See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322845539

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

Article  in  Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy · January 2018

DOI: 10.1063/1.5012024

CITATIONS READS
8 1,379

3 authors, including:

L. Chen Jian Chen

University of Shanghai for Science and Technology University of Shanghai for Science and Technology
15 PUBLICATIONS   58 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   240 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jian Chen on 03 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1 Review of the Savonius rotor’s blade profile and its performance

2 Liu Chen, Jian Chen*, Zhouzhou Zhang

3 School of Energy and Power Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology,

4 Shang Hai, China

5 E-mail: 09900589r@connect.polyu.hk Telephone/fax number: +86-021-55272740

6 Abstract

7 The utilization of urban wind energy through small wind turbines has become an

8 arising technology to ease the conflicts between rising energy demand in buildings and

9 depletion of traditional energy resources. Many studies have reported that drag type

10 vertical axis wind turbines have superior performance in the unsteady wind because of

11 its attractive features. Several review work has been conducted on this turbine. They

12 mainly focused on the geometrical design parameters, the flow patterns, the research

13 methodology and the wind tunnel blockage correction. However, less research has

14 been conducted to classify the Savonius rotor based on the classification criterion of

15 blade profile and has made a comprehensive performance comparison between

16 different types of Savonius rotors. The blade profile is the essential design issue for a

17 Savonius rotor; therefore, the variation of the blade profile will change the design

18 parameters and affect the rotor’s performance significantly. So the classification based

19 on the blade profile cannot only present the effect of key design parameters on rotor’s

1
20 performance for each blade profile easily, but also obtain the functional features of

21 different profiles and the comparison among different profiles. Hence, in this article

22 we aim to summarized the classification of Savonius wind turbines according to the

23 blade profile and present the development of this promising low speed generator.

24 Keywords: Vertical axis wind turbine; Savonius rotor; Blade profile; Design
25 parameters; Performance

26 1 Introduction

27 A rising energy demand in residential and commercial buildings is a remarkable

28 energy challenge over recent decades. The energy demand in buildings far exceed that

29 in industrial and transportation sectors. Thus, the contradiction between the rapidly

30 increasing energy demand and dwindling of fossil fuel becomes more and more

31 serious.

32 Many scientists have dedicated their attention to finding proper alternative

33 renewable energy and technologies for the buildings. The utilization of urban wind

34 energy through a small wind turbine seems an effective way to ease this contradiction.

35 And lots of studies have reported that the drag type vertical axis wind turbine can be

36 successfully applied in building areas because of its distinct features, such as simplicity

37 of structure, low sensitivity of complex wind [1], power generation in low wind

38 condition [2] and feasible connection to the electricity devices [3].

2
39 In 1931, Sigurd Savonius, as the first researcher in this aspect, wrote a journal

40 paper about the Savonius rotor and its applications [4]. Generally, a Savonius rotor has

41 two or three semicircular buckets (blades) [5]. The basic configuration of a traditional

42 Savonius is presented in the left side of Figure 1. Two blades of the Savonius rotor are

43 defined as advanced and returning blades. Figure 1 (right) is a double- or two-stage

44 Savonius rotor made by stacking of two rotors.

45

46 Figure 1 A traditional Savonius rotor

47 From aerodynamic efficiency point of view, this drag-type of VAWT has lower

48 efficiency compared with the lift-type VAWT. But the structure of drag-type VAWT is

49 stronger and can resist excessive wind which may destroy other types of wind turbines.

50 It is also identified as the most silent wind turbine [6] and can produce power at low

51 wind speed. Recent researches indicate that higher annual energy production at

52 relatively low wind speed [7] is a very important feature of small VAWT operating in

3
53 the urban terrain. With the unrestricted blade material, users can fabricate a Savonius

54 turbine on-site easily using nearby materials [8, 9]. In addition, it operates at lower

55 rotation speed leading to a less vibration [10]. The aforementioned features make the

56 Savonius rotor a good alternative renewable power generation approach for urban

57 terrain. A quantitative comparison between the horizontal axis wind turbine and the

58 Savonius rotor was conducted by Menet, J et al [11] on the basis of L-σcriterion. They

59 pointed out that a clear advantage is found of the Savonius rotors considering the

60 maximum mechanical stress acted on the blades or paddles.

61 Based on the documented data, the average power efficiency of a Savonius rotor is

62 about 20% [5] , which is far less than that of its lift-type counterparts and is only half of

63 the Betz’s limit [12]. Therefore, many researchers have taken great effort to enhance

64 the power coefficient of the Savonius rotor or to understand the flow mechanism using

65 different approaches. Those researches of the Savonius rotor can be classified into four

66 areas presented in Table 1. They are geometrical researches, wind augmentation

67 devices, wind farm study and the flow mechanism study. The purpose of the

68 geometrical researches is primarily to find an optimal combination of several design

69 parameters [13, 14] and improve the rotor’s performance, especially the starting torque

70 coefficient (CTS) and power coefficient (CP). Wind augmentation devices are used to

71 increase the wind speed or avoid the wind acting directly on the returning blades. By

4
72 and large, wind augmentation devices will increase the power output and operation

73 range [15-17] greatly. However, there are some other factors which need to be

74 considered, such as cost effectiveness, easy maneuverability and simplicity of design

75 [18]. Moreover, wind augmentation devices may invalidate the non-directional feature

76 of the vertical axis wind turbine [13]. The wind farm study is mainly focused on the

77 interaction between rotors [6, 19] and reducing the power loss [20]. The aim of flow

78 mechanism study is to understand the force generation, such as the lift and drag force

79 [21] and important flow features due to the modification of the design parameters [22,

80 23]. Kang. C et al [24] conducted a review emphasizing the flow related issues of the

81 Savonius rotor, including the characteristics of upstream air flow, the flow pattern

82 around the Savonius rotor and aerodynamic loads.

83 Among the aforementioned four areas, most researchers focused on the rotor’s

84 geometry design. The Savonius rotor has many geometrical design parameters

85 although its structure is relatively simple, compared with the lift-type wind turbine. The

86 geometrical design parameters related to a traditional Savonius rotor can be the radius

87 of bucket, the rotor’s height, the bucket number, the central shaft’s radius, the overlap

88 ratio, the thickness of bucket, the radius of endplates, the shape of endplates, the rotor’s

89 swept area, the aspect ratio, blade’s profile and so on. For the multi-stage rotor, the

90 geometrical design parameters are the phase shift angle, the aspect ratio of each stage,

5
91 and the stage number. Table 1 lists those geometrical design parameters and

92 nomenclatures of a conventional semicircular Savonius rotor.

93 Table 1 The research focus of the Savonius rotors

Research focus Name of investigation Nomenclature

Rotor Geometry design Radius of bucket r=d/2

Rotor’s Height H

Bucket number N

Central shaft’s radius a/2

Overlap S

Blade thickness BT

Radius of endplate D0/2

Overlap ratio (S-a)/D

Rotor’s radius R=D/2

Aspect ratio of rotor ARR=H/D

Aspect ratio of each stage ARS=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 rotor *

94 As far as we knows, many talented scholars have proposed many different kinds

6
95 of novel Savonius rotors and stated that their rotors were superior to the semicircular

96 conventional rotors using different research methodologies. Those novel Savonius

97 rotors have their own identity design parameters. Several review literatures of

98 Savonius rotor have been conducted recently. For example, Roy, S and Saha, U, K [25]

99 conducted a comprehensive review of the experimental investigations to gain the effect

100 of the drag coefficient, lift coefficient, aspect ratio, overlap ratio, rotor angle, number of

101 blades, tip speed ratio, Reynolds number and blockage ratio on the Savonius rotor’s

102 performance. Their team also carried out a similar review of numerical methods for the

103 Saovnius rotor [26]. The review conducted by Kang, C et al [24] focused on the flow

104 patterns and structures near the Savonius rotor and the limitation of existing numerical

105 and experimental predicting methods. Akwa, J, V et al [27] carried out a review about

106 the effect of the geometrical design parameters on the Savonius rotor’s performance.

