciency curve as a function of the commissioning date for the unit,
rated head, rated ow and other main design parameters. Since the design theories, methods and tools
of turbines are relatively mature, and the majority of turbine manufacturers have reached a level of
know how which enables them to carry out hydraulically and structurally correct units to product highperformance turbines. This paper paid more attention to the design factors, which could inuence the
value of the practically attainable overall turbine efciency. To quantify the effects of these factors, this
paper investigated the inuence of roughness and gap clearances on the internal leakage ow rate.
Testing and CFD are the most two important tools in different design stages. This paper reviewed some
key ideas and issues on the efciency research in both. At last, improvement measures based on these
above mentioned design factors were provided.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Hydraulic turbines
Efciency losses
Performance testing
CFD method
Efciency improvement

Contents
1.
2.
3.

4.

5.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mathematical model for predicting turbine efciency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design factor affecting turbines efciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Inuence of surface roughness and wear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.
Inuence of gap clearances on the internal leakage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.
Others. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Performance testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.
Model tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.
Field tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3.
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CFD method for promoting the research and design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.
Improving pressure recovery in draft tube. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.
Cavitation research by CFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.
CFD in tip clearance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4.
Prediction of erosion in hydraulic turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.5.
CFD in off-design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.6.
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Corresponding author. Tel.: 1 416 9787776.

E-mail address: karney@ecf.utoronto.ca (B.W. Karney).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.023
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

19
19
19
19
21
22
23
23
23
23
24
24
24
24
24
25
25
25
25

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

6.

Efciency improvement in turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6.1.
Better design or optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2.
Improve the surface performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3.
Improvements to hydropower production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1. Introduction
Hydropower has been a proven, extremely exible, and welladvanced technology for more than one century. At present, its
technology is very mature. Still, there is some room for further
improvements. Turbine efciency is likely the most important
factor in a unit. As the heart of the system, design of a turbine is
focused on this to obtain the maximum efciency. The maximum
efciency can be reached when all losses are kept to a minimum.
In general, peak efciencies of Francis turbines with modern
design tools like CFD method have enabled to achieve the range of
93% to almost 96%. The position that peak efciency occurs varies
between 80% and 95% ow. For Kaplan turbine, the position that
peak efciency occurs varies between 94% and 100% ow. Efciency loss at higher heads drops 2 to 5 percent points below peak
efciency at the design head, and as much as 15 percent points at
lower heads. For multi-nozzles Pelton turbines, the high efciency
zones are even broader due to the number of operating jets can be
varied. The position that peak efciency occurs varies between
65% and 80% ow. Crossow turbines are only used in the lower
power range. Generally, large turbine refers to single unit with a
capacity of more than 50,000 kW, and small turbine refers to unit
capacity of 100 kW to 50,000 kW. Turbines can reach high efciency under normal circumstances, but rather low efciency
during small ow rate. With total efciencies from 84% to 87%
[1], the peak efciency is a little less than that of other turbines.

19

25
25
26
26
26
27
27

For reaction runners, the peak efciency equation has the

following form:

peak A  year  specif icspeed size

where A is a constant value depending on the type of the runner;

year is the efciency change due to the year the unit was
commissioned; specif icspeed is the efciency change due to specic
speed; and size is the efciency change due to size.
This equation indicates that four parts inuence the peak
efciency. The rst one xed the base level of the peak efciency.
Based on the statistics of a large sample of data in a lot of
operating hydropower plants, A has a value of 0.9187 for a Francis
runner and 0.904 for Kaplan and axial ow runners. The difference
in the base level is 1.47%, double the 0.75 difference given in ASME
data [3]. The second one shows the difference in ages and
commissioning. The rst three parts determine the peak model
efciency. And the last one is a modication on the prototype size
and the runner throat diameter. For the details of exact peak
efciency and shape equations and scope of them could see
Gordon's paper [2].
Manness and Doering [4] developed Gordon's method, with a
large Manitoba Hydro's data. Furthermore, Manness's method
includes the effects of rerunnering turbines in his model while
Gordon's does not. The accuracy of rened model is within 72%
for an older turbine, and within 7 1% for new one.

3. Design factor affecting turbines efciency

2. Mathematical model for predicting turbine efciency
It is difcult to nd out on turbine efciency data in detail in
most paper, while manufacturers are reluctant to divulge data.
Since manufacturers regard such information as proprietary that
could compromise a competitive advantage. So in some cases it is
challenging and not exible to obtain the turbine efciency due to
time, budgetary, or other constraints. J.L Gordon [2] did a very
good job to develop a set of empirical equations for calculation of
turbine runner efciencies, taking the increase in efciency of
newer designs and deterioration since commissioning into
account. The method outlined by Gordon is a generic procedure,
with calibration factors for different turbines. The accuracy of
Gordon's method is within 73%. These equations are intended as
an aid in

 Estimating new runner performance at the feasibility study

stage and

 Estimating old runner performance where it is impractical to

undertake efciency tests or where commissioning test records
are unavailable.

At last, these equations with their plotting curves are very

useful to help understand the development of the efciency level
of turbines, and different efciency characteristics of different
types of turbines.

3.1. Introduction
The majority of the hydraulic turbine manufacturers have
reached a very high level of knowhow which enables them to
carry out hydraulically and structurally correct designed turbines.
So the value of the practically attainable overall turbine efciency
is mainly inuenced by factors such as surface roughness of
parts that are in contact with the ow, and the internal leakage
ows through the gaps between the blades and shroud. The
former means the performance of a turbine can degrade over
time, due to erosion damage, cavitation damage and weld repairs,
etc. The latter also could get worse due to erosion wear.
Fig. 1 shows a breakdown of the loss distribution within a
Francis turbine as a function of specic speed [5]. The value of
specic speed directly corresponds to the shape of the runner.
With lower specic speeds, the volumetric losses as well as losses
due to runner disk friction are very signicant. For high head
Francis turbines, the efciency due to disk friction can reach up
1.0% [6]. For higher specic speeds, the inuence of blade friction
losses and exit swirl losses in draft tube dominates and mainly
determines the level of the overall efciency. There are similar
results for other types of turbines [3]: turbine efciency is a
function of the specic speed, with both low and high specic
speed turbines having lower peak efciencies than medium ones.
At lower heads, losses in the draft tube are increasingly signicant;
at high heads, ow losses through the runner seals increase. Lastly,

20

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

Fig. 1. Loss breakdown of Francis turbines as a function of specic speed.

