THE 4TH ASIAN INTERl(ATIOl(AL

COl(FERENCE ON FLUID MACHIl(ERY

CONSIDERATIOIV OIV EFFECTIVE HEAD IN CROSS-FLOW WATER TURBINE

T. Kitahora, J. Kulokawa
Yokohama National University, Japan

T. Toyokura
Syounan Industry UniversitY, Japan

It is necessary to supply air into a runner chamber in a cross-flov turbine installed

vith a draft tube, which is different from any other type of vater turbines. Turbine
efficiency changes depending on the supplied air flovrate, and therefore, the efficiency
calculation becolBes more complicated than that of the other water turbines.
As a turbine perfotmance is largely influenced by the behaviour of air volume, it is
still difficult to prcdict overall performance from each component perfornance. Here ve
propose an effective head and recirculation loss by vhich the overall performance of a
cross-flow turbine can be predicted for various operating conditions. And the hydraulic
losses are studied experimentally by changing a nc,zzle installation, a net head and a
runneir dialBeter.

1. Introduction overall efficiency fro,n each component

performance.
Cross-=flov turbine usually used in In order to determine the method of
the middle head range is inexpensive predicting the overall efficiency of a
and the efficiency decrease in lav cross-flov turbine from the knovn effi-
flovrates can be prevented by dividing ciency of each component, the experi-
the axial width of a runner-and-nozzle mental study is performed using se-veral
passage into two parts[l]. conbinations of a runner-and-nozzle and
The authors have studied abol!t a a draft tube.
cross-flov turbine in order to apply it
into lower head range, and the optimum 2. SYmbols ,
configuration and the optimum operating
H

condition vere elucidated very

in a ver low net head ( measured from free
-

head range[2]. . .
In calculating the efficiency of a p.
surface of outlet tank )
pressure in runner chamber
n d

reaction type turbine, the net head efficiency

determined by subtracting the velocity runner diameter
head at the draft tube outl･et from the e* nozzle installation angle
total head at the turbine inlet is Q. vater flovrate
usually used. On the other hand, in the Q. air flovrate ( at the normalized
case c*f an impulse type turbine, the condition )
b

total head at a nozzle inlet from the passage vidth

intersection point between the jet Subscript
e

center line and the runner pitch circle runneLL exi t

c

is used. These are both based on the runner center

idea that the net head is the receiv-
able vater energy.
In calculating the efficiency of
a cross-flov turbine installed with a
draft tube, the same method as a
reaction type can be used. However, the
draft tube efficiency of a 'cross-flov
turbine is lov especially in the high
head Tange because of the air supply
into a casing for the purpose of avoid-
ing collision of flov against a runner
shaft, and accordingly the overall tur-
bine efficiency is largely dependent
on the height and the cfficiency of a
draft tube.
Even if the performance of a runner
-and-nozzle is knovn, the combined per-
formance betveen a runner-and-nozzlc
and a draft tube･is much different, and
it is still difficult to predict the
367
3. Tes Ap aratus and "ethod
Fig. I shovs the experimental apara-
tus of a cross-flov turbine model. In
the turbine A the inlet pipe and the
nozzle are horizontally installed,
vhich is often used for the a,iddle head
range. The turbine B is vertically
installed, vhich is suitable for lov
head range[3]. In the turbine D the
runner-and-nozzle is similar to that of
the turbine B･･lbut is reduced to 25134.
The runner-and-nozzles tested vere
confirmed to have good performances
vhen installed in the turbine A, and
thcir detailed configurations are shovn
in Fig. 2. As･ the runner diameter of
the turbine D is different from the
other two, and the runner vidth b is
 h'
IAi'
lvt t e l

IAt f
lllel t,
Itillt ¥ ,,

l
tttttt tttll l･tltt It tt, ,

l: C]ttbtf

/
i

,)
( 4¥¥-

,
'b"'
I,tt,,

t
L'b
'L' ,P1
,Itl',t
' NIL

h
G･td, ･il,

_/;
ll J t,,Iff _l .
j r,
,,,
s,,
tls !