107 The reviewed design parameters are the endplates, the aspect ratio, gap ratio, blade

108 number and stage of the rotor and so on. Moreover, wind tunnel blockage correction

109 methods for the Savonius rotor were reviewed by Ross, I et al [28]. The above reviews

110 were mainly focused on the geometrical design parameters, flow patterns, researches

111 methodology and wind tunnel blockage correction.

112 By examining the relevant research in this field, it is found that less concern has

113 been shown on classifying the Savonius rotors using the blade profile classification

7
114 criterion and making a comprehensive performance comparison between different

115 types of Savonius rotors. However, the blade profile is the essential design issue which

116 not only determines most of the rotor’s design parameters but also has tremendous

117 influence on the performance of a Savonius rotor.

118 Thus, the objective of this paper is to summarize the development of this

119 promising low speed generator [7] as well as the performance comparison based on the

120 classification criterion of the blade profile. Nevertheless, our emphasis is only on the

121 rotor with two blades considering the high power output which is generally decreased

122 with the increasing of the blade number [29].

123 2 The blade extruded from 2D section

124 Starting from this section, the classification of the Savonius rotor is based on the

125 geometrical and functional features of the blade profile. Generally, the blade profile can

126 be divided into 2D and 3D profiles in light of the spatial characteristics. 2D profiles

127 mean that the rotor’s blades are built through the extension of the 2D section along

128 normal direction of a flap endplate. The blades with three-dimensional features are

129 defined as 3D blade profiles.

8
130 2.1 The blade cross section has one unbroken curve

131 2.1.1 Traditional semicircular profile

132 Traditional semicircular profile is the first unbroken curve blade profile used for

133 the Savonius rotor which is applied in 1925 by Sigurd Savonius for a patent [30]. It

134 consists of two semicircular profiles. The basic structure and design parameters of this

135 traditional Savonius rotor can be found in the left of Figure 1. This design is inspired

136 by the Fletterner’s ship and built through the cutting of the Fletterner cylinder into half

137 and moving sideways. Table 1 summaries most of the geometrical parameters for this

138 rotor. Sigurd Savonius made a comprehensive comparison between 30 different rotors

139 to find the desirable design parameters for this rotor. The highest CP reported in Sigurd

140 Savonius’s studies was 31%. However, a wind tunnel study conducted by Simonds and

141 Bodek [31] in the Brace Research Institute stated that 14% is the highest CP when the

142 tip speed ratio is 0.7. Newman [32] also studied this type of Savonius rotor at different

143 gap ratios in 1974.

144 Research works about the traditional Savonius are summarized in Table 2 to

145 present the relationship between the best design parameters and the maximum CP. The

146 unit for the size is millimeter. This summary includes the experimental test in and out of

147 the wind tunnel as well as the CFD simulation. It is found that the CPmax gained from

148 different research groups are quite different. Generally, the CPmax ranges from 17% to

9
 149 30% for this type of traditional Savonius rotor.

150 Table 2 Summary of the tested and simulated traditional rotors

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

91.4*60.9
Newman [32] Test 38.1 27.9 30.48 15.24 2.54 1.5*105 30%
Inside

4600*6100
Blackwell, B.F et al [33] Test 1500 952 * 500 100 8.64*105 25.5%
Inside

375*375
Saha, U.K [29] Test 17.3 21.8 23.98 10.9 * 8.23m/s 18%
outside

180~2 180~ 198~ 27~ 400*400

Kamoji, M.A. et al [34] Test * 1.1*105 17.5%
30 230 253 34.5 outside

500*500
Roy, S and Saha, U,K [13] Test 230 209 230 128 25.6 1.2*105 23%
outside

1000*1000
Torresi, M., et al.[35] Test 412 330 360 200 40.2 7m/s 21%
Inside

Banerjee, A., et al.[36] CFD 230 209 * ≈116 0.2d * 6.2m/s 28%

Mao, Z.Y.[37] CFD 1000 909 * 500 91 * 7m/s 26.7%

Shaheen, M [38] CFD 1000 1000 * 525 78.75 * 7m/s 23%

Rogowski, K [39] CFD * 940 * 500 50 * 7m/s 24%

Kim, S. and C. Cheong [40] CFD 1000 * 1000 250 * * 7m/s 23%

151 2.1.2 Blade profile with Myring Equation

152 The semicircular profile has one design parameter, i.e. the diameter. A new

153 profile proposed by Tian, W.L. et al [41] used the Myring Equation to describe the

10
154 blade profiles as showed in Figure 2. The control parameter of the profile is the blade

155 fullness. The Myring Equation widely used for the autonomous underwater vehicles is

1n
  x 2 
156 y  b 1    
  a  

157 In this equation, n is the blade fullness, and n equals to two mean a half-ellipse.

158 In their study, a = b= 0.25 m, the diameter of the rotor is 1m, while n varies from 0.5

159 to 3. The results showed that the maximum CP is 0.2573 achieved at n=1. This

160 maximum CP is 10.98% higher than that of a semicircular Savonius rotor. They also

161 pointed that a smaller fullness increases the positive CT and reduces negative CT.

162

163 Figure 2 The blade using myring equation

164 2.1.3 Blade profile with different bucket arc angles

165 A novel bucket design proposed by Driss, Z., et al. [42] can be found in Figure 3.

166 This new configuration has several fixed design parameters, such as c=100mm,

11
167 q=100mm, H=300mm and l=24mm. The arc angle ψ is the only variable parameter.

168 Four arc angles (60°, 75°, 90° and 130°) are inspected through the CFD and

169 experiments methods, and the rotor with ψ=90° is a traditional Savonius rotor. Those

170 rotors were tested in an open tunnel with a test cross section which is

171 400mm*400mm*800mm in size. According to the obtained results, it concluded that

172 the arc angle has a great influence on the flow characteristics, especially for the

173 depression area that is located on the concave surface and enlarged with the growth of

174 the arc angle. The largest depression area is found for the rotor with 130° of arc angle.

175

176 Figure 3 Blade profile with different bucket arc angle

177 2.1.4 Sail profile

178 The Sail profile was proposed firstly by Govinda and Narasimha [43] in 1979

179 aiming to reduce the weight or increase the projected area. Fleming and Probert [44]

180 stated that sail profiles have the advantages of lighter and flexibility comparing to the

12
181 rigid profiles. The profile of sail is controlled by the locations of rollers that are similar

182 to the controlling points of a curve. In 1985, Fleming conducted a comparison between

183 five sail profiles as presented in Figure 4. Results stated that CP curves of profile 1, 2

184 and 3 are closed to each other; profile 3 gained the maximum CP among five profiles.

185 They also found that CP of rotor with three sail profiles is one third higher than that of

186 the rotor with two semicirular profiles. Generally, a rotor with two rigid profiles is

187 superior than a rotor with three rigid profiles in terms of CP [45].

188

189 Figure 4 Five different profiles tested by Fleming

190 2.1.5 Summary of blade cross section has one unbroken curve

191 Based on above review, for the testing of traditional Savonius rotor, the CP of a

192 traditional Saovonius rotor rangs from 0.175-0.30. The best power coefficient was

193 30% obtained by Newman [29] in a wind tunnel. The CP gained inside the wind

194 tunnel is generally higher than that outside the wind tunnel. It should keep in mind

195 that the correction methods for inside and outside wind tunnel tests are different.

