Review of the Savonius rotor's blade profile and its performance

Liu Chen, Jian Chen, and Zhouzhou Zhang

Citation: Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018);

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5012024
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/rse/10/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

A new 360° airfoil model for predicting airfoil thrust potential in vertical-axis wind turbine designs
Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 10, 013304 (2018); 10.1063/1.5011207
 JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 10, 013306 (2018)

Review of the Savonius rotor’s blade profile and its

performance
Liu Chen, Jian Chen,a) and Zhouzhou Zhang
School of Energy and Power Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and
Technology, Shanghai, China
(Received 4 November 2017; accepted 13 January 2018; published online 31 January 2018)

The utilization of urban wind energy through small wind turbines has become an
arising technology to ease the conflicts between rising energy demands in buildings
and depletion of traditional energy resources. Many studies have reported that drag
type vertical axis wind turbines have superior performance in the unsteady wind
because of their attractive features. Several review studies have been conducted on
these turbines. They mainly focused on the geometrical design parameters, the flow
patterns, the research methodology, and the wind tunnel blockage correction.
However, less research has been conducted to classify the Savonius rotor based on
the classification criterion of the blade profile and has made a comprehensive
performance comparison between different types of Savonius rotors. The blade
profile is the essential design issue for a Savonius rotor; therefore, the variation of
the blade profile will change the design parameters and affect the rotor’s
performance significantly. So, the classification based on the blade profile can not
only present the effect of key design parameters on rotor’s performance for each
blade profile easily but also obtain the functional features of different profiles and
the comparison among different profiles. Hence, in this article, we aim to
summarize the classification of Savonius wind turbines according to the blade
profile and present the development of this promising low speed generator.
Published by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5012024

I. INTRODUCTION
A rising energy demand in residential and commercial buildings has been a remarkable
energy challenge over recent decades. The energy demand in buildings far exceeds that in
industrial and transportation sectors. Thus, the contradiction between the rapidly increasing
energy demand and dwindling of fossil fuel becomes more and more serious.
Many scientists have paid their attention to finding proper alternative renewable energy and
technologies for buildings. The utilization of urban wind energy through a small wind turbine
seems to be an effective way to ease this contradiction. A lot of studies have reported that the
drag type vertical axis wind turbine can be successfully applied in building areas because of its
distinct features, such as simplicity of structure, low sensitivity of complex wind,1 power gener-
ation in low wind conditions,2 and feasible connection to electricity devices.3
In 1931, Savonius, as the first researcher in this aspect, wrote a journal paper about the
Savonius rotor and its applications.4 Generally, a Savonius rotor has two or three semicircular
buckets (blades).5 The basic configuration of a traditional Savonius is presented in the left side
of Fig. 1. Two blades of the Savonius rotor are defined as advanced and returning blades.
Figure 1 (right) shows a double- or two-stage Savonius rotor made by stacking of two rotors.
From the aerodynamic efficiency point of view, this drag-type of vertical axis wind turbine
(VAWT) has lower efficiency compared to the lift-type VAWT. But the structure of drag-type
VAWT is stronger and can resist excessive wind which may destroy other types of wind turbines.

a)
E-mail: 09900589r@connect.polyu.hk. Telephone/fax: þ86-021-55272740.

1941-7012/2018/10(1)/013306/20/$30.00 10, 013306-1 Published by AIP Publishing.

013306-2 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 1. A traditional Savonius rotor.

It is also identified as the most silent wind turbine6 and can produce power at low wind speed.
Recent research indicates that higher annual energy production at relatively low wind speed7 is a
very important feature of small VAWT operating in the urban terrain. With the unrestricted blade
material, users can fabricate a Savonius turbine on-site easily using nearby materials.8,9 In addition,
it operates at lower rotation speed leading to a less vibration.10 The aforementioned features make
the Savonius rotor a good alternative renewable power generation approach for urban terrain. A
quantitative comparison between the horizontal axis wind turbine and the Savonius rotor was made
by Menet et al.11 on the basis of the L-r criterion. They pointed out that a clear advantage is found
in the Savonius rotors considering the maximum mechanical stress acted on the blades or paddles.
Based on the documented data, the average power efficiency of a Savonius rotor is about
20%,5 which is far less than that of its lift-type counterparts and is only half of Betz’s limit.12
Therefore, many researchers have made great effort to enhance the power coefficient of the
Savonius rotor or to understand the flow mechanism using different approaches. This research
of the Savonius rotor can be classified into four areas presented in Table I. An asterisk in all
tables means that the related parameter doesn’t have a nomenclature or the related information
is not provieded. They are geometrical research, wind augmentation devices, the wind farm
study, and the flow mechanism study. The purpose of the geometrical research is primarily to
find an optimal combination of several design parameters13,14 and improve the rotor’s perfor-
mance, especially the starting torque coefficient (CTS) and the power coefficient (CP). Wind
augmentation devices are used to increase the wind speed or avoid the wind acting directly on
the returning blades. By and large, wind augmentation devices will increase the power output
and operation range15–17 greatly. However, there are some other factors which need to be con-
sidered, such as cost effectiveness, easy maneuverability, and simplicity of design.18 Moreover,
wind augmentation devices may invalidate the non-directional feature of the vertical axis wind
turbine.13 The wind farm study is mainly focused on the interaction between rotors6,19 and
reducing the power loss.20 The aim of the flow mechanism study is to understand the force gen-
eration, such as the lift and drag force21 and important flow features due to the modification of
the design parameters.22,23 Kang et al.24 conducted a review emphasizing the flow related issues
of the Savonius rotor, including the characteristics of upstream air flow, the flow pattern around
the Savonius rotor, and aerodynamic loads.
Among the aforementioned four areas, most researchers focused on the rotor’s geometry
design. The Savonius rotor has many geometrical design parameters although its structure is rel-
atively simple compared to the lift-type wind turbine. The geometrical design parameters
related to a traditional Savonius rotor can be the radius of the bucket, the rotor’s height, the
bucket number, the central shaft’s radius, the overlap ratio, the thickness of the bucket, the
radius of endplates, the shape of endplates, the rotor’s swept area, the aspect ratio, blade’s pro-
file, and so on. For the multi-stage rotor, the geometrical design parameters are the phase shift
angle, the aspect ratio of each stage, and the stage number. Table I lists these geometrical
design parameters and nomenclatures of a conventional semicircular Savonius rotor.
013306-3 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

TABLE I. The research focus of the Savonius rotors.

