# Experimental Assessment of a New Kinetic Turbine Performance for Artificial Channels

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. The Kinetic Turbine Concept and Its Open-Air Platform

^{−1}. This rotational speed is high enough to minimize the size of the electrical generator, which must be installed in the bulb of the machine. Since the nominal rotational speed of the turbine runner is much lower, the gearbox mentioned above ensures the necessary rotational speed multiplication ratio.

^{−1}at the generator side.

## 3. Experimental Setup

#### 3.1. Global Methodology

#### 3.2. Identification of Variables in Laboratory

^{−1}. The speed of the generator can reach a maximal value of 2000 rpm. The target operating conditions, corresponding to the turbine nominal conditions, are a power of 742 W for a rotational speed of 1190 min

^{−1}. As explained in Section 2, this rotational speed is high enough to sufficiently minimize the torque, and implicitly, the size of the electrical machine. The size of the electric machine is also reduced, since cooling is done with water. Power electronics are installed between the generator and the grid to allow for a variation of the rotational speed of the electrical machine and thus the turbine one. The power electronics are composed of two Emerson M700 frequency converters, one driving the generator, the other ensuring the current injection into the network. The rotational speed of the machine is the degree of freedom of the system to stay at the best efficiency point when the upstream flow velocity varies, thus keeping a constant tip speed ratio.

**,**remarking that the resulting torque is considered instead of the current of the generator. A maximum value of 88% was reached for the electro-mechanical efficiency ${\eta}_{e-m}$ for a generator rotational speed of 683 min

^{−1}and a torque of 260 N·m at the gearbox output. The full load and the nominal expected operating points specified in Table 1 are indicated respectively with a blue and a grey dot on the 2D electro-mechanical efficiency hill-chart.

#### 3.3. Identification of Variables on Site

## 4. Pilot Site

#### 4.1. General Description

^{3}/s. The underground hydroelectric plant is equipped with three vertical-axis Kaplan turbines, which recover the hydraulic power from 34 m to 42 m head. The flow exits the draft tubes by three tailrace tunnels directly connected with the tailrace canal. The latest, as illustrated in Figure 7, presents a regular trapezoidal cross section over about 600 m before reaching again the natural course of the river. Finally, the open air testing platform was installed in the upstream side of the downstream bridge, an implantation location that ensures an optimal testing condition over the whole year independent of the power plant operating mode [17].

#### 4.2. Flow Pattern

## 5. Performance Measurements

#### 5.1. Influence of the Depth

^{−1}. For a depth of 1.5 m, the nominal rotational speed corresponds approximately to 70 min

^{−1}and an upstream velocity of $1.5\mathrm{m}\xb7{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, which are in the range of the expected designed nominal operating conditions. The investigated range of the upstream velocity is higher for the depth of 1.5 m explaining the extended contour plot.

#### 5.2. Influence of the Tilt

#### 5.3. Nominal Conditions of the Kinetic Turbine

## 6. Conclusions

## Acknowledgments

## Author Contributions

## Conflicts of Interest

## Nomenclature

Symbols | ||

Ac | [m^{2}] | Canal Area of the test section: 137 m^{2}. |

C_{p} | [-] | Power coefficient. |

C_{p ref} | [-] | Maximal power coefficient at no tilt and a depth of 2.5 m equal to 0.83. |

C_{∞} | [m∙s^{−1}] | Upstream reference flow velocity. |

I_{g} | [A] | Current at the generator terminals. |

N_{g} | [min^{−1}] | Rotational speed of the generator. |

N_{r} | [min^{−1}] | Rotational speed of the runner. |

P_{e} | [W] | Electrical power. |

P_{h} | [W] | Hydraulic power. |

P_{m} | [W] | Mechanical power. |

Q | [m^{3}∙s^{−1}] | Discharge. |

R^{*} | [m] | Hub-to-shroud normalized radius |

R_{r} | [m] | Runner outer radius. |

T^{*}_{CFD} | [N∙m] | Cumulated runner torque predicted by CFD normalized by the total torque. |