13
196 From CFD method, the highest CP gained by Mao, Z.Y [34] was 28% for the

197 traditional one. The blade profile based on Myring Equation achieved the highest CP

198 of 0.2573 when the blade fullness is n=1. For sail profile, a well-designed three-blade

199 rotor may be superior to the two-blade rotor.

200 2.2 Subsection profile

201 Different from the blade profile with one curve, subsection profile means that the

202 blade profile is built through several segmentations. For instance, a profile is either a

203 combination of a line and an arc or a small arc plus a big arc. The design parameters

204 of subsection profile are richer than those of the traditional semicircular profile. Thus,

205 each subsection profile has its own particular design parameter.

206 2.2.1 Bach type profile

207 As far as we know, the Bach profile is the second common profile used for

208 Saovnius rotor and proposed by Bach [46] six years after the semicircular profile. Bach

209 replaced the semicircular profile with a Bach profile composed by a straight line and an

210 arc. Figure 5 presents the geometry of the Bach type profile ( Modi, VJ et al [47] and

211 Sukanta, R et al [13] ). The performance of the rotors with Bach and the traditional

212 profiles was compared through the Mcgill wind tunnel. Results showed that the Bach

213 rotor gained higher performance at lower and higher TSR, compared with the

214 traditional Savonius rotor. In the middle range of TSR, Savonius rotor is better than the

14
215 Bach rotor which gained the maximum CP at TSR=0.9.

216 In 1986, Ushiyama et al [48] compared the performance of the rotors with Bach

217 and Savonius profiles. Rotor with Bach type profile can gain the maximum CP in the

218 gap ratio range of 0 to 0.3. This CPMAX is 0.23 that is 9% higher than that of a rotor with

219 a semicircular profile. In order to improve the power output, Modi and Fernado [49]

220 conducted a detailed investigation into several key geometric parameters as presented

221 in Figure 6. Experimental results demonstrated that the smaller gap ratio leads to larger

222 power coefficient. It means that the CPMAX is gained when a equals to zero. The

223 optimal design parameters are listed in Table 3.

224

225 Figure 5 The Bach’s blade profile

226 Table 3 The optimal design parameters for the rotor tested by Modi and Fernado

Design parameters Values

15
 Blade overlap b=0.1D

Aspect ratio 0.77

Blade shape factors q/p=0.2

227 Modi, VJ [50] experimented the Bach type rotor in a boundary-layer wind tunnel

228 which can regulate the wind speed from 2.5 to 25 m/s, the blade arc angle being in the

229 range of 110º to 150º. They reported that the 135º is the best arc angle and geometric

230 parameter of p/q has a significant effect on CP. A further study found that the best CP is

231 about 0.32 when λ = 0.79 in the open condition.

232

233 Figure 6 The Bach-type rotor tested by Modi and Fernando

234 Kamoji, MA [34] conducted an experimental study on the Bach type rotor without

235 the central shaft. Those rotors are shown in Figure 6. The maximum CP achieved is 0.21

236 when the Reynolds number is 150000, TSR=0.69, Do/D=1.1, overlap ratio is zero, the

237 blade arc angle 124º, the ratio of height to diameter is 0.69 and p/q=0.2. The CP is not

16
238 only higher than that of traditional Savonius rotor with the shaft but also higher than

239 that of Bach type rotor with the shaft.

240 In 2013, Sukanta Roy et al. [51] applied numerical simulation to study the

241 influence of the arc angle (Φ) on the Bach rotor when the blade arc angle in a range of

242 90º to 165º and TSR varies from 0.2 to 1.4. Results showed that the CP is enhanced

243 firstly with the growth of the arc angle due to the improvement of the positive moments.

244 This positive effect will be ceased when arc angle is larger than 135º because the

245 incoming free stream cannot act directly on the advancing blade. The maximum CP

246 value is 0.34 gained at TSR = 0.8.

247 Zhou, T. and D. Rempfer [52] performed numerical simulations on the unsteady

248 flow of a conventional semicircular Savonius rotor and a Bach rotor. In their study, the

249 overlap ratio of the relevant Savonius turbine is 0.2. The leaf shape parameter and the

250 blade arc angle of the Bach-type rotor is 0.2 and ψ=124º, respectively. The two models

251 have a D=0.29m. The wind speed of the flows is 7.924 m/s. The results demonstrated

252 that the Bach-type rotor is superior to the semicircular Savonius rotor in terms of power

253 coefficient. The maximum CP of the Savonius turbine and the Bach turbine is 0.189 and

254 0.2635, respectively. They also found the Bach-type rotor has two peak points for its

255 torque at azimuth angle θ= 114º and θ=294º. Those two peak values are larger than

256 that of the Savonius rotor. They found that the gap ratio has a small effect on the torque

17
257 coefficient of the conventional Savonius rotor. But the gap between the two straight

258 lines influences the performance of the Bach rotor significantly. Hence, a conclusion

259 has been gained that the blade modification including the length of the straight line and

260 the arc shape may increase the performance of the rotor greatly. Table 4 summaries the

261 power coefficient of different Bach rotors studied by different research groups.

262 Table 4 Summary of Bach type rotors

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

Roy, S and Saha, U,K[13] Test 230 209 230 * 135° 1.2*105 0.3

Kamoji, MA [34] Test 0.7D * 1.1D 0.2 124° 1.5*105 0.21

Modi and Fernando [49] Test 0.77D * 0.2 135° 6.76m/s 0.36

Modi, VJ [50] Test 0.77D * 0.75D 0.2 135° 7m/s 0.32

Sukanta Roy et al. [51] CFD * * 1.1D * 135° 6.31m/s 0.34

Zhou, T. and D. Rempfer [52] CFD * 290 * 0.2 124° 7.924m/s 0.263

Kacprzak, K. and K. Sobczak [53] CFD * 200 * 0.2 135° * 0.18

Kacprzak, K. and K. Sobczak [54] CFD 154 200 266 0.2 135° 9m/s 0.215

263 2.2.2 The Sivasegaram profile

264 The Bach profile consists of an arc and a straight line. However, the Sivasegaram

265 profile [55] is a combination of a small and a big curvature as presented in Figure 7.

266 They tested this profile and found that the power output of the Sivasegaram profile is

267 better than that of the semicircular profile, as long as the small curvature arc is a
18
268 circular arc and the blade angle of the big curvature lies between 120º and 150º. The

269 design parameters of the best profile are n=2,  =127°, s/R=3.11 and ns/D=2.8.

270 Optimal CP is about 0.2. In 1978, Sivasegaram also carried out a study of the effect of

271 blade number experimentally.

272

273 Figure 7 The blade profile proposed by Sivasegaram

274 2.2.3 Benesh profile

275 The Benesh profile [56-58] is composed of a straight line and two arcs. The

276 geometric model [59] is shown in Figure 8. In 2015, Roy and Saha [60] tested the

277 Benesh profile, the improved Bach profile, the traditional semicircle and the semi

278 elliptical rotor in the wind tunnel. Their experimental results showed that the maximum

279 CP is 0.29, 0.30, 0.26, and 0.23, respectively. The maximum CP of the Benesh profile

280 rotor is only less than that of the improved Bach, but higher than that of other rotors.

281 The experiment also found that the starting ability can be improved and the negative

282 static torque coefficient can be reduced through the Benesh design, compared to the

19
283 traditional semi-circular and semi elliptical rotor.

284

285 Figure 8 A blade profile proposed by Benesh

286 Rahai, H. and H. Hefazi, [61] did an experimental study on the two-blade rotor

287 with and without the spanwise slots when the overlap ratio is zero and 0.48 for

288 Savonius and Benesh profiles. Results reported that the Savonius and the Benesh

289 profiles reach the CPMAX in the TSR range of 0.8 to 1.2. The CPMAX (0.31) of the Benesh

290 airfoil is higher than that (0.27) of the Savonius.