Fig. 2. Surface roughness impact the Francis turbine specic energy efciency.

Fig. 3. Inuence of buckets erosion on efciency of a Pelton turbine.

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

21

Fig. 4. Decay of efciency due to wear.

larger reaction turbines are more efcient than smaller ones due
to the relatively lower effect of friction in runners.
3.2. Inuence of surface roughness and wear
Scientists and engineers have long known that surface roughness on ow surfaces will rob a moving uid of energy in piping
systems. Brice and Kirkland [7] found the similar relationship
between surface roughness of the turbine components and degradation of the unit performance. Here, the surface roughness
includes the initial roughness strongly depends on the manufacturing techniques used, and the roughness which is changed by
wear or erosion. Thereby surface quality causes increased energy
losses during its operation.
The losses are increased by increased roughness due to
increased friction losses usually expressed in the head from the
worn surface and an offset from the optimum hydraulic prole.
Friction losses should be special considerable, especially in the
runner where the relative velocity is the greatest. As early as 1978,
Kurokawa et al. [8] studied the roughness effects on the three
dimensional boundary layer ow along an enclosed rotating disk
with theoretical and experimental approaches. And in 1997,
Kubota et al. [9] extracted the specic hydraulic energy deciency
from the performance diagrams of a model turbine changing the
roughness systematically to investigate the effect of surface roughness on a Francis turbine. In 2007, Krishnamachar and Fay [10,11]
synthesized analytical procedures with practical data and provided a reasonably simple computational method to obtain realistic estimates for roughness effects on the optimum efciency of
Francis turbines. Recently, Maruzewski et al. [12] studied the
specic losses per component of a Francis turbine, which were
estimated by CFD simulation. The results were performed for
different water passage surface roughness heights. The IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission), IAHR (International Association for Hydraulic Research) and their working groups collected
and analyzed vast data on both model and prototype turbines to
calculate or scale the different friction coefcients by upgrading
the scale effect formulas such as IEC 60995.
Fig. 2 shows the evolution of the specic hydraulic energy
efciency of a Francis turbine versus the sand grain roughness
height and versus the discharge [12].
The effect due to wear changing the roughness is also signicant. Truscott [13] surveyed the factors and types of wear, and
the effects of wear on performance and working life. Padhy and

Fig. 5. Blade and casing arrangement in a Kaplan turbine.

Saini [14] reviewed different causes for the declined performance

and efciency of the hydro turbines and suitable remedial measures suggested by various investigators, based on the literature
survey various aspects related to silt erosion in hydro turbines.
For impulse turbines, wear on needle and nozzle would result
in a decay of efciency and possibly cavitation, see Fig. 3 [15]. In
worn bucket, the boundary layer is thickened and disturbed due to
an increased waviness of the surfaces.
For reaction turbines, the performance of a turbine is destined
to degrade due to various reasons as years go by, shown in Fig. 4
[15]. These factors include metal loss (cavitation, erosion, and
corrosion), opening of runner seal, opening of guide vanes clearances, and increasing surface roughness. Erosive wear due to high
content of abrasive material during monsoon and cavitation is the
very important one [16].

22

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

Fig. 6. Inuence of tip clearance ows on the development of cavitation. (a) Numerical result without tip clearence, (b) Numerical result with tip clearence and Experimental
Visualization.

Fig. 7. Erosion pattern of particles of different diameters in Francis turbine labyrinth.

In the presence of particular wear phenomena, mainly three

following results will lead to the efciency deterioration:

 wear of guide vanes components with increase of clearance

between guide vanes and wearing plates.

 Surface roughness increases in the runner channels.

 Erosion on the seal rings with increase of volumetric losses.
The roughness and wear inuence each other and promote
each other.
3.3. Inuence of gap clearances on the internal leakage
Volumetric losses are mainly caused by the existence of sealing gap
and tip clearance of runners. The higher is the differential pressure
across the space, the greater is the leakage. The leakage ow
contributes negatively to the turbine performance in several ways.

 Flow loses energy through viscous losses in boundary layer as

well as in viscous mixing with the mainstream.

 Flow does not give work to the blade.

 Flow blocks the mainstream by reducing the area available for
the mainstream and increases the 3D turbulent ow due to the
unsteady leakage vortex.
Worn guide vane end clearances can contribute to a decline in
unit performance. Over years of operation with eroded end
clearances, worn stem journal bushings, and improperly adjusted
toe to heel closures, the leakage through the guide vanes may

double. The tip ow strengthens the ow detachment caused by

the strong curvature of the blades and guide vanes. This is very
harmful to the turbine. Since the ow detachment inuences the
normal guidance made by the guide vanes and blades near their
tips, thus disturbs the ow at the outlet causing decay of the
energy transformation in the runner, efciency losses and local
erosion [17]. Worse, because of wear, the gap will continually
increase between guide vanes and wearing plates, which produces
an increase of volumetric losses and vortices.
For Kaplan and bulb turbines, since the blades are adjustable,
the runner is not shrouded, there must exist a nite clearance
between them, shown in Fig. 5. The tip clearance is of the order of
millimeter, but it is one of the most inuential parts to performance of the turbines. These gaps can give rise to leakage ows,
resulting in the formation of vortices. Based on prototype measurements, the leakage loss of a Francis turbine is at about 0.5% to
1%, even if with tight seal gaps [6]. For high head units, leakage by
seal rings may affect the overall efciency of the turbine by 1% to
3% [18]. The vortex breakdown is the cause of the unsteady
ow features. These secondary ows cause elevated water velocity, shear and rapid pressure changes and low absolute pressure
levels [19]. The large pressure gradient between the noncavitation pressure side and the cavitation suction side enhances
the tip clearance ows. Downstream of the trailing edge the ow
eld is characterized by a strong local ow blockage in the tip
region. The blockage is extremely large and persistent, and
becomes the dominant single source of hydraulic loss within
the blade passage [20]. And then tip clearance cavitation takes
place in the gap between the blades and the machine casing. There