Research focus Name of investigation Nomenclature

Rotor geometry design Radius of the bucket r ¼ d/2

Rotor’s height H
Bucket number N
Central shaft’s radius a/2
Overlap S
Blade thickness BT
Radius of the endplate D0/2
Overlap ratio (S-a)/D
Rotor’s radius R ¼ D/2
Aspect ratio of the rotor ARR ¼ H/D
Aspect ratio of each stage ARS ¼ h/D
Stage number SN
Phase shift angle PSA
Blade profile *
Wind augmentation devices Inlet vanes *
Outlet diffuser *
Ancillary surfaces *
Wind farm study Rotor’s interval RI
Rotor’s arrangement *
Flow fields Force generation mechanism *
Flow features of the rotor *

As far as we know, many talented scholars have proposed many different kinds of novel
Savonius rotors and stated that their rotors were superior to the semicircular conventional rotors
using different research methodologies. Those novel Savonius rotors have their own identity
design parameters. Several review literatures of the Savonius rotor have been reported recently.
For example, Roy and Saha25 conducted a comprehensive review of the experimental investiga-
tions to determine the effect of the drag coefficient, lift coefficient, aspect ratio, overlap ratio,
rotor angle, number of blades, tip speed ratio, Reynolds number, and blockage ratio on the
Savonius rotor’s performance. Their team also carried out a similar review of numerical meth-
ods for the Savonius rotor.26 The review conducted by Kang et al.24 focused on the flow pat-
terns and structures near the Savonius rotor and the limitation of existing numerical and experi-
mental predicting methods. Akwa et al.27 carried out a review on the effect of the geometrical
design parameters on the Savonius rotor’s performance. The reviewed design parameters are
the endplates, aspect ratio, gap ratio, blade number, and stage of the rotor and so on. Moreover,
wind tunnel blockage correction methods for the Savonius rotor were reviewed by Ross and
Altman.28 The above reviews were mainly focused on the geometrical design parameters, flow
patterns, research methodology, and wind tunnel blockage correction.
By examining the relevant research in this field, it is found that less concern has been
shown on classifying the Savonius rotors using the blade profile classification criterion and
making a comprehensive performance comparison between different types of Savonius rotors.
However, the blade profile is the essential design issue which not only determines most of the
rotor’s design parameters but also has tremendous influence on the performance of a Savonius
rotor.
Thus, the objective of this paper is to summarize the development of this promising low
speed generator7 as well as the performance comparison based on the classification criterion
of the blade profile. Nevertheless, our emphasis is only on the rotor with two blades consider-
ing the high power output which is generally decreased with the increase in the blade
number.29
013306-4 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

TABLE II. Summary of the tested and simulated traditional rotors.

Authors Method H D D0 D S Wind tunnel RN or V CPMAX (%)

Newman32 Test 38.1 27.9 30.48 15.24 2.54 91.4  60.9 1.5  105 30
inside
Blackwell et al.33 Test 1500 952 * 500 100 4600  6100 8.64  105 25.5
inside
Saha29 Test 17.3 21.8 23.98 10.9 * 375  375 8.23 m/s 18
outside
Kamoji et al.34 Test 180–230 180–230 198–253 * 27–34.5 400  400 1.1  105 17.5
outside
Roy and Saha13 Test 230 209 230 128 25.6 500  500 1.2  105 23
outside
Torresi et al.35 Test 412 330 360 200 40.2 1000  1000 7 m/s 21
inside
Banerjee et al.36 CFD 230 209 * 116 0.2d * 6.2 m/s 28
Mao37 CFD 1000 909 * 500 91 * 7 m/s 26.7
Shaheen38 CFD 1000 1000 * 525 78.75 * 7 m/s 23
Rogowski39 CFD * 940 * 500 50 * 7 m/s 24
Kim and Cheong40 CFD 1000 * 1000 250 * * 7 m/s 23

II. THE BLADE EXTRUDED FROM THE 2D SECTION

Starting from this section, the classification of the Savonius rotor is based on the geometri-
cal and functional features of the blade profile. Generally, the blade profile can be divided into
2D and 3D profiles in light of the spatial characteristics. 2D profiles mean that the rotor’s
blades are built through the extension of the 2D section along the normal direction of a flap
endplate. The blades with three-dimensional features are defined as 3D blade profiles.

A. The blade cross-section has one unbroken curve

1. Traditional semicircular profile
The traditional semicircular profile is the first unbroken curve blade profile used for the
Savonius rotor which is applied in 1925 by Sigurd Savonius for a patent.30 It consists of two
semicircular profiles. The basic structure and design parameters of this traditional Savonius
rotor can be found in the left of Fig. 1. This design is inspired by the Flettner ship and built
through the cutting of the Flettner cylinder into half and moving sideways. Table I summarizes
most of the geometrical parameters for this rotor. Savonius made a comprehensive comparison
between 30 different rotors to find the desirable design parameters for this rotor. The highest
CP reported in Sigurd Savonius’s studies was 31%. However, a wind tunnel study conducted by
Simonds and Bodek31 in the Brace Research Institute stated that 14% is the highest CP when
the tip speed ratio is 0.7. Newman32 also studied this type of Savonius rotor at different gap
ratios in 1974.
Research works on the traditional Savonius are summarized in Table II to present the rela-
tionship between the best design parameters and the maximum CP. The unit for the size is mil-
limeter. This summary includes the experimental test in and out of the wind tunnel as well as
the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation. It is found that the CPmax values gained
from different research groups are quite different. Generally, CPmax ranges from 17% to 30%
for this type of traditional Savonius rotor.

2. Blade profile with the Myring equation

The semicircular profile has one design parameter, i.e., the diameter. A new profile
proposed by Tian et al.41 used the Myring equation to describe the blade profiles as shown in
013306-5 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 2. The blade using the Myring equation.

Fig. 2. The control parameter of the profile is the blade fullness. The Myring equation widely
used for the autonomous underwater vehicles is
"
 2 #1=n
x
y¼b 1 :
a

In this equation, n is the blade fullness, and a blade is a half-ellipse when n equals to two.
In their study, a ¼ b ¼ 0.25 m and the diameter of the rotor is 1 m, while n varies from 0.5 to 3.
The results showed that the maximum CP is 0.2573 achieved at n ¼ 1. This maximum CP is
10.98% higher than that of a semicircular Savonius rotor. They also pointed that a smaller full-
ness increases the positive CT and reduces negative CT.

3. Blade profile with different bucket arc angles

A novel bucket design proposed by Driss et al.42 can be found in Fig. 3. This new configu-
ration has several fixed design parameters, such as c ¼ 100 mm, q ¼ 100 mm, H ¼ 300 mm, and
l ¼ 24 mm. The arc angle w is the only variable parameter. Four arc angles (60 , 75 , 90 , and
130 ) are inspected through the CFD and experimental methods, and the rotor with w ¼ 90 is
a traditional Savonius rotor. This rotor was tested in an open tunnel with a test cross-section
which is 400 mm  400 mm  800 mm in size. According to the obtained results, it is concluded
that the arc angle has a great influence on the flow characteristics, especially for the depression
area that is located on the concave surface and enlarged with the growth of the arc angle. The
largest depression area is found for the rotor with an arc angle of 130 .

4. Sail profile
The Sail profile was proposed first by Govinda and Narasimha43 in 1979 aiming to reduce
the weight or increase the projected area. Fleming and Probert44 stated that sail profiles have
the advantages of lightness and flexibility compared to the rigid profiles. The sail profile is con-
trolled by the locations of rollers that are similar to the controlling points of a curve. In 1985,
Fleming conducted a comparison between five sail profiles as presented in Fig. 4. The results
stated that CP curves of profiles 1, 2, and 3 are close to each other; profile 3 gained the maxi-
mum CP among five profiles. They also found that CP of the rotor with three sail profiles is one
third higher than that of the rotor with two semicircular profiles. Generally, a rotor with two
rigid profiles is superior to a rotor with three rigid profiles in terms of CP.45
013306-6 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 3. Blade profile with different bucket arc angles.