l
,,s

i
,

, t
'I'

t
I tt j

i
l
i

i
ii

i
,,,

t ,
i,'

t t
. t , l' Iss
,,ft ,,t,

,
,
, I

ii i
i
,
I
ii
t Df," t,,C

t
ii

I
t
I

t
U]i, Il

B
Turbine A Turbine Tur b i n-e D
Pig. I Experimcntal Apparatus

elongated to 150mm in order to obtain

the 'same frowrate as the turbine B. Thc

6'
height from the free surface of the

4
outlet tank to the runncr center is .--. L--*
"(r:f e' Cuide

/
same and 1120mm for all turbines testc,d.
'l
f "''bc ,aAc

,
'l
The draft tubes of thc turbines A ' Io : e
,
,. ,b,

and B are dcsigncd bascd on thc cxperi- ¥ -･-･- ! - ,..

l
160 e
mental resultsC4] to havc optimum per- t,ttt :
cifclc !
formances at Q./Q-=5%. In this air of f9aRcf!
,rl!.

supply condition, thc vater level in

Ua t t :ataa

Nozzl e
the runner chamber is equal- to the
height of thc runner bottom, and this
condition is knovn to have good per- Rt7O
formance for the case of middlc head
rangc. The shape of the draft tube in Rlta. a

the turbinc D is determined based on

'L

the measured results of the turbine B 1･-

in vhich the m*'ximum efficiency was cl. h:

"'F
/
obtaincd at the ratio of Q./Q_=0.5%. Rl. 6
R.6
The bottom of each draft tubc is
submerged 100mm decp into thc water, Unit : at'8

its horizontal p0Sition is adjustcd to

a
v

Runncf ne
the optimum one, and chamber valls are
inclined so that tfic vater enters into Fig. 2 D e t a i l'e d
Dimensions of
the draft tube smoothly. Turbines A, B
The guide vane installed in thc
nozzle passage., vhich can rotatc and
control the flovrate, is kept full open
E'

during the present study. Shaft power i

?

f '
is measured from thc strain gauge typc Q. .d

torque meter by adding mcchanical loss. ,.

:::

The net head is calculated by adding 0.6 Q*

the static pressure head at the nozzle 0,6
I

entrance, velocity head, and thc hight o.s

of the pressure tap from thc vatcr o.s
level of the outlet tank. 0.4
o.4
4 Ex erimental Results and Discussions 0.3
0.3
(1) Method of performancb calculation -0.2
. 0.2
of runner-and-nozzle m 'lltl'

The performance of the turbine D is o .o a

shovn against a rotational spccd in Fig. o
3 vhen the draft tubc is not installcd. ;O .O 4
In this case, the frec surfacc or the
jet from the nozzle is faced io thc Fig. 3 Performancc .of- Turbine D
atmospheric pressure. The curvcs of (runner-and-nozzle)
368
  1 0
efficiency  η 。  and  shaft power P are
貸 RunΩer D ΦCedefol璽o“ICO“hl
seen to  changO  parabolaically．  Here，
the  net  head  量1。  is  defined  as the OCo重lcI olI”ao『
0。9
紅eightof thecenterof the runnerfrom ●C““冨ol ll“Cl o“1“

SfSn
aO・−a
thewaterleve1、oftheoutlet tank OL”‘l ol．n”“
isロsuallyロsed’ nthedetermination 0。8
a runner efficiency． Tぬe flo暫一  rate
seen  to  de．crease  a  little  暫ith
0．7
increaseintherotationalspeed．
    In  t恥e  follo響ings，  the cha織ge
       in
 t轟e performances at the  maxim匙2m
    cffi−
0．6
 ciency point  is  describcd by  changing 0 4 8     12     16
 an opcrating condition． To  begin
    with，               H！d
 a’clear dctermination of thc ” effective Fiε，．4  Kfffciencies based  on  several
駐ead噌is very important， because
      tねe definitio縮s of the effective ぬead
tロrbineefficie醜cy is largely  dependent
 on the difinition as sho響n in Fig．4，
       in
 》hich the efficiencis of thc runner−and Nozzlo oxi皇       l
 −nozzle in the turbinc  D  is sho皆n
      for CO魯IC‘          9 『O昌OC『 co81cr
 the different definitibns of the
   effcc−                 i      り
 tive head。  Four kinds of the  effective                 i    属
             ！’一マー”＼、
 head are compared， they arc the  heights              ／。 ！  、
                2   、
at the nozzle exit cehter，the
    runner             ’  1  も
       りし     ロ ロ    ほ  ロ      り ヨ りゆりじ
 center （ conventional net  head ），
      t翫e             冠！ザ   ノ
            ・、∫1 9ノ
runneT exit， and the bottom of       the              、．      ．！
 rUnner．  ”ere， 鱒the nOZZle eXit
  center99               、→・一響
                2
 is the center’of the nozzユe  exit
    Cぬan−
      Slr￠amHacl
neユ・ at  the  runner periphery， and
      the
               i『墾旦脅o『 oxi竃
鱒runnerexit薩 is determined by
   simply
aSSum三ng a  representatiVe  stream
     line Fig． 5 Definitionof『effective head
passing  through  the  nozzle center
       as
sho■n in Fig．5under theassu叩tion
       of
！腎