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

could be an erosion risk even though the head could be low, see
Fig. 6 [21].
The effects induced by the presence of the tip clearance do not
have a linear growth with its size. So it is important to determine
the admissible tip clearance size [22]. Okita el al. [21] found the tip
clearance ows from the pressure side to the suction side of the
blade produced the tip vortex cavitation, which affected the sheet
cavitation on the leading edge of the next blade and enhances the
blockage effect near the casing than the ows without tip
clearance. Nilsson and Davidson [23] investigated the turbulent
ow in Kaplan hydraulic turbines. They focused on tip clearance
losses, which reduced the Kaplan turbine efciency by about 0.5%.
The computations capture a vortical structure close to the leading
edge tip clearance, where the tip clearance ow interacts with the
shroud boundary and cavitation occurs. The tip blade loading
increased when the specic speed decreased.
Labyrinth seals are the primary type of seals for hydraulic
turbines, see Fig. 7 [17]. However, as a type of non-contact seal, the
space between the crown and upper cover is lled with highpressure water, which results in a high disk friction loss. Zhao et al.
[24] carried an experimental study on leakage ow in different
geometrical disk seals to state that the leakage ow rate is inverse
proportional to the rotational speed and it could be possible to
optimize disk with tilting pads to reduce the leakage loss.
The hub/tip ratio is an important parameter as it not only
controls the ow rate but also inuences the stall conditions, the
tip leakage and the ability of the turbine to run up to operating
speed [25]. Singh and Nestmann [26] concluded that a larger hub/
tip ratio yielded lower runner losses. However, there is no clear
guidance on hub/tip diameter ratio. Without universal formula,
the ratio is determined through a review of empirical methods, e.g.
Nechleba [27], Durali [28] and Wright [29].
3.4. Others
Hydropower plants often get lots benet from air admission or
air injection [3032], because which smoothes out the annoying
high-frequency components of noise and vibration. In addition,
aeration sometimes removes ow instability by manipulating the
hydraulic transmission behavior in particular lowering the draft
tube natural frequency [33]. However, few research works have
been published about the effect of ow aeration on turbine
efciency. Energy losses due to aeration increase with the relative
air ow rate. Parts of results on efciency losses due to aeration
have been collected in connection with tests aiming at increased
tail water oxygen content [3436]. Depending on design, it is
necessary to add inserts in the draft tube. These structures
obstruct the ow and cause additional drop in efciency. Such
additional loss may be avoided if air can be admitted through the
shaft bore or head cover [33].
3.5. Discussion
The presented results show that disk and gap losses play a big
part in low specic speeds. So there is the highest potential for an
efciency improvement in the region of low specic speeds. All
efforts aimed at an improvement of the surface quality and wear
protection of wet surface of components will cause a gain of
efciency. Furthermore, it is worthy to reduce the clearance of the
sealing gaps to the smallest possible value in order to decrease the
volumetric losses.
It is mentioned that the conditions of the surfaces as well as the
sealing gaps will decay by the time of operation. So it makes sense
to check these parameters at reasonable intervals during the
lifetime of a turbine.

23

4. Performance testing
CFD methods, talked about in next section, provide the turbine
designer with powerful tools for achieving highly efcient hydraulic
turbine designs. However, CFD techniques cannot be in accordance
with the true nature very well, especially in complex physic
environment. CFD methods still require ne-tuning with test
results. Turbine performance test parameters typically include:
generator output, turbine ow rate, headwater and tailwater elevations, inlet head and discharge head. There are two kinds of tests in
hydraulic turbines, one is model test and the other is eld test.
4.1. Model tests
Model test is an important element in the design and development phases of a new turbine. It will verify the performance of a
given turbine design. It is necessary for determining performance
over a range of operating and for determining quasi-transitory
characteristics. Model test can also be used to eliminate or
mitigate problems associated with cavitation, hydraulic thrust,
vibration and pressure pulsation. A standard for model testing of
water turbines is International Standard IEC-60193. In general IEC60193 applies to any type of reaction or impulse turbine tested
under prescribed laboratory conditions and may accordingly be
used for acceptance tests of the prototype turbines as well. Typical
laboratory facilities include [37]:







Water tunnels;
Depressurized umes;
Depressurized towing tanks;
Pump and turbine test loops;
Other test apparatus, i.e. cavitation erosion test.

The formula for up scaling the efciency form the model to the
prototype Francis turbine is:




2
1  m V 1  Rem =Rep
where is the rated efciency difference between the prototype
and the model, m is the efciency of the model, Rem, Rep is the
Reynolds numbers of the model and prototype respectively, V is
the scalable part of the losses, and is exponent. For Kaplan
turbines, the value of V is different.
There is a debate in the extrapolation of model test results to
prototype values. In principle, based on the similarity laws, various
scaling formulas can be used to estimate prototype values (i.e.
discharge, speed, power, etc.) from model tests. In fact, too many
factors can lead to the prototype real value different from those
calculated by scaling formulas. The essential reason is that all of
losses lead to efciency will change in prototype machine. Osterwalder and Hippe [38] made attempts to set out diagrams
permitting a quick determination of efciency scaling. Bachmann
el al. [39] proposed some methods to predict the prototype
efciencies. The IEC-60913 thought losses could be classied into
two categories based on whether those losses depended on
Reynolds number. For reaction turbines, friction losses are mainly
dependent on the Reynolds number provided that ow conditions
are hydraulically smooth. Because the Reynolds number of the
model, referred to the reference diameter of the machine (or to a
characteristic length of a component), is usually smaller than that
of the prototype, the ratio of friction losses to total losses for the
model becomes larger than the corresponding ratio for the
prototype. Therefore, in most cases, model efciency is somewhat
lower than prototype efciency. Because of two-phase ow in the
turbine housing, the efciency of impulse turbines (e.g. Pelton
type) may be strongly inuenced by the Froude number.