5. Summary of the blade cross-section has one unbroken curve

Based on the above review, for the testing of the traditional Savonius rotor, CP of a tradi-
tional Savonius rotor ranges from 0.175 to 0.30. The best power coefficient was 30% obtained
by Newman32 in a wind tunnel. CP gained inside the wind tunnel is generally higher than that
gained outside the wind tunnel. It should be kept in mind that the correction methods for inside
and outside wind tunnel tests are different. From the CFD method, it is found that the highest
CP gained by Banerjee et al.36 was 28% for the traditional one. The blade profile based on the
Myring equation achieved the highest CP of 0.2573 when the blade fullness is n ¼ 1. For the
sail profile, a well-designed three-blade rotor may be superior to the two-blade rotor.

B. Subsection profile
Different from the blade profile with one curve, the subsection profile means that the blade
profile is built through several segmentations. For instance, a profile is either a combination of
a line and an arc or a small arc plus a big arc. The design parameters of the subsection profile
are richer than those of the traditional semicircular profile. Thus, each subsection profile has its
own particular design parameter.

FIG. 4. Five different profiles tested by Fleming.

013306-7 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 5. Bach’s blade profile.

1. Bach type profile

As far as we know, the Bach profile is the second common profile used for the Savonius
rotor and proposed by Bach46 six years after the semicircular profile. Bach replaced the semicir-
cular profile with a Bach profile composed of a straight line and an arc. Figure 5 presents the
geometry of the Bach type profile (Modi et al.47 and Roy and Saha13). The performance of the
rotors with Bach and the traditional profiles was compared through the Mcgill wind tunnel. The
results showed that the Bach rotor gained higher performance at lower and higher tip speed
ratio (TSR) compared to the traditional Savonius rotor. In the middle range of TSR, the
Savonius rotor is better than the Bach rotor which gained the maximum CP at TSR ¼ 0.9.
In 1986, Ushiyama et al.48 compared the performance of the rotors with Bach and
Savonius profiles. The rotor with the Bach type profile can gain the maximum CP in the gap
ratio range of 0 to 0.3. This CPMAX is 0.23 that is 9% higher than that of a rotor with a semicir-
cular profile. In order to improve the power output, Modi and Fernando49 conducted a detailed
investigation into several key geometric parameters as presented in Fig. 6. Experimental results
demonstrated that the smaller gap ratio leads to a larger power coefficient. This means that
CPMAX is gained when a equals zero. The optimal design parameters are listed in Table III.
Modi50 experimented the Bach type rotor in a boundary-layer wind tunnel which can regu-
late the wind speed from 2.5 to 25 m/s, with the blade arc angle being in the range of
110 –150 . They reported that 135 is the best arc angle and the geometric parameter of p/q
has a significant effect on CP. A further study found that the best CP is about 0.32 when
k ¼ 0.79 in the open condition.

FIG. 6. The Bach-type rotor tested by Modi and Fernando.

013306-8 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

TABLE III. The optimal design parameters for the rotor tested by Modi and Fernado.

Design parameters Values

Blade overlap b ¼ 0.1D

Aspect ratio 0.77
Blade shape factors q/p ¼ 0.2

Kamoji34 conducted an experimental study on the Bach type rotor without the central shaft.
This rotor is shown in Fig. 6. The maximum CP achieved is 0.21 when the Reynolds number is
150 000, TSR ¼ 0.69, Do/D ¼ 1.1, the overlap ratio is zero, the blade arc angle is 124 , the ratio
of height to diameter is 0.69, and p/q ¼ 0.2. CP is not only higher than that of the traditional
Savonius rotor with the shaft but also higher than that of the Bach type rotor with the shaft.
In 2013, Roy et al.51 applied numerical simulations to study the influence of the arc angle
(U) on the Bach rotor when the blade arc angle is in a range of 90 –165 and TSR varies from
0.2 to 1.4. The results showed that CP is enhanced first with the growth of the arc angle due to
the improvement of the positive moments. This positive effect will be ceased when the arc
angle is larger than 135 because the incoming free stream cannot act directly on the advancing
blade. The maximum CP value is 0.34 gained at TSR ¼ 0.8.
Zhou and Rempfer52 performed numerical simulations on the unsteady flow of a conven-
tional semicircular Savonius rotor and a Bach rotor. In their study, the overlap ratio of the rele-
vant Savonius turbine is 0.2. The leaf shape parameter and the blade arc angle of the Bach-type
rotor are 0.2 and w ¼ 124 , respectively. The two models have D ¼ 0.29 m. The wind speed of
the flows is 7.924 m/s. The results demonstrated that the Bach-type rotor is superior to the semi-
circular Savonius rotor in terms of power coefficient. The maximum CP values of the Savonius
turbine and the Bach turbine are 0.189 and 0.2635, respectively. They also found that the Bach-
type rotor has two peak points for its torque at azimuth angles of h ¼ 114 and h ¼ 294 .
These two peak values are larger than those of the Savonius rotor. They found that the gap ratio
has a small effect on the torque coefficient of the conventional Savonius rotor. But the gap
between the two straight lines influences the performance of the Bach rotor significantly.
Hence, a conclusion has been gained that the blade modification including the length of the
straight line and the arc shape may increase the performance of the rotor greatly. Table IV sum-
marizes the power coefficient of different Bach rotors studied by different research groups.

2. The Sivasegaram profile

The Bach profile consists of an arc and a straight line. However, the Sivasegaram profile55
is a combination of a small and a big curvature as presented in Fig. 7. He tested this profile
and found that the power output of the Sivasegaram profile is better than that of the semicircu-
lar profile, as long as the small curvature arc is a circular arc and the blade angle of the big
curvature lies between 120 and 150 . The design parameters of the best profile are n ¼ 2,
TABLE IV. Summary of Bach type rotors.

Author Method H D D0 p/q Arc (deg) RN or V CPMAX

Roy and Saha13 Test 230 209 230 * 135 1.2  105 0.3
34
Kamoji Test 0.7D * 1.1D 0.2 124 1.5  105 0.21
Modi and Fernando49 Test 0.77D * 0.2 135 6.76 m/s 0.36
Modi50 Test 0.77D * 0.75D 0.2 135 7 m/s 0.32
Roy et al.51 CFD * * 1.1D * 135 6.31 m/s 0.34
Zhou and Rempfer52 CFD * 290 * 0.2 124 7.924 m/s 0.263
Kacprzak and Sobczak53 CFD * 200 * 0.2 135 * 0.18
Kacprzak and Sobczak54 CFD 154 200 266 0.2 135 9 m/s 0.215
013306-9 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 7. The blade profile proposed by Sivasegaram.

h¼127 , s/R ¼ 3.11, and ns/D ¼ 2.8. Optimal CP is about 0.2. In 1978, Sivasegaram also carried
out a study on the effect of the blade number experimentally.