291 2.2.4 Summary of subsection profiles

292 Many scholars carried out a comparison research between Bach and traditional

293 profiles. They reached a consensus that the Bach profile has a better performance than

294 the traditional one. The Bach profile attained its highest CP (0.36) at p/q=0.2 and the

295 arc=135°, while the highest CP obtained by CFD was 0.34. Apart from the Bach profile,

20
296 fewer scholars compared the Sivasegaram, Benesh and Savonius profiles, and they

297 found that the Sivasegaram profile got the highest CP of 0.2. The Benesh profile was

298 better than the Savonius one, but its best CP was lower than the modified Bach profile

299 according to the study [57].

300 2.3 Drag reducing profile

301 Several profiles are defined as the drag reducing profiles based on their

302 functional feature. Previous researchers found that the advancing blades offer the

303 driving force and the returning blades are the main source of the drag force. Thus,

304 reducing the drag force appears to be a possible way to improve the rotor’s

305 performance.

306 2.3.1 Swinging profile

307 The drag force caused by the returning blades is one of the important obstacles that

308 impede the performance of the drag type rotor. Swinging blade is a novel way

309 proposed firstly by Aldoss [62] in 1984 to handle this obstacle. The configuration of

310 this profile can be found in Figure 9. The galvanized sheets were rolled to form the

311 swinging blades that can rotate around its pivots. When the incoming wind acts on the

312 advancing blades, the rotation of the advancing blade is hindered by the central shaft.

313 On the contrary, the returning blade can be rotated without any interruption. This

314 rotation reduced the drag force on the returning blades.

21
315

316 Figure 9 The swinging blades

317 Two blade profiles named A-type and B-type were inspected at five different

318 swinging angles. They stated that the larger swinging angle results in higher power

319 output for two kinds of blade profiles, and A-type profile is better than B-type profile in

320 terms of power output. It is also observed that the CPMAX for the best rotor is about 0.1,

321 this value is only half of the CPMAX of the semicircular rotor.

322 Since then, Aldoss, TK [63] tested several Swinging blades at an average wind

323 speed of 18 m/s. For each downwind swing angle φ (0, 5, 10, and 20 degrees) and

324 upwind swing angle θ (20, 35, 50, 57.5 and 65 degrees), the torque and rotor speed was

325 measured. The results showed that the flow characteristics inside the rotor can be

326 optimized through the blade swinging which decreases the resistance of the wind blade

327 and increases the thrust of the blade. The power factor of the rotor is increased to about

328 23.5% when the upwind and downwind blades swing to the optimum angle of 50

22
329 degrees and 13.5 degrees respectively.

330 2.3.2 Slated profile

331 Another type of drag reducing profile is the slatted-blade Savonius rotor proposed

332 by Reupke and Probert [64] in 1991. The basic configuration is a semicircular curve.

333 However, this semicircular curve is divided into several pieces of slats, as depicted in

334 Figure 10. Each slat can rotate around the roller. When the upcoming wind acts on the

335 returning blades, those slats will open and let the wind pass through. Two semicircular

336 profiles with 8 large and 16 small slats were compared to study the effect of the size of

337 slat. The tested results observed that the idea of slats causes the performance

338 degradation, but strengthens the static torque due to the opening of the slats in the

339 returning blade.

23
340

341 Figure 10 The cranfield slatted rotor

342 2.3.3 Slotted blades

343 Driven by the reducing of the drag force, Alaimo A., et al [65] proposed a new

344 bucket for Savonius rotor. The blade is slotted as showed in Figure 11. The diameter of

345 the rotor is 1.0 m. While the slot position is f. The effect of slot positions and slot gap on

346 the starting performance was studied at the velocity of 7m/s. They found that the

347 starting ability can be improved when the slot position is less than 40%. The results also

348 demonstrated that the slotted rotor has a better performance when angular velocity is

349 low and the slot gap has little influence on the rotor’s CP.

24
350

351 Figure 11 The slotted profile

352 2.3.4 Summary of drag reducing profile

353 The swinging, slated and slotted profiles were proposed to reduce the drag force of

354 returning blades. However, the design of swing and slated profiles degraded the power

355 coefficient. Only the slotted profile could contribute to its performance and the starting

356 torque performance.

357 2.4 Airfoil or lift profile

358 The idea of airfoil or lift profile maybe motivated by the lift characters of the

359 Savonius rotor or lift-type wind turbine. Generally, the TSR range of the Savonius rotor

360 is from 0 to 2. The lift characters of Savonius rotor is presented when the Savonius rotor

361 works at TSR>1. Khan, H.M [66] conducted a wind tunnel testing on five blade profiles

362 including a semicircular profile. The remaining four profiles are the NACA profile used
25
363 NACA 0024 section, a S-section profile, an inverted S-section profile and a double

364 rotor section profile as described in Figure 12. The aim of utilization of NACA profile

365 is to reduce the drag force. The S-section profile is similar to the Sivasegaram profile

366 mentioned in Section 2.2.2.

367

368 Figure 12 Four profiles tested by Khan

369 Khan reported that each rotor’s profile is related to an optimal gap ratio. The

370 optimal tip speed ratios for the semicircular section, NACA section, S-section, inverted

371 s-section and double rotor section are (0.325 0.9), (0.32, 0.6), (0.37, 1.1), (0.175, 1.0)

372 and (0.3, 0.8), respectively. The highest CP is gained for the rotor with S-section

26
373 profile. NACA profile did not reach the anticipated effect because the minimum drag

374 is only produced at low angle of attack. The encouraging feature of the rotor with

375 S-section profile is low-speed power generation even when wind speed equals to 4

376 miles per hour. Table 5 summaries the maximum power coefficient of the rotors gained

377 by above investigations.

378 Further study of the airfoil profile was conducted by Tartuferi, M et al [67] in 2015

379 through the numerical simulation. The profile used is the newly high camber airfoil as

380 showed in Figure 13. The first blade profile is designed based on the geometry of the

381 Goettingen airfoil, and the second blade profile is a newly developed airfoil. The

382 inflow wind speed is 9 m/s corresponding to Re=2.34×105, and the λ value varies from

383 low to high. Research results showed that the two kinds of rotors in the generator are

384 coupled with a good flexibility, and two types of blades can use the low pressure area of

385 the forward blade effectively to promote the rotation of the rotor and the output power.

386 The maximum CP of two rotors is 0.22 and 0.25, respectively. It is also found that the

387 development of airfoil blade has great potential in improving the energy efficiency of

388 Savonius rotor [61].

27
389

390 Figure 13 SR3345 and SR5050 (50% camber) airfoil

391 Table 5 Summary of the rotors with airfoil blades

Authors Method Airfoil Dimensions D RN or V CPMAX

Khan, H.M [66] Test Semicircular section 3D 305 6.05m/s 0.325

NACA section 0.32
S-section 0.37
inverted s-section 0.175
double rotor section 0.3
Tartuferi, M et CFD SR3345 2D * 9m/s 0.22
al[67] SR5050 0.25
Semicircular Savonius 0.253
Muscolo, G.G. and CFD Kyozuka 3D 300 25m/s 0.15
R. Molfino [68] Bronzinus 300 25m/s 0.25

392 2.5 Profile optimized by optimal algorithm

393 From the above sections, we found that most of the blade profiles in discussion,

394 such as semicircular profile, sail profile, Bach profile, Benesh profile, Sivasegaram

395 profile, slated profile and slotted profile are designed according to personal experience.

396 Some of the researchers used equations to describe the blade profiles, such as blade

397 profile, which uses Myring and NACA airfoil equations. Of course, the above

398 experience profiles or equations cannot cover all the profiles in the design domain.