24

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

Therefore, IEC-60913 recommends, for impulse turbine model

tests, to choose a specic hydraulic energy which satises the
Froude similitude. Standard JSME (Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers) S008 also summarized the viscous losses [40]. It thought
loss distribution factor was function of the specic speed, while it
was constant in the IEC-60193 for each type of machine.
The unsteadiness, not mentioned by various standards, exactly
makes different contributions on losses. Actually, this is a very
important feature because a ow must be unsteady in so complex
passages. Research in EPFL (Ecole Polytechnique Federale de
Lausanne) group conrmed that ow unsteadiness disturbed the
boundary layer in Francis turbines [41,42]. Li [43] in his PhD thesis
did an experimental investigation of head loss of oscillatory ow
in a rectangular. The head losses increase with the amplitude of
the oscillation and the frequency, which means ow unsteadies
may also lead to additional viscous losses in turbulent ows. So
when and how the scaling formulas take these losses into account
need more research.
4.2. Field tests

some differences from their model, which alter their performance.

No matter model or eld tests, the core problem is to develop a
high accuracy method to ascertain performance by measuring ow
rate, head, and power, from which efciency may be determined. A
major difculty resides in the accurate determination of the ow
rate. Work should be concentrated methods of measurement,
testing procedures, and methods of calculation. Another problem
is to develop high accuracy correction and extrapolation principles. Every reasonable effort shall be made to conduct the test as
close as possible to specied operating conditions in order to
minimize deviation corrections. And the study of the various
models of the energy conversion associated with all kinds of
losses is help to reduce the extrapolation deviation.

5. CFD method for promoting the research and design

The ows in turbine system are almost invariably turbulent.
The development and interaction of boundary layers and separation of boundary layers cannot be completely analyzed theoretically. To predict the behavior of uids in turbulent ow,
computational uid dynamics (CFD) based on turbulent models
of uid behavior can provide better visual solutions of ows and
valuable data. The design calculations for attaining the highest
possible efciency and the optimization are done on a computer
with CAD and CFD approaches. Expect for design stage, before
upgrading or rehabilitation, tests are carried out to determine the
efciency to reveal that the current efciency of the turbine is
indeed lower than expected. This is necessary to refurbish the
units. However there is no way to verify if the new turbine meets
the performance improvement before which is really manufactured. Nowadays, with CFD technology, engineers are able to
simulate the new one at required operating zone, including the
ow as the water passes through the intake, penstock, spiral
casing, stay/guide vanes, the runner and draft tube. With CFD,
plants and manufactures can save large money from the expensive
tests and lots of physical modications. From last few decades, the
vast number of applications by the CFD method in engineering has
proven this approach is an important help to designers and
operators. Even then, models must still be designed and tested
before a prototype machine can be built.

The previous section has told a truth that though a good result
got in model test, there is no guarantee that the prototype
machine is an accurate reproduction of design. Besides, ow
conditions, intake head losses, water quality, the effect of operating other adjacent units, etc., cannot be analyzed in model tests.
For these reasons, eld performance tests will often be performed
once prototype machine is installed. Field tests are also performed
for commission a site and for various problem-solving activities.
However, eld tests also cannot take the place of model tests.
Some conditions, such as severe cavitation and maximum runaway speed, can be simulated in model tests, but seldom tested in
a prototype. The factors leading to difference between model test
results and eld test results include: efciency step up, powerhouse head determination, site differences, manufacturing differences, deection differences and wear [44]. International Standard
IEC-60041 and ASME PTC 18-2011 describe the basic procedures
and code-accepted measurement methods.
There are several different types of eld tests which serve
different purpose: the absolute efciency and the relative efciency. The former is measured for acceptance or performance
tests, more complex, more expensive, commonly tested once;
while the latter is measured when operating information or netuning of turbine performance is desired. The difference is
whether the discharge is measured absolutely or in relation to
some other known parameters.
The absolute methods include: the velocityarea method by
means of current-meters or Pitot tubes, the pressuretime method
(Gibson method), tracer methods either by transit-time or dilution
measurement, standardized thin-plate weirs, standardized differential pressure devices, and volumetric gauging. In addition the
acoustic method also is optional. Moreover, the thermodynamic
method of efciency measurement permits discharge to be
obtained as a derived quantity from efciency, specic energy
and power measurements.
Relative methods such as the WinterKennedy method, nonstandardized differential pressure devices, non-standardized weirs
or umes, certain simple forms of the acoustic method or local
velocity measurement with a single current-meter may be used to
obtain a relative value of the discharge or even an absolute value if
they are calibrated in situ by comparison with an absolute method.

The numerical ow simulation in draft tube is one of most

difcult and least reliable. Workshops [45,46], such as Turbine 99,
validated the computational method and parameters, and examined the accuracy of draft tube ow prediction. The Swiss EPFL
[47] continued the research on the draft tube ow analysis. They
compared the measurement data of the pressure recovery of the
model of FLINDT Francis turbine with CFD predictions of all
different FLINDT partners. After few years' effort, the prediction
of the pressure recovery with the CFD approach seems reliable
under clean and precise modeling only. Pan [48] simulated a
hydro-turbine system provided by Waterpumps Oy, Finland. With
the CFD method, they found the turbine system efciency is
increased by 1.5% and the draft tube pressure recovery factor is
increased by 4.03%, by introducing Vortex Generators into the
draft tube.
Up to now, CFD prediction of draft tube ow is still an
open issue.

4.3. Discussion

5.2. Cavitation research by CFD

Usually the performance of large turbines is determined rst in

model tests. However prototype turbine installations always have

Turbines show declined performance after few years of operation, as they get severely damaged due to various reasons. One of