3. Benesh profile
The Benesh profile56–58 is composed of a straight line and two arcs. The geometric model59
is shown in Fig. 8. In 2015, Roy and Saha13 tested the Benesh profile, the improved Bach pro-
file, the traditional semicircle, and the semi elliptical rotor in the wind tunnel. Their experimen-
tal results showed that the maximum CP values are 0.29, 0.30, 0.26, and 0.23, respectively. The
maximum CP of the Benesh profile rotor is only less than that of the improved Bach but higher
than that of other rotors. The experiment also found that the starting ability can be improved
and the negative static torque coefficient can be reduced through the Benesh design, compared
to the traditional semi-circular and semi-elliptical rotors.
Rahai and Hefazi60 performed an experimental study on the two-blade rotor with and with-
out the spanwise slots when the overlap ratios are zero and 0.48 for Savonius and Benesh pro-
files. The results reported that the Savonius and the Benesh profiles reach CPMAX in the TSR
range of 0.8–1.2. CPMAX (0.31) of the Benesh airfoil is higher than that (0.27) of the Savonius.

4. Summary of subsection profiles

Many scholars carried out a comparison research between Bach and traditional profiles.
They reached a consensus that the Bach profile has a better performance than the traditional
one. The Bach profile attained its highest CP (0.36) at p/q ¼ 0.2 and arc ¼ 135 , while the high-
est CP obtained by CFD was 0.34. Apart from the Bach profile, fewer scholars compared the
Sivasegaram, Benesh, and Savonius profiles, and they found that the Sivasegaram profile got
the highest CP of 0.2. The Benesh profile was better than the Savonius one, but its best CP was
lower than the modified Bach profile according to the study.57

C. Drag reducing profile

Several profiles are defined as the drag reducing profiles based on their functional feature.
Previous researchers found that the advancing blades offer the driving force and the returning
blades are the main source of the drag force. Thus, reducing the drag force appears to be a pos-
sible way to improve the rotor’s performance.

1. Swinging profile
The drag force caused by the returning blades is one of the important obstacles that impede
the performance of the drag type rotor. The use of a Swinging blade is a novel way proposed
first by Aldoss61 in 1984 to handle this obstacle. The configuration of this profile can be found
in Fig. 9. The galvanized sheets were rolled to form the swinging blades that can rotate around
its pivots. When the incoming wind acts on the advancing blades, the rotation of the advancing
blade is hindered by the central shaft. In contrast, the returning blade can be rotated without
any interruption. This rotation reduced the drag force on the returning blades.
Two blade profiles named A-type and B-type were inspected at five different swinging
angles. They stated that the larger swinging angle results in higher power output for two kinds
013306-10 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 8. A blade profile proposed by Benesh.

of blade profiles, and the A-type profile is better than the B-type profile in terms of power out-
put. It is also observed that CPMAX for the best rotor is about 0.1, and this value is only half of
the CPMAX of the semicircular rotor.
Since then, Aldoss62 tested several Swinging blades at an average wind speed of 18 m/s.
For each downwind swing angle u (0 , 5 , 10 , and 20 ) and upwind swing angle h (20 , 35 ,
50 , 57.5 , and 65 ), the torque and rotor speed was measured. The results showed that the
flow characteristics inside the rotor can be optimized through the blade swinging, which
decreases the resistance of the wind blade and increases the thrust of the blade. The power fac-
tor of the rotor is increased to about 23.5% when the upwind and downwind blades swing to
the optimum angle of 50 and 13.5 , respectively.

2. Slated profile
Another type of drag reducing profile is the slatted-blade Savonius rotor proposed by
Reupke and Probert63 in 1991. The basic configuration is a semicircular curve. However, this
semicircular curve is divided into several pieces of slats, as depicted in Fig. 10. Each slat can
rotate around the roller. When the upcoming wind acts on the returning blades, those slats will
open and let the wind pass through. Two semicircular profiles with 8 large and 16 small slats
were compared to study the effect of the size of the slat. The tested results showed that the
idea of slats causes the performance degradation but strengthens the static torque due to the
opening of the slats in the returning blade.

3. Slotted blades
Driven by the reduction of the drag force, Alaimo et al.64 proposed a new bucket for the
Savonius rotor. The blade is slotted as shown in Fig. 11. The diameter of the rotor is 1.0 m, while
the slot position is f. The effect of the slot positions and slot gap on the starting performance was
studied at the velocity of 7 m/s. They found that the starting ability can be improved when the
slot position is less than 40%. The results also demonstrated that the slotted rotor has a better per-
formance when angular velocity is low and the slot gap has little influence on the rotor’s CP.

4. Summary of the drag reducing profile

The swinging, slated, and slotted profiles were proposed to reduce the drag force of return-
ing blades. However, the design of swing and slated profiles degraded the power coefficient.
Only the slotted profile could contribute to its performance and the starting torque performance.
013306-11 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 9. The swinging blades.

D. Airfoil or lift profile

The idea of the airfoil or lift profile maybe motivated by the lift characteristics of the
Savonius rotor or lift-type wind turbine. Generally, the TSR range of the Savonius rotor is from
0 to 2. The lift characteristics of the Savonius rotor are presented when the Savonius rotor
works at TSR > 1. Khan65 conducted a wind tunnel testing on five blade profiles including a
semicircular profile. The remaining four profiles are the NACA profile used NACA 0024 sec-
tion, an S-section profile, an inverted S-section profile, and a double rotor section profile as
described in Fig. 12. The aim of utilization of the NACA profile is to reduce the drag force.
The S-section profile is similar to the Sivasegaram profile mentioned in Sec. II B 2.
Khan reported that each rotor’s profile is related to an optimal gap ratio. The optimal tip
speed ratios for the semicircular section, NACA section, S-section, inverted s-section, and dou-
ble rotor section are (0.325, 0.9), (0.32, 0.6), (0.37, 1.1), (0.175, 1.0), and (0.3, 0.8), respec-
tively. The highest CP is gained for the rotor with the S-section profile. The NACA profile did
not reach the anticipated effect because the minimum drag is only produced at a low angle of
attack. The encouraging feature of the rotor with the S-section profile is low-speed power gen-
eration even when the wind speed equals 4 miles per hour. Table V summarizes the maximum
power coefficient of the rotors obtained from the above investigations.

FIG. 10. The cranfield slatted rotor.

013306-12 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 11. The slotted profile.

Further study of the airfoil profile was conducted by Tartuferi et al.66 in 2015 through the
numerical simulation. The profile used is the newly high camber airfoil as shown in Fig. 13.
The first blade profile is designed based on the geometry of the Gottingen airfoil, and the sec-
ond blade profile is a newly developed airfoil. The inflow wind speed is 9 m/s corresponding to
Re ¼ 2.34  105, and the k value varies from low to high. Research results showed that the two
kinds of rotors in the generator are coupled with good flexibility, and two types of blades can
use the low pressure area of the forward blade effectively to promote the rotation of the rotor
and the output power. The maximum CP values of two rotors are 0.22 and 0.25, respectively. It
is also found that the development of a airfoil blade has great potential in improving the energy
efficiency of the Savonius rotor.60

E. Profile optimized by the optimal algorithm

From the previous sections, we found that most of the blade profiles in discussion, such as
the semicircular profile, sail profile, Bach profile, Benesh profile, Sivasegaram profile, slated
profile, and slotted profile, are designed according to personal experience. Some of the research-
ers used equations to describe the blade profiles, such as the blade profile, which uses Myring
and NACA airfoil equations. Of course, the above experience profiles or equations cannot cover
all the profiles in the design domain. Fortunately, CP and CTS prediction methods have been
altered from experiment to simulation owing to the rapid development of computational fluid
dynamics (CFD). In addition, there are many robust search algorithms available. In 2011,

FIG. 12. Four profiles tested by Khan.