28
399 Fortunately, CP and CTS prediction methods have been altered from experiment to

400 simulation owing to the rapid development of computational fluid dynamics (CFD). In

401 addition, there are many robust search algorithms available. In 2011, Moharmed et al.

402 [16] adopted the CFD method and an advanced search approach based on evolutionary

403 algorithm (EA) to find the suitable profile of the Savonius rotor. In their study, five

404 points are used to control the shape of the blade profile. Two end points are fixed and

405 three points can be moved within a certain range as presented in Figure 14. The

406 coordinates of the three points are determined through the EA aiming to gain the

407 maximum power output. Their research added an obstacle to avoid the upcoming wind

408 acting directly on the returning blades.

409

410 Figure 14 The blade profile optimized by evolutionary algorithm

411 The simulated results showed that the optimal profile can improve the power

412 output by 38.9 percent at TSR=0.7. The genetic algorithm is another promising way to

413 optimize the blade section, although more research efforts need to be done in this area.
29
414 Savonius rotors with six different blade’s curves were simulated by Sargolzaei, J

415 and Kianifar, A [69] using artificial neural networks (ANNs). The artificial neural

416 networks are becoming popular because of its ability to model non-linear data. The

417 rotors were also investigated in the wind tunnel. It is found that the results are almost in

418 full agreement with that obtained from the experiment. The proposed algorithm is

419 proved to be accurate and fast.

420 Overall, several research groups had adopted profile equations and searching

421 algorithms to design the Savonius blade profile. However, the optimal profile should be

422 somewhere in the entire two-dimensional space. Profile equations should have the

423 ability of wide coverage and less controlling points. In addition, advanced search

424 algorithms should have the features of robust, efficiency and convergence.

425 2.6 Summary of 2D blade profiles

426 The classification of 2D blade profiles is generally based on the evolution and

427 development of process. The first proposed 2D profile was the semi-circular bucket

428 which has one unbroken curve. Then, the subsection profile was proposed to enrich

429 the design of Savonius rotor. Some of researchers proved that the well-designed Bach

430 and Benesh rotors can generate more power than the semi-circular rotor. Next,

431 previous talented researchers found that reduction of the drag force acting on the

432 returning blades could be a promising way to enchance the power coefficient of this

30
433 kind of rotor. Among different drag reducing profiles, the slotted profile is the only

434 one which can improve the power output. Following the drag reducing design, the

435 airfoil profile was introduced to generate the lift force. Some of CFD simulation

436 stated that the performance of the rotor with airfoil profile is better than that of the

437 semicircular rotor. All of the above 2D blade profiles were designed based on

438 personal experience. Thus, some of advanced optimal algorithms were adopted to

439 search the entire 2D space and find a proper profile for Savonius rotors. Theoretically,

440 the profile gained from the optimal algorithm is superior to the above 2D profiles. The

441 profile design based on optimal algorithm will become a research hotspot in the

442 future.

443 3 The 3D blades

444 The well-known 3D blade profiles are twisted and helical blades. The cross

445 sections or profiles at different XY planes are not the same for twisted blades. On the

446 contrary, helical blade has the same cross sections or profiles. The detailed description

447 can be found in the following section.

448 3.1 Twisted blade

449 Early study of the twisted blade was tested experimentally by Grinspan et al [70]

450 in 2001. The twisted blade has different profiles at the upper and lower positions as

31
451 presented in Figure 15. The extruded path of 2D section is always parallel to the central

452 shaft. However, an angle  is made between the inner edge of the twisted blade and

453 central shaft. Four rotors (Curved profile, straight profile, aerofoil profile and twisted

454 blade) were studied. The best rotor’s CPMAX of the rotor is 0.55, which is close to the

455 Betz’s limit of 0.593. Their CPMAX appears to be overestimated. Results also showed

456 that the starting torque can be improved greatly by a twisted design. In 2006, Saha and

457 Rajumar [71] studied several twisted blades. They stated that the CP of a rotor with

458 three twisted blades could be enhanced with the increasing of the twisted angle. The

459 optimum twisted angle is 15º resulting in the maximum CP=0.14.

460

461 Figure 15 The rotor with twisted blade and the top and bottom profiles

462 In 2008, Saha, UK [29] conducted a further experimental research on a

463 semi-circular rotor and a twisted blade rotor (twist angle is 12.5º) in a wind tunnel.

464 They studied the effect of the rotor’s stage number. The experimental results showed

32
465 that the optimal number of blades is two. Compared with the semi-circular blade, the

466 twisted blade has a higher CP, which is 0.19. Table 6 presents a summary of studies for

467 twisted rotors.

468 Table 6 Summary of twisted Savonius rotors

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

Saha, U.K 375*375

Test 17.3 21.8 23.98 10.9 12.5º 8.23m/s 0.19
[29] outside

Saha and 375*375

Test 220 * * 120 12.5º 8.23m/s 0.14
Rajumar [71] outside

469 3.2 Helical blade

470 Another 3D blade is helical blade. The design of helical blade needs the

471 determination of 2D profile and the angle between upper and lower profiles. Twisted

472 blades tested by Nemoto et al [72] in 2003 are the helical blades which can be found in

473 Figure 16. Five rotors without endplates from (a) to (e) have the CPMAX of 0.05, 0.51,

474 0.1, 0.095 and 0.125, respectively. The CPMAX of the rotor (e) with the circular

475 endplates is about 0.175. Results indicated that the larger curvature of the profile

476 improves the CP and increases the TSR range. Helical shape and larger curvature profile

477 are two good features for rotor design.

33
478

479 Figure 16 The Savonius rotor tested by Nemoto et al

480 In 2009, Kamoji [73] built a helical rotor (Figure 17) and tested it in a wind tunnel.

481 The phase shift angle between top and bottom profiles are 90º. Tested results found that

482 the helical shape can eliminate the negative static torque in the entire range of the

483 azimuth angle. The CPMAX for the helical rotor without the central shaft and gap is 0.175

484 which is close to that of the semicircular rotor when RN=150,000. Among the tested

485 rotors, the CPMAX of the rotor with the central shaft is 0.09, which is the lowest CPMAX

486 among the tested helical rotors.

487

488 Figure 17 A helical Savonius rotor tested by Kamoji

34
489 In 2009, Zhao, Z [74] studied several design parameters of a helical rotor, such as

490 the gap ratio, aspect ratio, size of endplates and the inner plates inside the blade. The

491 shaft angle between top and bottom profiles is 180º. Numerical study found that the

492 CP of there-blade helical Savonius is inferior to that of the rotor with two blades. The

493 helical rotor with an aspect ratio of 6.0 is better than those with the aspect ratio of 1, 3,

494 5, and 7. The helical rotor with 180º shift angle is superior to those with 90º, 270º,

495 360º helical angles. They also found that the maximum CP is 0.21 for the helical

496 two-blade Savonius rotor when e=0.3, H/D=6, and θ=180º. The static torque

497 coefficient of helical Savonius rotor is positive.

498 Jae-Hoon Lee et al. [75] investigated the CP and CTS of the helical rotors at

499 different TSRs and azimuth angles. They made four models with helical angles of 0º,

500 45º, 90º and 135º respectively. The aspect ratio is 1.33, overlap ratio is 0.167, and

501 end-plates were installed. The results showed that the maximum CP of the rotor

502 achieved 0.13 when the twist angle is at 45º and the tip speed ratio is at 0.45 in

503 experimental and numerical simulation. However, the CP of rotor with twist angles of

504 90º and 135º is even lower than that of rotor with twist angle of zero. And the torque

505 coefficients remained constant when the twist angle is beyond 90º. The rotor with twist

506 angle of 0° achieved the maximum CT when the azimuth angle is 45º.