5.1. Improving pressure recovery in draft tube

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

the important reasons is erosive wear of the turbines due to

cavitation. Reaction turbines, however are more prone to cavitation especially Francis turbines where a zone in the operating
range is seriously affected by cavitation and considered as forbidden zone. Cavitation is a phenomenon which manifests itself in
the pitting of the metallic surfaces of turbine parts because of the
formation of cavities [49]. Few years ago, the CFD method
generally identies cavitation risk by evaluating zones of pressure
below vapor pressure in computed ow elds with a single-phase
model. Its major disadvantage is that the effect of a cavitation
bubble on the ow eld is neglected. Perhaps this approach is
adequate in most cases. But it cannot provide more information
such as the effect of cavitation on the efciency or a more accurate
prediction of the extent of a cavitation bubble. The CFD method in
two-phase simulation has to be carried out. The most powerful
model is the RayleighPlesset two-phase ow model. This
approach is being used for modeling the formation and decay of
vapor bubbles. So it can enable a more accurate prediction of the
cavitation zone and the associated drop in efciency. Wu et al. [50]
simulated the unsteady cavitation turbulent ow in a Francis
turbine using the RANS method and the improved mixture model
of two-phase ows. Necker and Aschenbrenner [51] calculated a
two-phase ow including cavitation model in a horizontal shaft
bulb turbine, and Szantyr et al. [52] analyzed the tip vortex
cavitation with experimental and numerical methods. All of their
work got good results in validation of the CFD approach compared
with the experimental data. The predicted size and position of the
vapor zone is found to be in very good agreement with the
observation. There is still more work needed in the prediction of
the related rise and sharp drop in efciency with decreasing the
Thoma number [53]. Kumar and Saini [49] gave a very comprehensive and systemic review on cavitation in hydro turbines.
5.3. CFD in tip clearance
Flow simulation in tip clearance needs a ner grid scheme in
the boundary layer. Sell [20] simulated the tip clearance affect on
the ow eld in a turbine blade row. The static pressure distribution indicated that care had to be taken in the selection of
appropriate downstream boundary conditions for the computation
of the unusual ow features. Liao et al. [54] analyzed the internal
ow in a Kaplan turbine runner with the Triangle Acute Clearance.
Control of the leakage ow by modifying the blade tip shape has
been the main subject for much research [55]. Actually cavitation
easily occurs in the tip clearance, so two-phase cavitation model
should be taken into account in the CFD approach. Okita et al. [21]
numerically analyzed the inuence of the tip clearance ows on
the unsteady cavitation ows in the 3D inducer. Because of
cavitation feature and boundary layer effect, further research is
needed.
5.4. Prediction of erosion in hydraulic turbines
State of the art CFD methods are employed to further understand the mechanics of hydro-abrasive erosion and, in particular,
to design erosion-resistant hydraulic proles [56]. At present, the
computerized methods successfully predict the region of maximum wear and can somewhat mitigate the erosion by rening
hydraulic design and exact type and position of protective coatings
needed [57].
5.5. CFD in off-design
Boundary layer separation can be negligible when a turbine is
operating near its design point, and the dominant ow characteristics in the ow passages can be calculated by CFD. These

25

calculations can lead to new runner design having signicantly

higher efciencies than older designs. However, one of the most
challenges for CFD is that off-design ow characteristics cannot be
calculated with condence. Since boundary layer separation
occurs and leads to highly complex ow patterns that defy
accurate description.
The ow at the draft tube inlet is characterized by a strong
swirl in a certain range of off-design operation. This is a very
popular focus on CFD simulation in off-design. The strong pressure
pulsations and rotating vortex can even damage the draft tube and
make a sharply drop in efciency. Paik et al. [58] calculated
incompressible swirling ow in a typical hydroturbine draft tube
unsteady Reynolds-averaged NavierStokes (URANS) simulations
and detached-eddy simulations (DESs). Their method could capture the onset of complex, large-scale instabilities in the ow,
including the formation of a precessing spiral rope vortex, and
yield mean velocity proles in reasonable agreement with measurements, and Stein et al. [59] found that the CFD simulation of
the draft tube requires great care with respect to turbulence
model. Because of the strongly curved ow paths and invalid of
the assumption of isotropy, the Reynolds stress models, Large Eddy
Simulation or similar approaches should be applied instead of
two-equation turbulent models. Draft tube vortex simulation with
a two-phase approach using the RayleighPlesset model, which
require huge computational grids for an accurate simulation, is a
serious challenge. Here too, more work is needed.
5.6. Discussion
Using CFD simulation provides not only better energy conversion efciency by improved shape of turbine runners and guide/
stay vanes, but also leads to a decrease in cavitation damages at
high head plants and reduced abrasion effects when dealing with
heavy sediment-loaded propulsion water. So in hydraulic turbine
eld, CFD is becoming a powerful tool, but requires validation
versus smartly designed and executed experiments as well as
profound knowledge in uid mechanics. CFD is good, but not
excellent enough. There is a lot work needed, in particular the offdesign simulation.

6. Efciency improvement in turbines

Large turbines are close to the theoretical efciency limit when
operated at the best design point. But this is not always possible.
Further and continued research is needed to make more efcient
operation possible over a broader range of ows. At the same time,
most of the existing units will need to be modernized during the
next three decades, allowing for improved efciency and higher
power and energy output by retrotting new equipment. CFD is an
important tool, making it possible to design turbines with high
efciency over a broad range of discharges. Improving operation
and reducing the cost of maintenance of equipment by new
techniques (e.g. articial intelligence, neural networks, fuzzy logic
and genetic algorithms) is also an innovational approach [57].
Generally speaking, based on the actual problem, there are two
types of approaches to improve the hydraulic turbine's efciency,
better structural design or optimization and surface improvement.
6.1. Better design or optimization
Through experimental and numerical data accumulated, optimizing the hydraulic performance of turbine components is more
and more easy and automatic. There is a great technique and
market potential for units modernization. Since the older ones
were not optimum design within the limitations of their