013306-13 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

TABLE V. Summary of the rotors with airfoil blades.

Authors Method Airfoil Dimensions D RN or V CPMAX

Khan65 Test Semicircular section 3D 305 6.05 m/s 0.325

NACA section 0.32
S-section 0.37
Inverted s-section 0.175
Double rotor section 0.3
Tartuferi et al.66 CFD SR3345 2D * 9 m/s 0.22
SR5050 0.25
Semicircular Savonius 0.253
Muscolo and Molfino67 CFD Kyozuka 3D 300 25 m/s 0.15
Bronzinus 300 25 m/s 0.25

Mohamed et al.16 adopted the CFD method and an advanced search approach based on evolu-
tionary algorithm (EA) to find the suitable profile of the Savonius rotor. In their study, five
points are used to control the shape of the blade profile. Two end points are fixed and three
points can be moved within a certain range as presented in Fig. 14. The coordinates of the three
points are determined through the EA aiming to gain the maximum power output. Their
research added an obstacle to avoid the upcoming wind acting directly on the returning blades.
The simulated results showed that the optimal profile can improve the power output by
38.9% at TSR ¼ 0.7. The genetic algorithm is another promising way to optimize the blade sec-
tion although more research efforts need to be done in this area.
Savonius rotors with six different blade’s curves were simulated by Sargolzaei and
Kianifar68 using artificial neural networks (ANNs). The artificial neural networks are becoming
popular because of their ability to model non-linear data. The rotors were also investigated in
the wind tunnel. It is found that the results are almost in full agreement with those obtained
from the experiment. The proposed algorithm is proved to be accurate and fast.
Overall, several research groups had adopted profile equations and searching algorithms to
design the Savonius blade profile. However, the optimal profile should be somewhere in the
entire two-dimensional space. Profile equations should have the ability of wide coverage and
less controlling points. In addition, advanced search algorithms should have the features of
robust, efficiency, and convergence.

F. Summary of 2D blade profiles

The classification of 2D blade profiles is generally based on the evolution and development
of the process. The first proposed 2D profile was the semi-circular bucket which has one unbro-
ken curve. Then, the subsection profile was proposed to enrich the design of the Savonius rotor.
Some of the researchers proved that the well-designed Bach and Benesh rotors can generate
more power than the semi-circular rotor. Next, previous talented researchers found that reduc-
tion of the drag force acting on the returning blades could be a promising way to enhance the
power coefficient of this kind of rotor. Among different drag reducing profiles, the slotted pro-
file is the only one which can improve the power output. Following the drag reducing design,
the airfoil profile was introduced to generate the lift force. Some of the CFD simulations stated

FIG. 13. SR3345 and SR5050 (50% camber) airfoil.

013306-14 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 14. The blade profile optimized by the evolutionary algorithm.

that the performance of the rotor with the airfoil profile is better than that of the semicircular
rotor. All the above 2D blade profiles were designed based on personal experience. Thus, some
of the advanced optimal algorithms were adopted to search the entire 2D space and find a
proper profile for Savonius rotors. Theoretically, the profile gained from the optimal algorithm
is superior to the above 2D profiles. The profile design based on the optimal algorithm will
become a research hotspot in the future.

III. THE 3D BLADES

The well-known 3D blade profiles are twisted and helical blades. The cross-sections or pro-
files at different XY planes are not the same for twisted blades. In contrast, the helical blade
has the same cross-sections or profiles. The detailed description can be found in sections that
follow.

A. Twisted blade
Early study of the twisted blade was tested experimentally by Grinspan et al.69 in 2001.
The twisted blade has different profiles at the upper and lower positions as presented in Fig.
15. The extruded path of the 2D section is always parallel to the central shaft. However, an
angle h is made between the inner edge of the twisted blade and the central shaft. Four rotors
(Curved profile, straight profile, aerofoil profile, and twisted blade) were studied. The best
rotor’s CPMAX of the rotor is 0.55, which is close to Betz’s limit of 0.593. Their CPMAX appears
to be overestimated. The results also showed that the starting torque can be improved greatly
by a twisted design. In 2006, Saha and Rajkumar70 studied several twisted blades. They stated
that CP of a rotor with three twisted blades could be enhanced with the increase in the twisted
angle. The optimum twisted angle is 15 , resulting in the maximum CP ¼ 0.14.

FIG. 15. The rotor with the twisted blade and the top and bottom profiles.
013306-15 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

TABLE VI. Summary of twisted Savonius rotors.

Authors Method H D D0 d Twisted angle Wind tunnel RN or V CPMAX

Saha et al.29 Test 17.3 21.8 23.98 10.9 12.5 375  375 8.23 m/s 0.19
outside
Saha and Rajkumar70 Test 220 * * 120 12.5 375  375 8.23 m/s 0.14
outside

In 2008, Saha et al.29 conducted a further experimental research on a semi-circular rotor

and a twisted blade rotor (twist angle is 12.5 ) in a wind tunnel. They studied the effect of the
rotor’s stage number. The experimental results showed that the optimal number of blades is
two. Compared to the semi-circular blade, the twisted blade has a higher CP, which is 0.19.
Table VI presents a summary of studies for twisted rotors.

B. Helical blade
Another 3D blade is the helical blade. The design of the helical blade needs the determina-
tion of the 2D profile and the angle between upper and lower profiles. Twisted blades tested by
Nemoto et al.71 in 2003 are the helical blades which can be found in Fig. 16. Five rotors with-
out endplates from (a) to (e) have the CPMAX values of 0.05, 0.51, 0.1, 0.095, and 0.125,
respectively. CPMAX of the rotor (e) with the circular endplates is about 0.175. The results indi-
cated that the larger curvature of the profile improves CP and increases the TSR range. The
helical shape and larger curvature profiles are two good features for rotor design.
In 2009, Kamoji72 built a helical rotor (Fig. 17) and tested it in a wind tunnel. The phase
shift angle between top and bottom profiles is 90 . The tested results found that the helical
shape can eliminate the negative static torque in the entire range of the azimuth angle. CPMAX
for the helical rotor without the central shaft and the gap is 0.175 which is close to that of the
semicircular rotor when RN ¼ 150 000. Among the tested rotors, CPMAX of the rotor with the
central shaft is 0.09, which is the lowest CPMAX among the tested helical rotors.
In 2009, Zhao73 studied several design parameters of a helical rotor, such as the gap ratio,
aspect ratio, size of endplates, and inner plates inside the blade. The shaft angle between top
and bottom profiles is 180 . Numerical studies found that CP of there-blade helical Savonius is
inferior to that of the rotor with two blades. The helical rotor with an aspect ratio of 6.0 is bet-
ter than those with the aspect ratios of 1, 3, 5, and 7. The helical rotor with a shift angle of
180 is superior to those with helical angles of 90 , 270 , and 360 . They also found that the
maximum CP is 0.21 for the helical two-blade Savonius rotor when e ¼ 0.3, H/D ¼ 6, and h
¼ 180 . The static torque coefficient of the helical Savonius rotor is positive.