507 A. Damak et al. [76] studied a helical Savonius turbine with a twisted angle of

35
508 180° and aspect ratio of 1.57 in a wind tunnel. They studied the effects of different

509 Reynolds numbers and ratio overlap on their performance and their aerodynamic

510 features. They found that the CP of the helical wind turbine is higher than that of the

511 traditional Savonius rotor. Helical rotor obtained the CPMAX in the range of tip speed

512 ratio 0.4-0.45. The experimental results also showed that the CPMAX increases the

513 Reynolds number, and the torque coefficient decreases linearly with the rise of the tip

514 speed ratio.

515 Argemiro Palencia Díaz et al [77] used CFD method to study a Benesh-like rotor,

516 a two-stage rotor, helical rotor and a three-blade rotor. They observed that the four

517 models obtained the maximum CP at the TSR=0.6. The CPMAX of helical Savonius is

518 about 0.18. The CP of three-blade is the lowest, which is about 0.07. The helical

519 Savonius rotor torque coefficient CT ranges from 0.25 to 0.35. The classical rotor has

520 the highest CP, while the peak to peak amplitude is the lowest (0.15-0.25 for helical and

521 0.19-0.25 for 2-step).

522 The flow physics was studied by Bachu Deb [78] through a three dimensional

523 CFD simulation for a two-blade helical Savonius turbine. The height of rotor is 60 cm.

524 The diameter of rotor is 17 cm and twist angles of four rotors are 0º, 45º, 90º, 135º, 180º.

525 All rotors have the endplates. It is found that at a TSR of 1.636, the maximum CP of the

526 rotors with an angle of 0º, 45º, 90º and 180º is 0.0709, 0.462, 0.2012 and 0.073,

36
 527 respectively. The maximum CP for the rotor with 135º rotor angle is 0.080 at a TSR of

528 0.589. They also found that the power and torque coefficients achieved are all positive.

529 They thought that the pressure gradient between the endplates contributes to the

530 enhancement of the power and torque coefficient for the rotor at the angle of 45º, 90º,

531 225º and 270º.

532 Table 7 Summary of the tested and simulated Helical rotors

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

1050*1050
Nemoto et al. [72] Test 800 208 240 0.76 * 10m/s 0.175
outside

400*400 150,000 0.175

Kamoji et al. [73] Test 202.4 230 * 0.9 90°
outside

Zhao, Z [74] CFD 6D * 1.1D 0.75 45° * 10m/s 0.21

Jae-Hoon Lee et al
Test 1.33D * * 0.45 45° * 10m/s 0.13
[75]

400*400
A. Damak et al [76] Test 1.57D * * 0.4~0.45 180° 11m/s 0.25
outside

Argemiro Palencia
CFD 200 90 * 0.6 * * * 0.18
Díaz et al [77]
1.636 0° 0.071
1.636 45° 0.462
*
Bachu Deb [78] CFD 600 170 187 1.636 90° * 0.201
0.589 135° 0.008
1.636 180° 0.073

Ricci, R., et al.[79] Test 1000 384 422.4 0.899 105° 3.16m2 8.1m/s 0.251

Kang,C., et al.[80] CFD 1800 1125 * * 180° * * *

Jeon, K.S., et al.[81] Test 500 250 * 0.67 180° 1000*1500 10m/s 0.132

533 Damak, A.et al [82] studied the aerodynamic behavior of a helical Savonius

37
534 turbine with a helical angle of 180º in an open wind tunnel, while the size of the

535 cross-section is 400 mm×400 mm. They studied the influence of different Reynolds

536 numbers and the tested helical rotors have two different overlap ratios (0.0 and 0.24).

537 The results showed that the helical Savonius rotor has a better performance than the

538 conventional one. The helical Savonius rotor obtained its maximum of CP of 0.2 at

539 TSR=0.33, while the CPMAX of a traditional rotor is only 0.16 at this TSR. They

540 observed that the Reynolds number has a great effect on the performance of the helical

541 Savonius rotor, and the rotor with overlap ratio=0.242 is better than that with overlap

542 ratio=0. Table 7 lists the summary of studies for helical rotors.

543 3.3 Summary of the 3D blades

544 Both twisted and helical blades can improve the rotor’s static torque coefficients.

545 The CP of twisted blades is less than that of the traditional one. The best CP of twisted

546 blade was only 0.19. For helical blade, the static torque coefficient of the helical

547 turbine was positive for the entire azimuth angle. And the maximum CP obtained by

548 Bachu Deb [74] for a twist angle of 45º is 0.462, and it is better than that of other

549 simulated rotors. An experimental test showed that the best CP of helical blade was

550 0.251 [76]. Till now, 3D blades have been studied incompletely. The majority of 3D

551 blades used the 2D semi-circular profile as the cross-section. More research is needed

552 for the optimization of 3D blades’ cross-section profile.

38
553 4 Summary and discussion

554 In this paper, the drag-type vertical axis wind turbines are classified based on

555 their blade profile. The performance and features of different types of profiles are

556 summarized and discussed in detail. Several conclusions are gained from this

557 comprehensive review. For the blade cross section with one unbroken curve, it is

558 found that the CPMAX of a traditional semicircular Savonius rotor ranges from 17% to

559 30%. Hence, Myring equation appears to be an alternative way to describe the blade’s

560 cross section.

561 For the subsection profile, the CPMAX of Bach-type rotors ranges from 0.18 to

562 0.36 without correction. Several testing and CFD simulation have proved that the

563 CPMAX of well-designed Bach is higher than that of well-design traditional

564 semicircular Savonius rotor. The CPMAX of Sivasegaram rotor is also higher than that

565 of the traditional semicircular Savonius rotor. A test comparison between Bach-type,

566 Benesh-type and traditional Savonius rotor found that the maximum CP of Benesh

567 profile rotor is only slightly lower than that of Bach-type rotor, and traditional rotor has

568 the lowest CPMAX.

569 The idea of drag reducing presents a new approach to improve the performance

570 of the Savonius rotor. However, this review found that most of drag reducing rotors

571 suffers the decreasing of the power coefficient and the complication of the

39
572 construction.

573 In terms of airfoil or lift profile, the tested and CFD simulation results indicated

574 that the airfoil section might improve or reduce the power output. More investigations

575 are needed in this area.

576 Obviously, the genetic algorithm is a promising way to optimize the blade section.

577 According to our review, it is found that less research has been done using advanced

578 optimization algorithm. Thus, more research work needs to be done in the area of

579 profile description equations and utilization of advanced optimization algorithm.

580 With regards to twisted blades, it has little effect on the power coefficient of the

581 turbine, but it can reduce the negative range of the CT by using twisted blades.

582 However, the CPMAX of the twisted rotors is not significantly higher than that of the

583 Savonius rotors.

584 Considering the helical blades, the helical rotors have a positive effect on the CTS,

585 and the values of CTS are all positive. With the help of the helical angle, the stability

586 of the static power coefficient becomes stronger in a certain range of angles. And

587 simulated and tested results stated that a well-designed helical rotor has a better

588 performance than a traditional Savonius rotor.

589 Acknowledgments

40
590 The work described in this paper was supported by the Shanghai Pujiang Program

591 (No.15PJ1406200) and the Chinese National Natural Science Funds (No. 51276116).

592 Reference
593 1. Plourde, B.D., et al., Simulations of Three-Dimensional Vertical-Axis
594 Turbines for Communications Applications. Wind Engineering, 2012. 36(4): p.
595 443-454.

596 2. Plourde, B.D., et al., An Experimental Investigation of a

597 Large,Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine: Effects of Venting and Capping. Wind
598 Engineering, 2011. 35: p. 213-222.