26

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

contemporary technology. Replacement of stator and/or rotor

proled machinery parts with new ones can increase the efciency. For example, just minor modications to the stay/guide
vane system could result in operation efciency which increases to
0.5% or more. These optimizations are easily studied in a CFD
model and/or physical model. The blade proles rening, even a
partial renewal, can increase much more efciency than other
components modication. More twisted blade in 3D space, such as
X-type blade for Francis turbines, in some cases can improve over
5 percent points than the very old units. Tip leakage cannot be
avoided. The technique that tends to reduce the tip leakage losses
has the objective to decrease the tip gap mass ow rate. A detailed
review of the various aspects of axial turbine tip clearance leakage
ow is given by the VKI Lecture Series 2004-02 [60]. Reducing the
negative effects of the tip leakage is generally referred to as tip
desensitization. The desensitization methods include active and
passive methods [55]. The latter is the major form in hydraulic
turbines. The passive control is simple, practical, and effective,
through modifying the blade/tip shape to control the leakage ow.
These blade tip geometries are squealer tips and winglets or tip
chamfering.
6.2. Improve the surface performance
Grinding, coating or painting the wet surfaces can rene the
roughness and improve the wear resistance in surface. And it is
also good to maintain and extend life of these structures.
Reducing the surface roughness of the penstock interior (i.e.
minimize frictional resistance) will help reduce the head loss
through the system, by using new coating materials. Some new
technology coating, such as silicone-based fouling release systems,
not only improve surface roughness but also can limit organic
buildup [61,62]. And another method is taking the innovative
containment principles and permeability control measures in pipe
design and construction to minimize water leakage through the
rock mass. CFD technology yields more accurate penstock hydraulic designs for hydrodynamic loading limiting head loss and
reducing water hammer effects. Paish et al. [63], Maher and Smith
[64], Alexander and Giddens [65] provided in depth guidance on
optimizing the penstock design for hydro systems.
For Pelton turbines, in order to keep the performance, sufcient
the coating of needles and nozzles is relatively inexpensive and
helpful for preserving the quality and the compactness of the jet.
For Francis turbines, the conditions of component are quite more
complex than Pelton. Coating of stationary/rotating seal rings,
guide vanes including their wearing plates, and inlet and outlet
edges of the runner can keep turbine in good performance. In
some cases, eld tests found that efciency may improve 0.1% to
0.8% comparing pre-coated versus post-coated performance [66].
Applying the new materials is another useful way to improve
the surface performance. Use suitable proven materials such as
stainless steel and the invention of new materials for coatings to
manufacture the components of turbines to maximize the resistance to erosion, abrasive wear and cavitation, and to extend
lifespan. If the sediments contain hard minerals like quartz, the
abrasive erosion of guide vanes, runners and other steel parts may
become very high and quickly reduce efciency or destroy
turbines completely within a very short time [56]. New solutions
are being developed by coating steel surfaces with a very hard
ceramic coating, protecting against erosive wear or delaying the
process.
6.3. Improvements to hydropower production
High-efciency or cost-effective operation requires attention to
both the individual turbine performance and the entire system

characteristic. Sometimes engineers pay more attention to the

instant demands of the turbine. As the supplementary introduction of the efciency improvements of turbines, ways to increase
the value of hydropower were discussed here briey.
Compared to fossil, nuclear, wind, and other renewable energies, hydropower resources have the exibility and cost advantages. But that does not mean hydropower is immune to
restrictions on operation. Attempting to maximize prot to safeguard the future of the facility, hydropower facilities must satisfy a
number of environmental and operational constraints. Some of
these constraints on hydropower operations include: [67] (1) limitations in maximum and minimum water output which can vary
by season, time of day, abnormal events such as ooding and
drought, and environmental and regulatory policies; (2) facility
restrictions such as the vibration of equipment as turbines ramp
up and ramp down, optimizing efciency to ensure maximum
return of investment, and minimum and maximum generator
production limits; and (3) electrical considerations such as over
voltage and under voltage conditions and market prices that
ensure that the hydro facility is still protable. For more details
on the specic water constraints experienced at hydro facilities,
please refer to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory report from 2012
[67].
From the Energy Department, the Electric Power Research
Institute's (EPRI) report [68], outlining key improvements can
provide more efcient and cost-effective electricity to homes and
business in the United States. Efforts during this study have
addressed operational, market, business, and policy considerations
in valuing hydropower. A compact and simple review of this report
and the original version can be found on the website of U.S.
department of energy. This report identies and assesses the
quantiable benets from potential improvements, such as installing turbines that can operate with lower water levels, utilizing
new power plant designs that can increase revenue and efciency.
This study looked at improvements that could boost the efciency
and output of hydropower plants. By deploying new hydropower
technologies, making operational improvements, utilizing hydropower's exibility more in grid resource planning, and monetizing
the energy storage capability of pumped storage, hydropower
plants could reach their largest revenue and efciency increases.
Here are some key ndings from the report [68]: (1) relying more
heavily on hydropower to address changes in electricity supply
and demand could provide more exible reserve power options
and reduce wear and tear on conventional thermal-generating
equipment; this could translate to a 40% increase in the total
annual value of hydropower. (2) Expanding the effective operating
range of hydropower unitsby reducing the minimum amount of
water needed to use the turbines stablycan increase the production value of plants by 60%. (3) Designing and implementing
cutting-edge plant designs that allow pumped storage to provide
grid services while pumping water would result in an 85% increase
in production value. (4) Treating pumped storage units as a unique
asset class would allow the creation of alternative business
models that could make investment in pumped storage more
attractive by integrating with variable renewables.

7. Conclusion
Efciency, reliability, and maintenance of hydraulic turbines are
most important for the economy and safety of hydropower.
However, basic knowledge of design and maintenance is required
to select the best equipment for a safe operation with highest
possible production. This paper reviewed a set of empirical
equations replaced of full database which is almost impossible to
get from different manufactures. It denes the peak efciency and

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

shape of the efciency curve as a function of the commissioning

date for the unit, rated head, rated ow and other main design
parameters. The informed selection and use of turbines can benet
from the application of these equations.
The presented results show that disk and gap losses play a big
part in low specic speeds. So there is the highest potential for an
efciency improvement in the region of low specic speeds.
Furthermore, it is worthy to reduce the clearance of the sealing
gaps to the smallest possible value in order to decrease the
volumetric losses.
Testing and CFD are the most two important tools in different
design stages. Work should be concentrated methods of measurement, testing procedures, and methods of calculation. Another
problem is to develop high accuracy correction and extrapolation
principles to specied operating conditions in order to minimize
deviation corrections. Modern CFD ow analysis, FEA for engineering in manufacturing have signicantly improved turbine efciency and production accuracy. The next step is to improve
turbine performance at off-design heads/discharges and to
improve range of operating heads/discharges. With the help of
the test validation, fast, well-calibrated CFD methods for design
will be automatized to a higher degree, and improve the off-design
operation simulation accuracy.
Now the peak efciency of turbines based on hydraulic design
is almost reaching the theoretical limit. Optimization of the
hydropower systems considering various factors will make more
promising than purely optimization of structures. In future, optimization of operation, mitigating or reducing environmental
impacts, adapting to new social and environmental requirements
and more robust and cost-effective technological solutions are
more and more important. Such as variable-speed turbines, matrix
technology, sh-friendly turbines (e.g. Alden Turbine), hydrokinetic turbines, or hybrid windhydropower turbine systems, etc.
with the application of new technologies, the new styles of
turbines are more efcient and environmentally friendly, and
can compete with traditional designs.

