Early September and I'm well into the driest time of year. In actual fact, there has been quite a bit of rain but at this time of year it does little to augment the flow from a spring, - which is the source for my Powerspout; I'm presently running on my second to smallest nozzle and generating 136 w into the grid; I've needed to install the reduced core (i.e. 18 pole) stator to achieve this output, something which I was hoping keeping with the 42 pole stator but using rotor packing would avoid.
Dropping down through my nozzle sizes in the past months has given plenty of scope to experiment with rotor packing at each flow level and collect data about its effects. I have written before of how it increases rpm and thereby keeps the pelton operating at nearer its 'sweet spot' speed; I thought this would make for better power output but reviewing all the data has cast doubt on such an assumption.
Below is the plot of watts output to grid vs dc operating voltage. Remember I am using a WindyBoy inverter which does not use MPP tracking; it simply draws a current from the turbine which is determined by the dc operating voltage; the magnitude of that dc current is reflected in the ac watts output to grid (LH vertical axis); the dc operating voltage varies with the flow delivered to the pelton (horizontal axis). The plot shows a polynomial curve on which all the data points sit with remarkably little spread. This was something of a surprise.
It was a surprise because the data points were the result of very different operating states for the turbine; some were with rotor packing and some were not.
For each of the data points on the graph above, I also measured rpm; and for the data points arising from the lower flows, I used rotor packing to keep rpm up to above 900.
With rpm data superimposed on the above graph, using the RH vertical axis for rpm, this is the picture:
As can be seen, for those data points where rpm was kept above 900 by rotor packing, there seems to have been no obvious improvement in ac watts over the trend established by there being no packing.
But perhaps I'm being unduly negative; perhaps without rotor packing the polynomial curve would have been a straight line relationship between dc volts and ac watts, making for less output than I actually got at the low end of the plot.
What counts for me is that to the eye and the ear the turbine undoubtedly appears happier with rotor packing. I will continue with it.
...experience gained from the operation of a microhydro plant, probably of interest mostly to other Powerspout owners. At the start, in 2014, it was new and there was much to write about but as time has passed there is less. So new posts will only be written if something interesting comes along, - look below to see if there is a new post.
Friday, 9 September 2016
Thursday, 1 September 2016
Sun and water
The end of August sees the completion of the first full year of having both hydro and solar generation being harvested here where I live. In this brief post, I want to present the data.
The synergy of solar with hydro is well recognised: of benefiting from hydro in winter and solar in summer; so the pattern of yield for the two as seen in the graphs below comes as no surprise.
In the UK, the total amount of generation that can be contributed to the grid at one meter point is restricted, and although my Powerspout could never generate at its maximum at a time of the year when the solar panels were also generating at their maximum, the sizing of the solar array had to be limited to keep the sum of their peak outputs within the permitted total.
For this reason the array is less than the maximum normally allowed; it is a 3.42 kWp installation and its yield is reduced by being in a location which is not ideal, facing east-south-east (S60degE), on a roof pitch which is rather flat (30deg).
Nevertheless it does the job nicely of keeping the energy generated each month in summer up to the peaks the Powerspout reaches in winter. Totalled over a full year the hydro generates more which, considering its design rating is just 0.75 kW vs the 3.42 kW of the PV, says much for how productive small hydros working 24/7 can be.
A post script to my last blog post: I have had much interaction with NRW since writing about my 'grievances', all of it good and positive. Having been decidedly critical in that post, I just want to put on record my thanks and appreciation to all those, from the member of the board downwards, who tolerated with good grace what I wrote and are looking into some of the points I raised. Diolch yn fawr.
The synergy of solar with hydro is well recognised: of benefiting from hydro in winter and solar in summer; so the pattern of yield for the two as seen in the graphs below comes as no surprise.
In the UK, the total amount of generation that can be contributed to the grid at one meter point is restricted, and although my Powerspout could never generate at its maximum at a time of the year when the solar panels were also generating at their maximum, the sizing of the solar array had to be limited to keep the sum of their peak outputs within the permitted total.
For this reason the array is less than the maximum normally allowed; it is a 3.42 kWp installation and its yield is reduced by being in a location which is not ideal, facing east-south-east (S60degE), on a roof pitch which is rather flat (30deg).
Nevertheless it does the job nicely of keeping the energy generated each month in summer up to the peaks the Powerspout reaches in winter. Totalled over a full year the hydro generates more which, considering its design rating is just 0.75 kW vs the 3.42 kW of the PV, says much for how productive small hydros working 24/7 can be.
A finishing thought: the sun does it all ! - energy from the sun is the source of both solar and hydro generation; were it not for the sun taking water as vapour from sea level up to the sky so it can drop on the hilltops as rain, not a hydro installation in the world could work.
A post script to my last blog post: I have had much interaction with NRW since writing about my 'grievances', all of it good and positive. Having been decidedly critical in that post, I just want to put on record my thanks and appreciation to all those, from the member of the board downwards, who tolerated with good grace what I wrote and are looking into some of the points I raised. Diolch yn fawr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)