aa  infinite number of runner vanes，
       no 0
slip condition and straight stream
     line Rロ踊Cf  A

 i“side the r““ner〔5〕． Φc8盈le『ll川：1‘“山1
0。9
    From Fig．5it isclearly recognized 0C“1“ol”IB屡
 that the efficiency based on the
   effec− ●Cg““lll““1“““
 tive head  of the ”runner exit”
  change s 0．8 OLa1“oll”“1
1ittユe over  the  耀hole net・head
   range．
器o胃ever，  the  effic三ency  based on
      the
”r纏nner center”  or  the  ”nozzle
     exit 0。7
center” changes largely in the loΨ
     head
range． This isbecauseFtheflo響
    gives 0．6
energy to the runner vanes notonly
       in
0 4 8       12
    H／d
the  entrance half but also in the
     exit
half，and tわe effec・tiveぬeightof
      the Fig．・6
Efficieacies  based  on  several
    runner  eXit  iS taken into
  account defi！1itions of the effective head
onlyinthecaseof”r観n臓erexit齢．。
    From  t為e  above−mentioned
   resロユts，
the 齢runaer exit”・height shoロ1d
        be
adopted  for  the definition of the
       ef−
TUfbioc B 丁懸rblocD
fective head instead of tbe conveηtion− Wnぬo讐l d r a f l l u b c
ヤal net head， asitdependslittle
        on 67．1 74 5
ごhe installation condition（轟eight
        of Wi星』 d r a臼  1讐b c
61．1
the 額et head）ワ 70．2
    Theaboveadopted definition of   the Table 1 Comparison   of   efficiencies
effective  head  is further examined
    to calculated fro皿 effective head
    confir皿  the  validity  and the
   ef一
ficie“cies are co耐pared三nFig．6  響hen
the nozzle instanationangleand    the difinition of tbe ”runner exit陶 is used．
runner diameter are cbanged． As     is
This might becausedby thechangein
sho響nin Fig。・6，theefficiencyis   also free  s“rface  configuration inside．the
seen to be almost cohstant for   the runner chamber， as  the  Froude  Ωumber
variation of the net head 響hen    the cぬangesd腿etoaverylo冒．velocity．
effective  head  based  on thc  ” runner
exit貿 is used、Here。inFigs．5and    6 （2） lnflu●nco of 『unn6『 di．am●t●r on亀h●
．theefficiency curve changesa 1ittle ●fficioncy
inavery lo冒 headrangc，evenif
   t新c
   The efficiency of a  。runner。and一

369
nozzle is illustrated in Tablc l, in
vhich that of the turbinc B is 67. IX O. l
Runncr B
for the case of II./d=5.8. This value is :3
:s
7.4X Iover than that or the turbine D

O
･hich has a smaller runner diamctcr.
This is mainly .caused by a leakage loss
at the - clearance betveen the runner o 0= 1 80'
e e=230'

1
side vall and the casing, as the clear- -O.

O
O

l
ance in both sides is 1..5mm and 1.0alm O.s
in the turbine B, vhile in the turbine x/b
D it is 0.75mm and 0.25mm, respectively'.
The aspect ratio of the runner in the 0.1
turbine B is smaller than that in the :a
:
Ruonef D
turbine D, and therefore the loss per

O
unit flovrate becomes larger. According
to StepanoffC6], the efficiency di ffer-
ence betveen both turbines amounts to o 6= 1 8 O'
about 3X. e 0=230'

1
-O

1
To clarify the cause of the effici- 'O Q. S .O
ency difference, the transverse veloc- x/b
ity distributions vere measured by a
Pitot probe inserted at O. 03d dofn- F'ig. 7 Energy distribution at the runner
stream of the runner exit. The energy outlet
distribution are compered for' the tur-
bines B and D in Fig.7, in vhich Ma, is
the product of angular moment u and

o
l.
angular veiocity a, , and x is the
distance from the side vall. It is
1'
¥,,
recognized that the flov leaves th_e

o
O.
1

runner vith higher energy in thc runncr '

B than in the runner D, and the visual-
O.

ized flov shoved that the turbulence of

C

vater is larger in the runner B. This

O.

uight be because the influence of

S

e
secondary flov near ･the vall betomes ¥
O.

relatively larger in the turbine B due 85F

4

Sjx
to a small aspect ratio, and because
e.

the runner vane thickness is not simil e=

3

1'
ar. ¥,

4
O.

(3) Overall performance of turbine with

2

draft tube 2
O.