T_{r} | [N∙m] | Torque at the runner shaft. |

U_{g} | [V] | Generator output voltage. |

x | [m] | Upstream longitudinal distance. |

η_{g} | [-] | Generator efficiency. |

η_{e-m} | [-] | Electro-mechanical efficiency. |

λ | [-] | Tip speed ratio. |

λ_{ref} | [-] | Tip speed ratio equal to 2.2 corresponding to C_{p ref.} |

ρ | [kg∙m^{−3}] | Water density |

ω_{g} | [rad∙s^{−1}] | Angular speed of the generator |

ω_{r} | [rad∙s^{−1}] | Angular speed of the runner |

Abbreviations | ||

ADCP | Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler | |

PMSM | Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |

## References

- US Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Wind and Hydropower Technologies, Feasibility Assessment of the Water Energy Resources of the United States for New Low Power and Small Hydro Classes of Hydroelectric Plants; Tech. Rep. DOE-ID-11263; Idaho Operations Office: Washington, DC, USA, 2006.
- Khan, A.M.J.; Bhuyan, G.; Iqbal, M.T.; Quaicoe, J.E. Hydrokinetic energy conversion system and assessment of horizontal and vertical axis turbines for river and tidal applications: A technology status review. Appl. Energy
**2009**, 86, 1823–1835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yuce, M.I.; Muratoglu, A. Hydrokinetic energy conversion systems: A technology status review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2015**, 43, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Verdant Power, LLC, 4640 13th Street, North, Arlington, VA 22207, USA. October 2008. Available online: http://www.verdantpower.com/kinetic-hydropower-system.html (accessed on 12 March 2018).
- Ruopp, A.; Ruprecht, A.; Riedelbauch, S.; Arnaud, G.; Hamad, I. Development of a hydro kinetic river turbine with simulation and operational measurements results in comparison. In IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2014; Volume 22, p. 062002. [Google Scholar]
- Bertrand, O.; Duron, L.; Girard, C.; Zanette, J.; Dominguez, F. Numerical modelling of vertical-axis and transverse-flow hydrokinetic turbine in the river Loire. In Proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress, The Hague, The Netherlands, 28 June–3 July 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Betz, A. Das Maximum der theorish möglichen Ausnutzung des Windes durch Windrotoren. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Turbinewesen
**1920**, 26, 307–309. [Google Scholar] - Igra, O. Research and development for shrouded wind turbine. Energy Convers. Manag.
**1981**, 21, 13–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kirke, B. Development in Ducted Water Current Turbines; Tidal Paper; School of Engineering, Griffith University: Nathan, Australia, 2003; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Lawn, C.J. Optimization of the power output from ducted turbines. Part A J. Power Energy
**2003**, 217, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Luquet, R.; Bellevre, D.; Fréchou, D.; Perdon, P.; Guinard, P. Design and model testing of an optimized ducted marine current turbine. Int. J. Mar. Energy
**2013**, 2, 61–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Laurens, J.-M.; Ait-Mohammed, M.; Tarfaoui, M. Design of bare and ducted axial marine current turbines. Renew. Energy
**2016**, 89, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Official Website of the Swiss Federal Office for Energy. Available online: http://www.bfe.admin.ch (accessed on 12 March 2018).
- Le Potentiel Hydroélectrique de la Suisse; Swiss Federal Office for Energy (SFOE): Bern, Switzerland, 2012.
- Biner, D.; Hasmatuchi, V.; Violante, D.; Richard, S.; Chevailler, S.; Andolfatto, L.; Avellan, F.; Münch, C. Engineering & Performance of DuoTurbo: Microturbine with Counter-Rotating Runners. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2016; Volume 49, p. 102013. [Google Scholar]
- Münch-Alligné, C.; Gaspoz, A.; Richard, S.; Hasmatuchi, V.; Brunner, N. New prototype of a kinetic turbine for artificial channels. In Advances in Hydroinformatics; Springer: Singapore, 2018; pp. 981–996. [Google Scholar]
- Hasmatuchi, V.; Avellan, F.; Münch, C. Numerical Modelling of a Run-of-River Tailrace Channel. In Proceedings of the Hydro 2014, Cernobbio, Italy, 13–15 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Hasmatuchi, V.; Alligné, S.; Kueny, J.-L.; Münch, C. Hydraulic performance of a new isokinetic turbine for rivers and artificial channels. In Proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress, The Hague, The Netherlands, 28 June–3 July 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Williams, H.L. Tidal Flow Hydroelectric Turbine. U.S. Patent 7,378,750 B2, 27 May 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Kolekar, N.; Banerjee, A. Performance characterization and placement of a marine hydrokinetic turbine in a tidal channel under boundary proximity and blockage effects. Appl. Energy
**2015**, 148, 121–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**Sketch of the kinetic turbine prototype along with main characteristic lengths (lenghts in mm).

**Figure 2.**Cumulated normalized torque along the blade for nominal conditions from CFD, extracted from previous simulations, [16].

**Figure 5.**(

**a**) Assembly of the generator and gearbox in the laboratory, (

**b**) efficiency of the Permanent Magnets Synchronous Motor generator.

**Figure 7.**Tailrace canal of Lavey—full 3D CAD isometric view and photograph with the open-air platform installed in the canal toward the downstream bridge.