599 3. Abraham, J.P., Small-Scale Wind Power: Design, Analysis, and

600 Environmental Impacts. 2014, 222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017:
601 Momentum Press®, LLC.

602 4. Savonius, S.J., The S-rotor and its Applications. Mechanical

603 Engineering, 1931. 53(5): p. 333-337.

604 5. Abraham, J., et al., Summary of Savonius wind turbine development

605 and future applications for small-scale power generation. Journal of
606 Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 2012. 4(4): p. 042703.

607 6. Shigetomi, A., et al., Interactive flow field around two Savonius
608 turbines. Renewable Energy, 2011. 36(2): p. 536-545.

609 7. Peacock, A.D., et al., Micro wind turbines in the UK domestic sector.
610 Energy and Buildings, 2008. 40(7): p. 1324-1333.

611 8. Valdes, L. and J. Darque, Design of wind-driven generator made up

612 of dynamos assembling. 2003. 28: p. 345-62.

613 9. Valdes, L. and K. Raniriharinosy, Low technical wind pumping of

614 high efficiency. 2001. 24: p. 275-301.

615 10. Abraham, J.P., et al., Numerical simulation of fluid flow around a
616 vertical-axis turbine. Journal of Renewable & Sustainable Energy, 2011. 3(3): p.
617 4418-4426.

618 11. Menet, J.-L., L.-C. Valdès, and B. Ménart, A comparative calculation
619 of the wind turbines capacities on the basis of the L–σ criterion. Renewable

41
620 Energy, 2001. 22(4): p. 491-506.

621 12. Aslam Bhutta, M.M., et al., Vertical axis wind turbine–A review of
622 various configurations and design techniques. Renewable and Sustainable
623 Energy Reviews, 2012. 16(4): p. 1926-1939.

624 13. Roy, S. and U.K. Saha, Wind tunnel experiments of a newly
625 developed two-bladed Savonius-style wind turbine. Applied Energy, 2015. 137:
626 p. 117–125.

627 14. Kacprzak, K. and K. Sobczak. Numerical analysis of the flow around
628 the Bach-type Savonius wind turbine. in Journal of Physics: Conference Series.
629 2014. IOP Publishing.

630 15. El-Askary, W., et al., Harvesting wind energy for improving
631 performance of Savonius rotor. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
632 Aerodynamics, 2015. 139: p. 8-15.

633 16. Mohamed, M., et al., Optimal blade shape of a modified Savonius
634 turbine using an obstacle shielding the returning blade. Energy Conversion and
635 Management, 2011. 52(1): p. 236-242.

636 17. Golecha, K., T.I. Eldho, and S.V. Prabhu, Influence of the deflector
637 plate on the performance of modified Savonius water turbine. Applied Energy,
638 2011. 88(9): p. 3207-3217.

639 18. Sivasegaram, S., Power augmentation in wind rotors-A review. Wind
640 Engineering, 1986. 10: p. 163-179.

641 19. Emmanuel, B. and W. Jun, Numerical Study of a Six-Bladed Savonius

642 Wind Turbine. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering, 2011. 133(4): p.
643 044503-044503.

644 20. Golecha, K., T. Eldho, and S. Prabhu, Study on the Interaction
645 between Two Hydrokinetic Savonius Turbines. International Journal of Rotating
646 Machinery, 2012. 2012.

647 21. Murai, Y., et al., Particle tracking velocimetry applied to estimate the
648 pressure field around a Savonius turbine. Measurement Science and
649 Technology, 2007. 18: p. 2491.

650 22. Fujisawa, N., Velocity measurements and numerical calculations of

651 flow fields in and around Savonius rotors. Journal of Wind Engineering and
652 Industrial Aerodynamics, 1996. 59(1): p. 39-50.

42
653 23. Afungchui, D., B. Kamoun, and A. Helali, Vortical structures in the
654 wake of the savonius wind turbine by the discrete vortex method. Renewable
655 Energy, 2014. 69(3): p. 174-179.

656 24. Kang, C., H. Liu, and X. Yang, Review of fluid dynamics aspects of
657 Savonius-rotor-based vertical-axis wind rotors, in Renewable and Sustainable
658 Energy Reviews. 2014. p. 499-508.

659 25. Roy, S. and U.K. Saha, Review of experimental investigations into the
660 design, performance and optimization of the Savonius rotor. Proceedings of the
661 Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part a-Journal of Power and Energy, 2013.
662 227(4): p. 528-542.

663 26. Roy, S. and U.K. Saha, Review on the numerical investigations into
664 the design and development of Savonius wind rotors. Renewable & Sustainable
665 Energy Reviews, 2013. 24: p. 73-83.

666 27. Akwa, J.V., H.A. Vielmo, and A.P. Petry, A review on the
667 performance of Savonius wind turbines, in Renewable and Sustainable Energy
668 Reviews. 2012. p. 3054-3064.

669 28. Ross, I. and A. Altman, Wind tunnel blockage corrections: Review
670 and application to Savonius vertical-axis wind turbines, in Journal of Wind
671 Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics. 2011. p. 523-538.

672 29. Saha, U., S. Thotla, and D. Maity, Optimum design configuration of
673 Savonius rotor through wind tunnel experiments. Journal of Wind Engineering
674 and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2008. 96(8): p. 1359-1375.

675 30. Savonius, S.J., Rotor adapted to be driven by wind or flowing water.
676 1929: United State. p. 4.

677 31. Simonds, M.H. and A. Bodek, Performance test of a Savonius rotor.
678 1964, Brace Rsearch Institute, McGill University: Quebec, Canada.

679 32. Newman, B. Measurements on Savonius rotor with variable gap. in

680 Proceeding of Sherbrook University Symposium on wind energy,. 1974.
681 Sherbrook Canada.

682 33. Blackwell, B.F., et al., Wind tunnel performance data for two-and
683 three-bucket Savonius rotors. 1977: Sandia Laboratories.

684 34. Kamoji, M., S. Kedare, and S. Prabhu, Experimental investigations

685 on single stage modified Savonius rotor. Applied Energy, 2009. 86(7-8): p.
686 1064-1073.
43
687 35. Torresi, M., et al., Performance and flow field evaluation of a
688 Savonius rotor tested in a wind tunnel. Ati 2013 - 68th Conference of the Italian
689 Thermal Machines Engineering Association, 2014. 45: p. 207-216.

690 36. Banerjee, A., et al., Unsteady Flow Analysis around an

691 Elliptic-Bladed Savonius-Style Wind Turbine. Proceedings of the Asme Gas
692 Turbine India Conference, 2014, 2014.

693 37. Mao, Z.Y. and W.L. Tian, Effect of the blade arc angle on the
694 performance of a Savonius wind turbine. Advances in Mechanical Engineering,
695 2015. 7(5).

696 38. Shaheen, M., M. El-Sayed, and S. Abdallah, Numerical study of

697 two-bucket Savonius wind turbine cluster. Journal of Wind Engineering and
698 Industrial Aerodynamics, 2015. 137: p. 78-89.

699 39. Rogowski, K. and R. Maronski, CFD Computation of the Savonius

700 Rotor. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 2015. 53(1): p. 37-45.

701 40. Bogue, D. and N. Crist. CST Transonic Optimization Using

702 Tranair++. in 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. 2008. Reno,
703 Nevada.

704 41. Tian, W.L., et al., Computational Fluid Dynamics Prediction of a

705 Modified Savonius Wind Turbine with Novel Blade Shapes. Energies, 2015.
706 8(8): p. 7915-7929.

707 42. Driss, Z., et al., Study of the bucket design effect on the turbulent flow
708 around unconventional Savonius wind rotors. Energy, 2015. 89: p. 708-729.

709 43. Govinda Raju, S. and R. Narasimha, A low-cost water pumping

710 windmill using a sail type Savonius rotor, in Proc. India Acad. Sci. 1979: India.
711 p. 67-82.