FIG. 16. The Savonius rotor tested by Nemoto et al.

013306-16 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

FIG. 17. A helical Savonius rotor tested by Kamoji.

Lee et al.74 investigated CP and CTS of the helical rotors at different TSRs and azimuth
angles. They made four models with helical angles of 0 , 45 , 90 , and 135 , respectively. The
aspect ratio is 1.33, the overlap ratio is 0.167, and end-plates were installed. The results showed
that the maximum CP of the rotor reached 0.13 when the twist angle is at 45 and the tip speed
ratio is at 0.45 in experimental and numerical simulations. However, CP of the rotor with twist
angles of 90 and 135 is even lower than that of the rotor with a twist angle of zero. The tor-
que coefficients remained constant when the twist angle is beyond 90 . The rotor with a twist
angle of 0 achieved the maximum CT when the azimuth angle is 45 .
Damak et al.75 studied a helical Savonius turbine with a twisted angle of 180 and an
aspect ratio of 1.57 in a wind tunnel. They studied the effects of different Reynolds numbers
and the ratio overlap on their performance and their aerodynamic features. They found that CP
of the helical wind turbine is higher than that of the traditional Savonius rotor. The helical rotor
obtained CPMAX in the range of tip speed ratios of 0.4–0.45. The results showed that the helical
Savonius rotor has a better performance than the conventional one. The helical Savonius rotor
obtained its maximum CP of 0.2 at TSR ¼ 0.33, while CPMAX of a traditional rotor is only
0.16 at this TSR. They observed that the Reynolds number has a great effect on the perfor-
mance of the helical Savonius rotor, and the rotor with the overlap ratio of ¼ 0.242 is better
than that with the overlap ratio of ¼ 0.
Dıaz and Salas76 used the CFD method to study a Benesh-like rotor, a two-stage rotor, a
helical rotor, and a three-blade rotor. They observed that the four models obtained the maxi-
mum CP at the TSR ¼ 0.6. CPMAX of helical Savonius is about 0.18. CP of three-blade is the
lowest, which is about 0.07. The helical Savonius rotor torque coefficient CT ranges from 0.25
to 0.35. The classical rotor has the highest CP, while the peak to peak amplitude is the lowest
(0.15–0.25 for helical and 0.19–0.25 for 2-step).
The flow physics was studied by Deb77 through a three dimensional CFD simulation for a
two-blade helical Savonius turbine. The height of the rotor is 60 cm. The diameter of the rotor
is 17 cm, and twist angles of four rotors are 0 , 45 , 90 , 135 , and 180 . All rotors have the
endplates. It is found that at a TSR of 1.636, the maximum CP values of the rotors with angles
of 0 , 45 , 90 and 180 are 0.0709, 0.462, 0.2012, and 0.073, respectively. The maximum CP
for the rotor with a rotor angle of 135 is 0.080 at a TSR of 0.589. They also found that the
power and torque coefficients achieved are all positive. They thought that the pressure gradient
between the endplates contributes to the enhancement of the power and torque coefficient for
the rotor at the angles of 45 , 90 , 225 , and 270 .
Table VII lists the summary of studies for helical rotors.

C. Summary of the 3D blades

Both twisted and helical blades can improve the rotor’s static torque coefficients. CP of
twisted blades is less than that of the traditional one. The best CP of the twisted blade was only
013306-17 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

TABLE VII. Summary of the tested and simulated Helical rotors.

Authors Method H D D0 TSR Helical angle Wind tunnel RN or V CPMAX

Nemoto et al.71 Test 800 208 240 0.76 * 1050  1050 outside 10 m/s 0.175
Kamoji et al.72 Test 202.4 230 * 0.9 90 deg 400  400 outside 150 000 0.175
Zhao73 CFD 6D * 1.1D 0.75 45 deg * 10 m/s 0.21
Lee et al.74 Test 1.33D * * 0.45 45 deg * 10 m/s 0.13
Damak et al.75 Test 1.57D * * 0.40.45 180 deg 400  400 outside 11 m/s 0.25
Dıaz and Salas76 CFD 200 90 * 0.6 * * * 0.18
Deb77 CFD 600 170 187 1.636 0 deg 0.071
1.636 45 deg * 0.462
1.636 90 deg * 0.201
0.589 135 deg 0.008
1.636 180 deg 0.073
Ricci et al.78 Test 1000 384 422.4 0.899 105 deg 3.16 m2 8.1 m/s 0.251
79
Kang et al. CFD 1800 1125 * * 180 deg * * *
Jeon et al.80 Test 500 250 * 0.67 180 deg 1000  1500 10 m/s 0.132

0.19. For the helical blade, the static torque coefficient of the helical turbine was positive for
the entire azimuth angle. The maximum CP obtained by Deb73 for a twist angle of 45 is 0.462,
and it is better than that of other simulated rotors. An experimental test showed that the best CP
of the helical blade was 0.251.75 To date, 3D blades have been studied incompletely. The
majority of 3D blades used the 2D semi-circular profile as the cross-section. More research is
needed for the optimization of 3D blades’ cross-section profile.

IV. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

In this paper, the drag-type vertical axis wind turbines are classified based on their blade
profile. The performance and features of different types of profiles are summarized and dis-
cussed in detail. Several conclusions are gained from this comprehensive review. For the blade
cross-section with one unbroken curve, it is found that CPMAX of a traditional semicircular
Savonius rotor ranges from 17% to 30%. Hence, the Myring equation appears to be an alterna-
tive way to describe the blade’s cross-section.
For the subsection profile, CPMAX of Bach-type rotors ranges from 0.18 to 0.36 without
correction. Several testing and CFD simulation have proved that CPMAX of well-designed Bach
is higher than that of the well-design traditional semicircular Savonius rotor. CPMAX of the
Sivasegaram rotor is also higher than that of the traditional semicircular Savonius rotor. A test
comparison between Bach-type, Benesh-type, and traditional Savonius rotors found that the
maximum CP of the Benesh profile rotor is only slightly lower than that of the Bach-type rotor,
and the traditional rotor has the lowest CPMAX.
The idea of drag reducing presents a new approach to improve the performance of the
Savonius rotor. However, this review found that most of the drag reducing rotors suffer from a
decrease in the power coefficient and the complication of the construction.
In terms of the airfoil or lift profile, the tested and CFD simulation results indicated that
the airfoil section might improve or reduce the power output. More investigations are needed in
this area.
Obviously, the genetic algorithm is a promising way to optimize the blade section.
According to our review, it is found that less research has been done using advanced optimiza-
tion algorithm. Thus, more research work needs to be done in the area of profile description
equations and utilization of advanced optimization algorithm.
013306-18 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