**Figure 8.**Resulting measured axial velocity profiles in the mid-span longitudinal section of the tailrace canal upstream of the testing platform: (

**a**) instantaneous values, averages and fitted profile; (

**b**) average and fitted profiles.

**Figure 9.**Power coefficient (

**a**) for three depths of 1 m, 1.5 m and 2.5 m for a tilt of 0° and (

**b**) for two depths 1.5 m and 2.5 m for a tilt of 6°.

**Figure 10.**Power coefficient for a tilt of 0° for three depths: 1 m (

**left**), 1.5 m (

**middle**) and 2.5 m (

**right**).

**Figure 11.**Power coefficient for different tilts from 0 to 10 degrees, for two depths (

**a**) 1.5 m and (

**b**) 2.5 m.

**Figure 12.**Power coefficient as a function of the tip speed ratio for different tilts and depths : (

**a**) for 0° and 1.5 m depth, (

**b**) for 3° and 1.5 m, (

**c**) for 6° and 1.5 m, (

**d**) for 0° and 2.5 m, (

**e**) for 3° and 2.5 m depth and (

**f**) for 6° and 2.5 m depth.

Expected Turbine Characteristics | ||
---|---|---|

Full-load | Nominal | |

${C}_{\infty}$ | $1.7\text{}\mathrm{m}\xb7{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ | $1.47\text{}\mathrm{m}\xb7{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ |

${P}_{h}$ | ${1}^{\prime}930\text{}\mathrm{W}$ | ${1}^{\prime}247\text{}\mathrm{W}$ |

$\lambda $ | $2.6$5 | |

${C}_{p}$ | $0.85$ | |

${P}_{mec}$ | ${1}^{\prime}640\text{}\mathrm{W}$ | $1\prime 060\text{}\mathrm{W}$ |

${N}_{r}$ | $86{\text{}\mathrm{min}}^{-1}$ | $74.4{\text{}\mathrm{min}}^{-1}$ |

${N}_{g}$ | $1\prime 376{\text{}\mathrm{min}}^{-1}$ | $1\prime 190{\text{}\mathrm{min}}^{-1}$ |

${P}_{elec}$ | ${1}^{\prime}148\text{}\mathrm{W}$ | $742\text{}\mathrm{W}$ |

Measured Quantity | Sensor Type | Range | Accuracy | |
---|---|---|---|---|

Reference velocity (C_{∞}) | Teledyne Workhorse 1200 kHz ADCP system | ±5 [m/s] | ±0.3 [%] of water velocity relative to ADCP | |

Electrical power (P_{e}) | Zimmer LMG670 precision electrical multimeter | 0.1000 [Vtrms] 0.32 [Atrms] | ±0.015 [%] | |

Mechanical torque (T_{r}) | NCTE 3000 torquemeter | ±250 [Nm] | ±0.02 [%] | |

Current (I_{g}) | LEM IT 60-S ULTRASTAB current transducer | 60 [Atrms] | ±0.02725 [%] | |

Voltage (U_{g}) | LEM CV 3-1000 voltage transducer | 1000 [Vtrms] | ±0.2 [%] | |

Rotational speed (N_{g}) | Heidenhain ECN 1325 encoder | 0.12000 [min^{−1}] | 2048 [ppr] | |

Water depth | Endress&Hauser Cerabat T PMC131 relative pressure sensor | 0.2 [bar] | ±0.5 [%] | |

Water temperature | Endress&Hauser Easytemp TMR31 sensor | 0.100 [°C] | ±0.1 [%] | |

Tilt | DIS Sensors QG40N-KAXYZ-12,0-AI-PT 3-axis acceleration sensor | ±12 [g] | ±0.12 [g] | |

Data acquisition and control | ||||

Teledyne RD Instruments ADCP system | - Dedicated to the values of the reference velocity | |||

NI CompactRIO 9035 controller | - Dedicated to the values of the prototype |

Optimal $\mathit{\lambda}$* | |||
---|---|---|---|

depth | 1 m | 1.5 m | 2.5 m |

0 degrees | 0.97 | 1.11 | 1 |

3 degrees | - | 1.17 | 1.16 |

6 degrees | - | 1.08 | 1.08 |

10 degrees | - | - | 1.18 |

Optimal C_{p}* | |||
---|---|---|---|

depth | 1 m | 1.5 m | 2.5 m |

0 degrees | 0.93 | 0.98 | 1 |

3 degrees | - | 1.02 | 1.05 |

6 degrees | - | 1.04 | 1.09 |

10 degrees | - | - | 1.12 |

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Münch-Alligné, C.; Schmid, J.; Richard, S.; Gaspoz, A.; Brunner, N.; Hasmatuchi, V.
Experimental Assessment of a New Kinetic Turbine Performance for Artificial Channels. *Water* **2018**, *10*, 311.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030311

**AMA Style**

Münch-Alligné C, Schmid J, Richard S, Gaspoz A, Brunner N, Hasmatuchi V.
Experimental Assessment of a New Kinetic Turbine Performance for Artificial Channels. *Water*. 2018; 10(3):311.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030311

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Münch-Alligné, Cécile, Jérémy Schmid, Sylvain Richard, Anthony Gaspoz, Nino Brunner, and Vlad Hasmatuchi.
2018. "Experimental Assessment of a New Kinetic Turbine Performance for Artificial Channels" *Water* 10, no. 3: 311.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030311