Overall pcrfora,ances of turbines

l

vith runner-and-nozele and draft tubes

e

are compared vith.each cou]ponent per-

formance in this section. :¥

Perfor,Dance curves are shovn in Fig. a

¥O. 2 Is8
8, in vhich the net head l, is taken as a 1
O.

the height from the free surface of the O. 8 ¥

I

c
outlet tank as is usually used. The
,

supplied air flovrate is controlled so te 20

that the runner chamber pressurc is
30
10 oSO Ce
'l'
d/ll f p" ' d"
kept constant(-12kPa). The vater level
in the runner chaa:]ber measured from the Fig. 8 Overall performance curve
bottom of the runner is also shovn in
the figure.
The difference ' effici-
of maximum
ency in both turbines is about 9X. Oi Air
Considering that the air pressure in- dH
Vatef lllef
!

side the runner is nearly equal to ･that

,

in the .runner chamber, the effective / * '-.

i '¥
.¥.

! e':
!

net head H. can be calculated by the

,
i

folloving equation. .-.- ･ -

c

Effective net head: H.=11.-p./p g '(1)

t.
¥

The efficiencies recalculated using the

.l

¥¥ i ../
above equat'ioh become necessarily vorse
i

. *.-

than that using the net head, and are

¥
,

coatpared in T8ble l. The efficiency of

the turbine installed vith a draft "tube Pig. 9
F l'o v
inside runner
37 O
is seen to bc lover than that vithout a
draft tube. The reason in consi'dered as
follovs.
The vater flovs into a runner from 1'o.04

B
a nozzle and leaves out of the runner ¥. Turbine
at the runner exit, as shovn in Fig. 9. o.Q3
About a half part of the runner is
filled vith air, but near the tip
region of vanes betveen the air and the o.Q2
vater the vater is involved and forms a Tufbinc D
tater layer as shovn･ in the. figure, O. O]
because the pressure in the runner H=2. 97m
chamber is a little higher than that in

o
the air region inside the runner. Nov
putting the thickness of vater layer as -llO -'o -70 -SO-30 e-lO
d e g.
c, as shovn in Fig. g, the folloving
equation of momentum balance is deduced Fig. lO yater layer Thickness as a
considering the pressure, the centri- function of O
fugal force,' and the vane vork, and
assuming that c((d:
d6?i c2
2 _ Ap
a cu2(_ tan,e
ua) -d )cde (2)
',f:r ¥ ･ F!=1:'
a,
I "
"
r

''

p
l'
llerc. O : angle mcasured from thc upper
edge of thc runncr. Ap : prcssure
differcnce betwcen thc watcr layer and 5 .
- ' !"!L"';:._:1(;.'

the air, u : peripheral velocity. P :

vanc outlct anglc.
h¥ ..
Je.

The vater layer thickness c is cal-

t),

culated for thc turbines B and D, and a "t. .,e. '

is plotted in Fig. 10 as a function of "' b
".
, !;:f.-.
! . ,
e . Vith an increase in the depth from
the water surfacc thc vatcr entcrs ¥."
"* ':
'
:(',:lyt ; _ ,

dceper into thc runncr, which increascs ' '1:: .:;- i

･ !･( :db:..-
'.""':-..'. '. . '
it ' '

the vater layer thickncss c. Undcr the . . " ' - /1 i..., .". '{!r;:#;c"/:/,L.._
sao]e net head condition the rotational ,.. .

speed is smaller, and the thickness L ; ' ..' 't( ( a.$ _ i:c t;
becomes largcr in thc turbipe B than in l
the turbinc D, and hcnce the re-enterd
vater volumc is larger in thc turbine D. *
: "
. .::1J