With regard to twisted blades, it has little effect on the power coefficient of the turbine,
but it can reduce the negative range of CT by using twisted blades. However, CPMAX of the
twisted rotors is not significantly higher than that of the Savonius rotors.
Considering the helical blades, the helical rotors have a positive effect on CTS, and the val-
ues of CTS are all positive. With the help of the helical angle, the stability of the static power
coefficient becomes stronger in a certain range of angles. Simulated and tested results stated
that a well-designed helical rotor has a better performance than a traditional Savonius rotor.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work described in this paper was supported by the Shanghai Pujiang Program (No.
15PJ1406200) and the Chinese National Natural Science Funds (No. 51276116).
1
B. D. Plourde et al., “Simulations of three-dimensional vertical-axis turbines for communications applications,” Wind
Eng. 36(4), 443–454 (2012).
2
B. D. Plourde et al., “An experimental investigation of a large, vertical-axis wind turbine: Effects of venting and
capping,” Wind Eng. 35, 213–222 (2011).
3
J. P. Abraham, Small-Scale Wind Power: Design, Analysis, and Environmental Impacts (Momentum Press, New York,
NY, 2014).
4
S. J. Savonius, “The S-rotor and its applications,” Mech. Eng. 53(5), 333–337 (1931).
5
J. Abraham et al., “Summary of Savonius wind turbine development and future applications for small-scale power gener-
ation,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 4(4), 042703 (2012).
6
A. Shigetomi et al., “Interactive flow field around two Savonius turbines,” Renewable Energy 36(2), 536–545 (2011).
7
A. D. Peacock et al., “Micro wind turbines in the UK domestic sector,” Energy Build. 40(7), 1324–1333 (2008).
8
L. Valdes and J. Darque, “Design of wind-driven generator made up of dynamos assembling,” Renewable Energy 28,
345–362 (2003).
9
L. Valdes and K. Raniriharinosy, “Low technical wind pumping of high efficiency,” Renewable Energy 24, 275–301
(2001).
10
J. P. Abraham et al., “Numerical simulation of fluid flow around a vertical-axis turbine,” J. Renewable Sustainable
Energy 3(3), 033109 (2011).
11
J.-L. Menet, L.-C. Valdès, and B. Menart, “A comparative calculation of the wind turbines capacities on the basis of the
L–r criterion,” Renewable Energy 22(4), 491–506 (2001).
12
M. M. Aslam Bhutta et al., “Vertical axis wind turbine–A review of various configurations and design techniques,”
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 16(4), 1926–1939 (2012).
13
S. Roy and U. K. Saha, “Wind tunnel experiments of a newly developed two-bladed Savonius-style wind turbine,” Appl.
Energy 137, 117–125 (2015).
14
K. Kacprzak and K. Sobczak, “Numerical analysis of the flow around the Bach-type Savonius wind turbine,” J. Phys.:
Conf. Ser. 530(1), 012063 (2014).
15
W. El-Askary et al., “Harvesting wind energy for improving performance of Savonius rotor,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.
139, 8–15 (2015).
16
M. Mohamed et al., “Optimal blade shape of a modified Savonius turbine using an obstacle shielding the returning
blade,” Energy Convers. Manage. 52(1), 236–242 (2011).
17
K. Golecha, T. I. Eldho, and S. V. Prabhu, “Influence of the deflector plate on the performance of modified Savonius
water turbine,” Appl. Energy 88(9), 3207–3217 (2011).
18
S. Sivasegaram, “Power augmentation in wind rotors-A review,” Wind Eng. 10, 163–179 (1986).
19
B. Emmanuel and W. Jun, “Numerical study of a six-bladed Savonius wind turbine,” J. Sol. Energy Eng. 133(4), 044503
(2011).
20
K. Golecha, T. Eldho, and S. Prabhu, “Study on the interaction between two hydrokinetic Savonius turbines,” Int. J.
Rotating Mach. 2012, 581658.
21
Y. Murai et al., “Particle tracking velocimetry applied to estimate the pressure field around a Savonius turbine,” Meas.
Sci. Technol. 18, 2491 (2007).
22
N. Fujisawa, “Velocity measurements and numerical calculations of flow fields in and around Savonius rotors,” J. Wind
Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 59(1), 39–50 (1996).
23
D. Afungchui, B. Kamoun, and A. Helali, “Vortical structures in the wake of the Savonius wind turbine by the discrete
vortex method,” Renewable Energy 69(3), 174–179 (2014).
24
C. Kang, H. Liu, and X. Yang, “Review of fluid dynamics aspects of Savonius-rotor-based vertical-axis wind rotors,”
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 33, 499–508 (2014).
25
S. Roy and U. K. Saha, “Review of experimental investigations into the design, performance and optimization of the
Savonius rotor,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part A-J. Power Energy 227(4), 528–542 (2013).
26
S. Roy and U. K. Saha, “Review on the numerical investigations into the design and development of Savonius wind
rotors,” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 24, 73–83 (2013).
27
J. V. Akwa, H. A. Vielmo, and A. P. Petry, “A review on the performance of Savonius wind turbines,” Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev. 16, 3054–3064 (2012).
28
I. Ross and A. Altman, “Wind tunnel blockage corrections: Review and application to Savonius vertical-axis wind
turbines,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 99, 523–538 (2011).
29
U. Saha, S. Thotla, and D. Maity, “Optimum design configuration of Savonius rotor through wind tunnel experiments,”
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 96(8), 1359–1375 (2008).
30
S. J. Savonius, “Rotor adapted to be driven by wind or flowing water,” U.S. patent No. 1697574 (January 1, 1929), p. 4.
013306-19 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