712 44. Fleming, P. and S. Probert, A proposed, three-sail, savonius-type

713 wind-rotor. Applied Energy, 1982. 12(4): p. 327-331.

714 45. Ersoy, H. and S. Yalcindag, An Experimental Study on the

715 Improvement of Savonius Turbine Performance Using Flexible Sails, in
716 International Journal of Green Energy. 2014. p. 796-807.

717 46. Bach, v.G., Untersuchungen uber Savonius-Rotoren und verwandte

718 Strom ungsmaschinen. Forsch auf dem Gebeite des Ingenierwesens, 1931. 2(6):
719 p. 218-231.

44
720 47. Modi, V., N. Roth, and A. Pittalwala, Blade Configurations and
721 Performance of the Savonius Rotor With Application to an Irrigation System in
722 Indonesia. Journal of solar energy engineering, 1983. 105: p. 294.

723 48. USHIYAMA, I., H. NAGAI, and J. SHINODA, Experimentally

724 determining the optimum design configuration for Savonius rotors. Bulletin of
725 JSME, 1986. 29(258): p. 4130-4138.

726 49. Modi, V. and M. Fernando, On the performance of the Savonius wind
727 turbine. Journal of solar energy engineering, 1989. 111: p. 71.

728 50. Modi, V., M. Fernando, and N. Roth. Aerodynamics of the Savonius
729 rotor: experiments and analysis. 1990. IEEE.

730 51. Roy, S., et al. Numerical Investigation to Assess an Optimal Blade
731 Profile for the Drag Based Vertical Axis Wind Turbine. in ASME 2013
732 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. 2013.

733 52. Zhou, T. and D. Rempfer, Numerical study of detailed flow field and
734 performance of Savonius wind turbines. Renewable Energy, 2013. 51: p.
735 373-381.

736 53. Kacprzak, K., G. Liskiewicz, and K. Sobczak, Numerical

737 investigation of conventional and modified Savonius wind turbines. Renewable
738 Energy, 2013. 60: p. 578-585.

739 54. Kacprzak, K. and K. Sobczak, Numerical analysis of the flow around
740 the Bach-type Savonius wind turbine. Xxi Fluid Mechanics Conference, 2014.
741 530.

742 55. Sivasegaram, S., An experimental investigation of aclass of

743 resistance-type, direction-independent wind turbines. Energy, 1978. 3(1): p.
744 23-30.

745 56. Benesh, A.H., Wind Turbine System Using a Vertical Axis Savonius
746 Type Rotor, in United States Patent. 1988.

747 57. Benesh, A.H., Wind Turbine System Using a Savonius Type Rotor, in
748 United States Patent. 1989.

749 58. Benesh, A.H. The Benesh Wind Turbine. in Eleventh ASME Wind
750 Energy Symposium. 1992.

751 59. Moutsoglou, A. and Y. Weng, Performance Tests of a Benesh Wind

752 Turbine Rotor and a Savonius Rotor. 1995: Wind Engineering.

45
753 60. Roy, S. and U.K. Saha, Wind tunnel experiments of a newly
754 developed two-bladed Savonius-style wind turbine. Applied Energy, 2015.
755 137(0): p. 117-125.

756 61. Rahai, H. and H. Hefazi, Development of optimum design

757 configuration and performance for vertical axis wind turbine, in Feasibility
758 Analysis and Final Eisg Report. 2005.

759 62. Aldos, T., Savonius rotor using swinging blades as an augmentation
760 system. Wind Engineering, 1984. 8: p. 214-220.

761 63. Aldoss, T. and Y. Najjar, Further development of the swinging-blade

762 Savonius rotor, in Wind Engineering. 1985. p. 165-170.

763 64. Reupke, P. and S.D. Probert, Slatted-blade Savonius Wind-Rotors.

764 Applied Energy, 1991. 40: p. 65-75.

765 65. Alaimo, A., et al., Slotted Blades Savonius Wind Turbine Analysis by
766 CFD. Energies, 2013. 6(12): p. 6335-6351.

767 66. Khan, M.H., Model and prototype performance characteristics of

768 Savonius rotor windmill. Wind Engineering, 1978. 2: p. 75-85.

769 67. Tartuferi, M., et al., Enhancement of Savonius wind rotor

770 aerodynamic performance: a computational study of new blade shapes and
771 curtain systems, in Energy. 2015. p. 371-384.

772 68. Muscolo, G.G. and R. Molfino, From Savonius to Bronzinus: a

773 comparison among vertical wind turbines. Technologies and Materials for
774 Renewable Energy, Environment and Sustainability (Tmrees14 - Eumisd),
775 2014. 50: p. 10-18.

776 69. Sargolzaei, J. and A. Kianifar, Modeling and simulation of wind

777 turbine Savonius rotors using artificial neural networks for estimation of the
778 power ratio and torque. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 2009. 17(7):
779 p. 1290-1298.

780 70. Grinspan, A., et al., Design, Development and Testing Of Savonius
781 Wind Turbine Rotor with Twisted Blades, in Proceedings of 28th National
782 Conference on Fluid Mechanics and Fluid Power. 2001. p. 428-431.

783 71. Saha, U. and M.J. Rajkumar, On the performance analysis of

784 Savonius rotor with twisted blades. Renewable Energy, 2006. 31(11): p.
785 1776-1788.

46
786 72. Nemoto, Y., A. Anzai, and I. Ushiyama, A Study of the Twisted
787 Sweeney-Type Wind Turbine. Wind Engineering, 2003. 27(4): p. 317-321.

788 73. Kamoji, M., S. Kedare, and S. Prabhu, Performance tests on helical
789 Savonius rotors. Renewable Energy, 2009. 34(3): p. 521-529.

790 74. Zhao, Z., et al. Optimum Design Configuration of Helical Savonius
791 Rotor via Numerical Study. in Proceedings of the ASME 2009 Fluids
792 Enginneering Division Summer Meeting(FEDSM2009). 2009. Colorado, USA:
793 ASME.

794 75. Lee, J.H., Y.T. Lee, and H.C. Lim, Effect of twist angle on the
795 performance of Savonius wind turbine. Renewable Energy, 2016. 89: p.
796 231-244.

797 76. Damak, A., Z. Driss, and M.S. Abid, Experimental investigation of
798 helical Savonius rotor with a twist of 180°. Renewable Energy, 2013. 52: p.
799 136-142.

800 77. Díaz, A.P. and K.U. Salas, Computational model of Savonius turbine.
801 Ingeniare Revista Chilena De Ingeniería, 2015. 23(3): p. 406-412.

802 78. Deb, B., R. Gupta, and R.D. Misra, PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF
803 A HELICAL SAVONIUS ROTOR WITHOUT SHAFT AT 45° TWIST ANGLE
804 USING CFD. Journal of Urban & Environmental Engineering, 2013. 7(1): p.
805 126-133.

806 79. Ricci, R., et al., Experimental study on a Savonius wind rotor for
807 street lighting systems. Applied Energy, 2016. 161: p. 143-152.

808 80. Kang, C., X. Yang, and Y.L. Wang, Turbulent Flow Characteristics
809 and Dynamics Response of a Vertical-Axis Spiral Rotor. Energies, 2013. 6(6): p.
810 2741-2758.

811 81. Jeon, K.S., et al., Effects of end plates with various shapes and sizes
812 on helical Savonius wind turbines. Renewable Energy, 2015. 79: p. 167-176.

813 82. Damak, A., Z. Driss, and M.S. Abid, Experimental investigation of
814 helical Savonius rotor with a twist of 180 degrees. Renewable Energy, 2013. 52:
815 p. 136-142.

816

817

47
Ad
vanc
edbl
ade

h
H

Re
tur
ningbl
ade
View publication stats