Acknowledgments
The rst author is grateful to the China Scholarship Council
(CSC) for nancial support to study in University of Toronto. And
this work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation
of China, China (No. 51279083).
References
[1] Tridentes Energy. CROSSFLOW Turbine. http://www.tridentes.com/energy/
en/turbines.html2012.
[2] Gordon J. Hydraulic turbine efciency. Can JCiv Eng 2001;28:23853.
[3] ASME Hydro Power Technical Committee. The guide to hydropower mechanical design. Kansas City, USA: HCI Publications; 1996.
[4] Manness J, Doering J. An improved model for predicting the efciency of
hydraulic propeller turbines. Can J Civ Eng 2005;32:78995.
[5] Drtina P, Sallaberger M. Hydraulic turbinesbasic principles and state-of-theart computational uid dynamics applications. Proc Inst Mech Eng C
1999:85102.
[6] Brekke H. Analysis of losses in hydraulic turbines. In: Proceedings of the 18th
IAHR symposium. Valencia, Spain; 1996. p. 294303.
[7] Brice T, Kirkland J, Authority TV. Checking turbine performance by index
testing. Knoxville, USA: Tennessee Valley Authority; 1985.
[8] Kurokawa J, Toyokura T, Shinjo M, Matsuo K. Roughness effects on the ow
along an enclosed rotating disk. Bull JSME 1978;21:172532.
[9] Kubota T, Takami Y. Effect of surface roughness on hydraulic performances of
Francis turbines at optimum operating point. In: Proceedings of the 5th Asis
international conference on uid machinery. Seoul, Korea; 1997.
[10] Krishnamachar P, Fay A. KAPLAN TURBINE RESEARCH - effect of surface
roughness on losses and performance of Kaplan turbines. Int J Hydropower
Dams 2008;15:102.
[11] Krishnamachar P, Fay A. OPERATION & MAINTENANCE the effects of surface
roughness. Int Water Power Dam Constr 2007;59:2831.

27

[12] Maruzewski P, Hasmatuchi V, Mombelli H-P, Burggraeve D, Iosn J, Finnegan

P, et al. Surface roughness impact on Francis turbine performances and
prediction of efciency step up. Int J Fluid Mach Syst 2009;2:35362.
[13] Truscott G. A literature survey on abrasive wear in hydraulic machinery. Wear
1972;20:2950.
[14] Padhy MK, Saini R. A review on silt erosion in hydro turbines. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2008;12:197487.
[15] Cateni A, Magri L, Grego G. Optimization of hydro power plants performance
importance of rehabilitation and maintenance in particular for the runner
proles. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on hydraulic
efciency measurements. Milan, Italy; 2008.
[16] Tong D. Cavitation and wear on hydraulic machines. Int Water Power Dam
Constr 1981;2:3040.
[17] Mack R, Drtina P, Lang E. Numerical prediction of erosion on guide vanes and
in labyrinth seals in hydraulic turbines. Wear 1999;233:68591.
[18] Nigam P. Handbook of hydroelectric engineering. Uttarakhand, India: Nem
Chand & Bros; 1985.
[19] Spring N. Fish-friendly hydro turbine. Power Engineering 2010;114:48.
[20] Sell M, Treiber M, Casciaro C, Gyarmathy G. Tip-clearance-affected ow elds
in a turbine blade row. Proc Inst Mech Eng A 1999;213:30918.
[21] Okita K, Ugajin H, Matsumoto Y. Numerical analysis of the inuence of the tip
clearance ows on the unsteady cavitating ows in a three-dimensional
inducer. J Hydrodyn Ser B. 2009;21:3440.
[22] Pereiras B, Castro F, el Marjani A, Rodrguez MA. Tip clearance effect on the
ow pattern of a radial impulse turbine for wave energy conversion.
J Turbomach 2011;133:041019.
[23] Nilsson H, Davidson L.. A numerical comparison of four operating conditions
in a Kaplan water turbine, focusing on tip clearance ow. In: Proceedings of
the 20th IAHR symposium on hydraulic machinery and systems. Charlotte,
USA; 2000.
[24] Zhao W, Nielsen TK, Billdal JT. An experimental study on leakage ow in
different geometrical disk seals. J Hydrodyn Ser B 2010;22:3815.
[25] Dixon SL. Fluid mechanics and thermodynamics of turbomachinery. Boston,
USA: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2005.
[26] Singh P, Nestmann F. Experimental investigation of the inuence of blade
height and blade number on the performance of low head axial ow turbines.
Renew Energy 2011;36:27281.
[27] Miroslov N. Hydraulic turbine their design and equipment. Paque, Checoslovakia: Artia; 1957.
[28] Durali M. Design of small water turbines for farms and small communities.
Cambridge, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1976.
[29] Wright T, Gerhart P. Fluid machinery. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press;
2013.
[30] Nukunishi K, Uedo T. Air supply into draft tube of Francis turbine. Fuji Electr
Rev 1964;10:8191.
[31] Mishra S, Singal S, Khatod D. A review on electromechanical equipment
applicable to small hydropower plants. Int J Energy Res 2012;36:55371.
[32] Doerer P. Design criteria for air admission systems in Francis turbines. In:
Proceedings of the 13th symposium on IAHR section hydraulic machinery,
equipment, and cavitation. Montreal, Canada; 1986.
[33] Drer P, Sick M, Coutu A. Flow-induced pulsation and vibration in hydroelectric machinery. London, UK: Springer; 2013.
[34] Harshbarger E, March P, Vigander S. Effect of hydro turbine air venting
on generating efciency, dissolved oxygen uptake, and turbine vibrations.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Norris (USA). Div. of Air and Water Resources;
1984.
[35] Papillon B, Sabourin M, Couston M, Deschenes C.. Methods for Air Admission
in Hydro Turbines. In: Proceedings of the 21st IAHR symposium on hydraulic
machinery and systems. Lausanne, Switzerland; 2002. p. 912.
[36] Bosioc AI, Susan-Resiga R, Muntean S, Tanasa C. Unsteady pressure analysis of
a swirling ow with vortex rope and axial water injection in a discharge cone.
JFluids Eng 2012;134:081104.
[37] Gulliver JS, Arndt RE. Hydropower engineering handbook. New York, USA:
McGraw-Hill; 1991.
[38] Osterwalder J, Hippe L. Guidelines for efciency scaling process of hydraulic
turbomachines with different technical roughnesses of ow passages.
J Hydraul Res 1984;22:77102.
[39] Bachmann P, Eichler O, Meier W, Zanetti V. Methods actually used and
proposed for prediction of prototype efciencies based on model tests. In:
Proceedings of the 14th IAHR symposium, sect, on hydr mach, equipment and
cavitation. Trondheim, Norway; 1988.
[40] Cervantes MJ, Gustavsson LH. Unsteadiness and viscous losses in hydraulic
turbines. J Hydraul Res 2006;44:24958.
[41] Ciocan GD, Avellan Fo, Berca EL.. Wall friction measurements: application in a
Francis turbine cone. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2002 Joint US-European
uids engineering division conference. Montreal, Canada: American Society of
Mechanical Engineers; 2002. p. 31722.
[42] Farhat M, Avellan F, Seidel U. Pressure uctuation measurements in hydro
turbine models. In: Proceedings of the 9th international symposium on
transport phenomena and dynamics of rotating machinery. Honolulu, Hawaii,
USA; 2002.
[43] Li P. An experimental investigation of velocity distribution and head loss of
oscillatory ow in a rectangular duct with sand roughness. Trondheim,
Norway: Norwegian University of Science and Technology; 2004.
[44] Sheldon L. Field testing and optimising efciency of hydro turbines. Water
Power Dam Constr 1982;34:228.