31
M. H. Simonds and A. Bodek, Performance Test of a Savonius Rotor (Brace Research Institute, McGill University,
Quebec, Canada, 1964).
32
B. Newman, “Measurements on Savonius rotor with variable gap,” in Proceeding of Sherbrook University Symposium
on Wind Energy, Sherbrook Canada (1974).
33
B. F. Blackwell et al., Wind Tunnel Performance Data for Two-and Three-Bucket Savonius Rotors (Sandia Laboratories,
1977).
34
M. Kamoji, S. Kedare, and S. Prabhu, “Experimental investigations on single stage modified Savonius rotor,” Appl.
Energy 86(7-8), 1064–1073 (2009).
35
M. Torresi et al., “Performance and flow field evaluation of a Savonius rotor tested in a wind tunnel,” in ATI 2013 - 68th
Conference of the Italian Thermal Machines Engineering Association (2014), Vol. 45, pp. 207–216.
36
A. Banerjee et al., “Unsteady flow analysis around an elliptic-bladed Savonius-style wind turbine,” in Proceedings of the
ASME Gas Turbine India Conference, 2014.
37
Z. Y. Mao and W. L. Tian, “Effect of the blade arc angle on the performance of a Savonius wind turbine,” Adv. Mech.
Eng. 7(5), 1–10 (2015).
38
M. Shaheen, M. El-Sayed, and S. Abdallah, “Numerical study of two-bucket Savonius wind turbine cluster,” J. Wind
Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 137, 78–89 (2015).
39
K. Rogowski and R. Maronski, “CFD Computation of the Savonius rotor,” J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 53(1), 37–45 (2015).
40
S. Kim and C. Cheong, “Development of a low-noise drag-type vertical wind turbines,” Renewable Energy 79(1),
199–208 (2015).
41
W. L. Tian et al., “Computational fluid dynamics prediction of a modified Savonius wind turbine with novel blade
shapes,” Energies 8(8), 7915–7929 (2015),
42
Z. Driss et al., “Study of the bucket design effect on the turbulent flow around unconventional Savonius wind rotors,”
Energy 89, 708–729 (2015),
43
S. Govinda Raju and R. Narasimha, “A low-cost water pumping windmill using a sail type Savonius rotor,” Proc. India
Acad. Sci. 2, 67–82 (1979).
44
P. Fleming and S. Probert, “A proposed, three-sail, Savonius-type wind-rotor,” Appl. Energy 12(4), 327–331 (1982).
45
H. Ersoy and S. Yalcindag, “An experimental study on the improvement of Savonius turbine performance using flexible
sails,” Int. J. Green Energy 11, 796–807 (2014).
46
G. Bach, “Untersuchungen uber Savonius-Rotoren und verwandte Stromungsmaschinen,” Forsch. Geb. Ingenieurwes.
2(6), 218–231 (1931).
47
V. Modi, N. Roth, and A. Pittalwala, “Blade configurations and performance of the Savonius rotor with application to an
irrigation system in Indonesia,” J. Sol. Energy Eng. 105, 294 (1983).
48
I. Ushiyama, H. Nagai, and J. Shinoda, “Experimentally determining the optimum design configuration for Savonius
rotors,” Bull. JSME 29(258), 4130–4138 (1986).
49
V. Modi and M. Fernando, “On the performance of the Savonius wind turbine,” J. Sol. Energy Eng. 111, 71 (1989).
50
V. Modi, M. Fernando, and N. Roth, Aerodynamics of the Savonius Rotor: Experiments and Analysis (IEEE, 1990).
51
S. Roy et al., “Numerical investigation to assess an optimal blade profile for the drag based vertical axis wind turbine,” in
ASME 2013 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (2013).
52
T. Zhou and D. Rempfer, “Numerical study of detailed flow field and performance of Savonius wind turbines,”
Renewable Energy 51, 373–381 (2013).
53
K. Kacprzak, G. Liskiewicz, and K. Sobczak, “Numerical investigation of conventional and modified Savonius wind
turbines,” Renewable Energy 60, 578–585 (2013).
54
K. Kacprzak and K. Sobczak, “Numerical analysis of the flow around the Bach-type Savonius wind turbine,” J. Phys.:
Conf. Ser. 530, 012063 (2014).
55
S. Sivasegaram, “An experimental investigation of a class of resistance-type, direction-independent wind turbines,”
Energy 3(1), 23–30 (1978).
56
A. H. Benesh, “Wind turbine system using a vertical axis Savonius type rotor,” in U.S. patent US5494407 A (November
15, 1988).
57
A. H. Benesh, “Wind turbine system using a Savonius type rotor,” U.S. patent 4838757 (July 10, 1989).
58
A. H. Benesh, “The Benesh wind turbine,” in Eleventh ASME Wind Energy Symposium (1992).
59
A. Moutsoglou and Y. Weng, “Performance tests of a Benesh wind turbine rotor and a Savonius rotor,” Wind Eng. 19,
349 (1995).
60
H. Rahai and H. Hefazi, Development of Optimum Design Configuration and Performance for Vertical Axis Wind
Turbine: Feasibility Analysis and Final EISG Report (California Energy Commission, 2005).
61
T. Aldos, “Savonius rotor using swinging blades as an augmentation system,” Wind Eng. 8, 214–220 (1984).
62
T. Aldoss and Y. Najjar, “Further development of the swinging-blade Savonius rotor,” Wind Eng. 9, 165–170 (1985).
63
P. Reupke and S. D. Probert, “Slatted-blade Savonius wind-rotors,” Appl. Energy 40, 65–75 (1991).
64
A. Alaimo et al., “Slotted blades Savonius wind turbine analysis by CFD,” Energies 6(12), 6335–6351 (2013).
65
M. H. Khan, “Model and prototype performance characteristics of Savonius rotor windmill,” Wind Eng. 2, 75–85 (1978).
66
M. Tartuferi et al., “Enhancement of Savonius wind rotor aerodynamic performance: A computational study of new blade
shapes and curtain systems,” Energy 79, 371–384 (2015).
67
G. G. Muscolo and R. Molfino, “From Savonius to Bronzinus: A comparison among vertical wind turbines,” Energy
Procedia 50, 10–18 (2014).
68
J. Sargolzaei and A. Kianifar, “Modeling and simulation of wind turbine Savonius rotors using artificial neural networks
for estimation of the power ratio and torque,” Simul. Modell. Pract. Theory 17(7), 1290–1298 (2009).
69
A. Grinspan et al., “Design, development and testing of Savonius wind turbine rotor with twisted blades,” in Proceedings
of the 28th National Conference on Fluid Mechanics and Fluid Power (2001), pp. 428–431.
70
U. Saha and M. J. Rajkumar, “On the performance analysis of Savonius rotor with twisted blades,” Renewable Energy
31(11), 1776–1788 (2006).
71
Y. Nemoto, A. Anzai, and I. Ushiyama, “A study of the twisted Sweeney-type wind turbine,” Wind Eng. 27(4), 317–321
(2003).
013306-20 Chen, Chen, and Zhang J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 10, 013306 (2018)

72
M. Kamoji, S. Kedare, and S. Prabhu, “Performance tests on helical Savonius rotors,” Renewable Energy 34(3), 521–529
(2009).
73
Z. Zhao et al., “Optimum design configuration of helical Savonius rotor via numerical study,” in Proceedings of the
ASME 2009 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting(FEDSM2009) (ASME, Colorado, USA, 2009).
74
J. H. Lee, Y. T. Lee, and H. C. Lim, “Effect of twist angle on the performance of Savonius wind turbine,” Renewable
Energy 89, 231–244 (2016).
75
A. Damak, Z. Driss, and M. S. Abid, “Experimental investigation of helical Savonius rotor with a twist of 180 ,”
Renewable Energy 52, 136–142 (2013).
76
A. P. Dıaz and K. U. Salas, “Computational model of Savonius turbine,” Ingeniare. Rev. Chil. Ing. 23(3), 406–412
(2015).
77
B. Deb, R. Gupta, and R. D. Misra, “Performance analysis of a helical Savonius rotor without shaft at 45 twist angle
using CFD,” J. Urban Environ. Eng. 7(1), 126–133 (2013).
78
R. Ricci et al., “Experimental study on a Savonius wind rotor for street lighting systems,” Appl. Energy 161, 143–152
(2016).
79
C. Kang, X. Yang, and Y. L. Wang, “Turbulent flow characteristics and dynamics response of a vertical-axis spiral rotor,”
Energies 6(6), 2741–2758 (2013).
80
K. S. Jeon et al., “Effects of end plates with various shapes and sizes on helical Savonius wind turbines,” Renewable
Energy 79, 167–176 (2015).,