The runner gives the angular mo- ,,+.,

IBentum to the re-enterd watcr. Assuming rig, I I Photograph of flov around

that the angular momentum givcn to the runner
re-enterd water layer becomes torque
loss, the lost head ( we call this as
the 'recirculation loss') can be pre-_
dicted. The efficiency decrease thus
calculated amounts to 2. 3 % in the
turbine B and 1.7 in the turbine D. e' Q S
Hovever, this value is much smaller 60 E"
o.
coa,pared ･ith the measured efficiency
difference shovn in Table l. -lO 20
This might be due to the under- :
.
estimation of the vater laycr thickness O ..8
l"

c because of the assumption of infinite

vane number. To measure the real thick- ,
ness of the vater laybr is very difri- 0.7
cult, and the photograph of the flov
betveen vanes is illustrated in Fig. Il 0.6 ･,

for the case of the turbine D. The R

vater betveen vanes are seen to be gas- o :::
liquid multi-phase floll, and from the oO. 1 O .7 5 J-
'g
photo the maximum vater layer thickness '
ratio 2c/d can be roughly measured to O
O

be about O. l, vhich is about 2,5 t.imes

8

the calculated value in Fig. 10.

12 H/d 1 6
In order to establish the ovcrall
efficiency of a cross flow turbinc from Pig. 12 Comparison of performance
371
the efficiency of a runher-and-nozzle,.
the measured overall efficiency is coo]-
pared vith the predicted efficiency in
Fig. 12 from the runner-and.-nozzle ef-
ficiency. The runner chamber pressure
is also compared for the case of the
turbine D.
'
loss proposed here. It is recom,nended
to adopt an effective net head instead
of the conventioned net head in
predicting the overall turbine perfQrm-
ance.
Acknovledgement

n the figure, the efficiency(shovn

by e) obtained by using the net head The Authors vould vish to acknovl-
from the free surface of outlet tank is edge T. Xubota (Kana ava Univ.) for his
compared vith the one (shovn by O ) helpful advice, and vish to acknovledge
using the effective head given by Eq, Fuji Electric company for a]anufacturing
(1). The efficiency based on the free experioental apparatus.
surface of the outlet tank is almost
constant against the net head H. Hov- RefGrendes
ever, the efficiency based on the
effective net head Hn decreases vith.an tl] Kubota.T.. Vater Turbine for Lov
decrease in H. Considering that the Head, Journal of JSXE,83-735,B(1980),p.
recirculation loss increases largely 1509
vith a decrease in the net head due to [2] Toyokura,T., et al. Study on'Cross-
the decrease of rotating speed, the flov Turbine, Trans. of JSUB, 51-461. B
overall eff-iciency of a cross flov ( 1985-1), p. 143
turbine should decrease vith a decrease C3] Toyokura,T., et al, Study on Cross-
in the net head, though the runner-and- flov Turbine ( Further Report. Appli-
nozzle efficiency is kept constant. cation for Lov Head. Trans. of JSXE,53-
Accdrdingly the efficiency curve de' 49 l. B( 1987-7), p. 2078
neted by O is considered to given real [4] Toyokura,T.,et al,Vertical Diffuser
efficiency of cross flov turbine. Performance vith Gas-liquid Tvo-phase
The predicted efficiincy curvc is Flov,Tran. of JSME,51-470.B(1985-lO),p.
also plotted by the dotted line in Fig. 3376
12, in vhich the vater layer thick.ness [5] Kitahora,T., Toyokura,T.. Proc. of
c is treated as 2.5 times the.calcu- The 23th Symp.of 'Turbomachinery Society
lated value as mentioned before. The of Japah, (1989), p. l
predicted curve agrees very vell vith [6] A.J.Stepanoff.Centrifugal and Axial
the one using the effective net head Pump, (John Viley & Sons, 1948)
over the vhole range.
5. Conclusion
The cross-flov tu rbine is exper i-
mentally studied, and the main 'res.ults
are summerized as follovs.
(1) The efficielacy of a runner-and-
nozzle becomes cqnstant in a vide range
of the net head by using the effective
head proposed here, vhile the effi-
ciency using a convential net head
changes largely in the lov head range.
The effective head is defined as the
head based on the height of the runner
exit.･- center, and the efficiency u.sing
this becomes almost constant in the
range that a similarity lav is consist-
ent.
(2) The comparison of tvo similar
runner-and-nozzles vith the ･different
aspectratio has revealed that the effi-
ciency of the smaller aspect ratio
runner has 7. 4X I over at the same
flovrate, because the flov is largely
influenced by the secondary flov near
the vall and the outlet flow has larger
turbulence.
(3) The overall efficiency of a cross-
flov turbine can be vell predicted
using an effective net head from the
runner-and-nozzle performance, runner
chamber pressure and the recirculation
372