28

X. Liu et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 51 (2015) 1828

[45] Andersson U, Dahlbck N. Experimental evaluation of draft tube owa test

case for CFD simulations. In: Proceedings of the 19th IAHR symposium on
hydraulic machinery and systems,. Singapore; 1998.
[46] Cervantes M, Andersson U, Lvgren H. Turbine-99 unsteady simulations
validation. IOP conference series: earth and environmental science: IOP
Publishing; 2010. p. 012014.
[47] Avellan F. Flow investigation in a Francis draft tube: the FLINDT project. In:
Proceedings of the 20th IAHR symposium on hydraulic machinery and
systems. Charlotte, North Carolina, USA; 2000.
[48] Pan HC, Hong SL. Improving the efciency of a hydro-turbine system by vortex
generators. Adv Mater Res 2012;354:63641.
[49] Kumar P, Saini R. Study of cavitation in hydro turbinesa review. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:37483.
[50] Wu Y, Liu S, Dou H-S, Zhang L. Simulations of unsteady cavitating turbulent
ow in a Francis turbine using the RANS method and the improved mixture
model of two-phase ows. Eng Comput 2011;27:23550.
[51] Necker J, Aschenbrenner T. Model test and CFD calculation of a cavitating bulb
turbine. IOP conference series: earth and environmental science: IOP Publishing; 2010. p. 012064.
[52] Szantyr J, Flaszyski P, Tesch K, Suchecki W, Alabrudziski S. An experimental
and numerical study of tip vortex cavitation. Pol Marit Res 2011;18:1422.
[53] Keck H, Sick M. Thirty years of numerical ow simulation in hydraulic
turbomachines. Acta Mech 2008;201:21129.
[54] Weili L, Xinwen T, Xingqi L.. Analysis of internal ow in the Kaplan turbine
with the triangle acute clearance. In: Proceedings of 2010 international
conference on mechanic automation and control engineering (MACE). Wuhan,
China: IEEE; 2010. p. 515255.
[55] El-Ghandour M, Mori K, Nakamura Y. Desensitization of tip clearance effects
in axial ow turbines. J Fluid Sci Technol 2010;5:31730.
[56] Gummer JH. Combating silt erosion in hydraulic turbines. Hydro Rev Worldw
2009;17:2834.

[57] IPCC. Hydropower. International panel on climate change. Geneva, Switzerland; 2011.
[58] Paik J, Sotiropoulos F, Sale MJ. Numerical simulation of swirling ow in
complex hydroturbine draft tube using unsteady statistical turbulence models.
J Hydraul Eng 2005;131:44156.
[59] Stein P, Sick M, Drer P, White P, Braune A. Numerical simulation of the
cavitating draft tube vortex in a Francis turbine. In: Proceedings of the 23rd
IAHR symposium on hydraulic machinery and systems. Yokohama, Japan;
2006.
[60] VKI Lectures Series 2004-02. Turbine blade tip design and tip clearance
treatment. Brussels: von Karman Institute; 2004.
[61] Atlar M, Glover E, Candries M, Mutton R, Anderson C. The effect of a foul
release coating on propeller performance. In: Proceedings of the international
conference on marine science and technology for environmental sustainability
(ENSUS 2002). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: University of Newcastle upon Tyne;
2002.
[62] Candries M, Anderson C, Atlar M. Foul release systems and drag. In: Proceedings of the PCE. Antwerp, Belgium; 2001.
[63] Paish O. Small hydro power: technology and current status. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2002;6:53756.
[64] Maher P, Smith N. Pico hydro for village power: a practical manual for
schemes up to 5 kW in hilly areas. London, UK: Intermediate Technology
Publications; 2001.
[65] Alexander K, Giddens E. Optimum penstocks for low head microhydro
schemes. Renew Energy 2008;33:50719.
[66] Mesa Associates INC., ORNL. Best practice catalog-Francis turbine. Hydropower advancement project; 2011. p. 126.
[67] Smith M, Starke I, Snyder B. Case study: hydropower constraints on OSAGE
and TAUM SAUK facilities. Knoxville, USA: Oak Ridge National Laboratory;
2012.
[68] EPRI. Quantifying the value of hydropower in the electric grid: nal report.
U.S. Department of Energy; 2013.