INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH

Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953 — 964 (1998)

INVESTIGATION OF THE PERFORMANCE

OF A CROSS-FLOW TURBINE

HAYATI OLGUN*
Mechanical Engineering Department, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon 61080, Turkey

SUMMARY
An experimental investigation was conducted to study the effects of some geometric parameters of runners and nozzles
(e.g., diameter ratio and throat width ratio) on the efficiency in the cross-flow turbines, by varying of ratio of
inner-to-outer diameters of runners and gate openings of two different turbine nozzles under different heads. In this
study, four different types of runners (170 mm outer diameter, 114 mm width) were designed and manufactured to
investigate the effects of the ratio of inner-to-outer diameters of runners on the turbine efficiency. Each runner had 28
blades and the ratios of inner-to-outer diameters of runners were 0)75, 0)67, 0)58 and 0)54, respectively. The runners were
denoted with the numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4, and nozzles A and B. The blade inlet and outlet angles were selected as 30° and
90°. Nozzles A and B were of rectangular cross-sectional channels. Nozzles outlet angles of two solid walls of 16° were
measured from the circumferential direction. The performance parameters namely output power, efficiency, runaway
speed, reduced speed and power for different nozzle/runner combinations were investigated by changing head range from
8 to 30 m, the nozzle A-runner combinations (A—1, 2, 3, 4) and from 4 to 17 m, the nozzle B-runner combination (B—2) at
different gate openings. The results of the present study clearly indicated that there was a negligible difference (e.g., 3% in
total between 0)54 and 0)75 diameter ratio) in the efficiency of turbine for different diameter ratios and heads, and that the
highest efficiency was obtained as 72% for A—2. ( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

KEY WORDS: cross-flow turbine; diameter ratio; efficiency; experiment; nozzle; nozzle shape; performance;
runner

INTRODUCTION
Hydropower has always been an important energy resource in the world. Many towns and villages arose
around waterfalls or rapids where dams could be constructed to provide mechanical power to run grist and
saw mills. With the spread of electrical lighting and machinery, water driven turbine generators were installed
at the dams to produce electrical power for the local communities. The subsequent development of large
hydroelectric and thermal generating plants with high-voltage, long-distance transmission facilities, led to
creation of large-scale electrical distribution networks and a decline in the real cost of electricity. These power
systems made smaller local hydroelectric stations uneconomical. In most cases these sites are too small to be
of interest to a major utility. Small hydraulic sites present a variety of economic advantages. A few are located
in or near communities not served by the major power network and could provide a cost-effective source.
Others are near homes and businesses whose owners could benefit from reduced energy cost. In some cases,
the installation considered is the smallest size of micro hydro plant suitable for a home or farm. Its capacity
might be 3—25 kW, enough to provide domestic energy independence or to displace substantial portions of
utility power (Moore, 1986).

¹his paper was submitted for publication by J. McMullan

* Correspondence to: H. Olgun, Mechanical Engineering Department, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon 61080, Turkey
Contract grant sponsor: Karadeniz Technical University Research Foundations

CCC 0363-907X/98/110953—12$17.50 Received 10 April 1998

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 27 April 1998
954 H. OLGUN

It is important to reflect on the situation in the world that at the present time hydroelectric energy provides
only about 35% of the total electric generation (Olgun, 1990). In most of third world countries there is a need
to produce electric power, essentially independent of a grid system. In this respect, the cross-flow turbines
have been considered a good alternative and found a widespread use. The cross-flow turbine has attracted
the attention of several investigators working in the area of microhydroelectric power generation. This type
of turbine, although primarily an impulse type, is suitable for operation at low and medium heads. It can
handle large quantities of water and also possesses flat efficiency characteristics. In a cross-flow turbine,
water passes through the runner twice, resulting in better momentum transfer (Reddy et al., 1996). The
characteristics of such turbines have been investigated by several researchers (e.g., Nakase et al., 1982;
Johnson, 1983; Toyokura and Kanemoto, 1985; van Dixhorn et al., 1984; Fukutomi et al., 1985; Khosrow-
panah et al., 1988; Arter and Meier, 1990; Olgun, 1990; Desai and Aziz, 1992; Totapally and Aziz, 1994; Joshi
et al., 1995; Reddy et al., 1996).
The main advantage of the cross-flow turbines is easy and inexpensive construction. This is also ideal for
small run of the river operations at low and medium heads because its efficiency is much less dependent on
the flow rate than other types of turbines. The cross-flow turbine generally consists of a runner and an inlet
nozzle as shown in Figure 1. The runner is simply made of a series of radially curved blades connected by two
circular parallel discs. The nozzle has a rectangular cross-section and leads the water jet into the runner at the
same angle. The main characteristics of such turbines are as follows: (i) Rotational speed can be selected in
a wide range. (ii) Turbine diameter is independent of the flow rate. (iii) Satisfactory efficiency can be obtained.
(iv) Manufacturing is simple and welding construction can be easily realized by local facilities. (v) Flow and
power adjustment can be obtained by means of a guide vane located in the nozzle. (vi) The bearings have no
contact with the flow. The characteristics mentioned above make these turbines very suitable for use in
regional small hydropower generation. An important design parameter of the runner is the selection of the
optimum number of blades, inner-to-outer diameter ratio, blade angles and blade forms. The cross-flow
turbine has attracted the attention of several investigators working in the area of microhydroelectric power
generation. In order to investigate further, up to 9 kW models designed and manufactured were tested with
different heads and gate openings (Olgun and Ulku, 1992a, b). The main objective of this study is to

Figure 1. Cross-flow turbine

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
 PERFORMANCE OF A CROSS-FLOW TURBINE 955

determine the effects of diameter ratios of runners on turbine efficiency at different heads and gate openings
of nozzles.

EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE

The experimental apparatus was built in the Energy Research Laboratory of Mechanical Engineering
Department at Karadeniz Technical University in Trabzon, Turkey. This apparatus consists of a water
re-circulation system, the cross-flow turbine and a loading and measurement system as shown in Figure 2.
The turbine parameters selected in the present study are as follows: output power (N ): 1—9)0 kW, head (H ):
% 0
4—30 m, flow rate (Q): 0)014—0)055 m3/s. The water re-circulation system is made of two centrifugal pumps
and the delivery piping which provides the necessary head and the flow-rate to the cross-flow turbine. It is
also arranged that the pumps can be connected in series, parallel or in by-pass mode. The adjustment of head
and flow-rate was accomplished by the use of two valves. The nozzle and runner were attached together to
a large tank. The flow leaving the runner was fed back again into the tank.
Two cross-sectionally different nozzles were made of stainless-steel sheet and used in the experiments.
Nozzle outlet angles of two solid walls measured from the circumferantial direction were 16° as shown in
Figure 3. Nozzle A is of two double evolvent walls. One of these walls was stationary with an angle of 16° and
the other adjustable one was the guide vane. It is adjusted to give nozzle throat width between 0 and S
0
(Figure 3). The nozzle throat width ratio of the nozzle throat (¹ "2 S /eD ) was 0)249. The length of nozzles
3 0 1
was the same as the ones of runner’s blades. Nozzle B also had double evolvent walls at the exit (Figure 2).
A guide vane was located inside the flow region where the trailing edge of the guide vane was arranged at 16°
from the pressure surface. Its width ratio ¹ was 0)544. For these experiments four different types of runners
3
(170 mm outer diameter and 114 mm width) were manufactured. The inner to outer diameter ratios of

Figure 2. Experimental rig (1-tank, 2-Housing, 3-nozzle- 4-Bourdan-type of manometer, 5-suction pipe, 6-D.C. generator, 7-belt drive,
8-torquemeter, 9-transition pipe, 10-orifice, 11-pitop tube, 12-pressure transducer, 13-diffuser with 10 channels, 14- amplifier, 15-loading
rig, 16-variac, 17-avometer, 18-diods, 19-pressure pipe, 20-valves, 21-centrifugal pumps)

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
956 H. OLGUN

Figure 3. Geometrical parameters of the nozzles

Figure 4. Geometrical parameters of the runners

runners D /D were 0)75, 0)67, 0)58 and 0)54 as shown with 1, 2, 3 and 4. The number of blades of each series
2 1
of turbine runners was 28. Some geometrical dimensions of the runners are shown in Figure 4. The runner
blades were of cylindrical and the blade edges were smoothed and rounded as shown in Figure 4. The side
discs of the runners were cut out of 10 mm stainless-steel plates. The blades were cut of the standard pipes, 43,

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
 PERFORMANCE OF A CROSS-FLOW TURBINE 957

53)5, 65 and 69 mm in diameter and 3 mm in thickness for each series. The blades were connected between the
discs by means of soldering. All runners were balanced before assembling them into the turbine. The runners
had no any shafts. The discs with the shafts were bolted together with the runners. The shafts were mounted
between two ball bearings. The turbine was coupled to a loading DC generator via a belt drive. The generator
loading system was made up of 18 resistance bars of 500 W each connected in parallel.
The experimental study involved the measurement of four parameters: shaft torque, shaft rotational speed,
flow rate and static pressure at the nozzle entrance. The measurements of these parameters are described
below: The torque generated on the turbine shaft was measured by type T torquemeter (Drehmoment
1
Messwelle by Hottinger Messtechnik, Darmstadt). A digital tachometer was used to measure the rotational
speed of the runner. The flow rate was measured by means of calibrated orifice-meter located between the
outlet of the centrifugal pumps and the nozzle (as shown in Figure 2). The calibration of the orifice-meter was
done by a weighting tank. A diaphragm-type pressure transducer was used to measure the pressure difference
between the orifice pressure tapping. The static pressure at the entrance of the nozzle was measured by means
of a Bourdan-type manometer. Each measuring device was thoroughly calibrated.
The experimental procedure is briefly decribed below. The manometer and lines were bled of all air at the
start of each test day. The pumps were started and the desired heads accurately adjusted by valves. The
rotational speed of the runner was first recorded before applying any load. The shaft of the runner was then
loaded by a generator. Process data from the manometer, tachometer, torquemeter and pressure transducer
were recorded. This procedure was carried out until the desired range of machine performance was obtained.
The procedure given above was repeated for different heads and gate openings of the nozzles—runners
combinations.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The head of the cross-flow turbine was the difference between the specific energies at the turbine inlet and
outlet as shown in Figure 5. The outlet section of the turbine was taken as the level of the water in the tank.
The exit pressure (P ) was atmospheric and the exit velocity is nearly equal to zero. Therefore, the net head is
0

Figure 5. The calculation of the turbine head

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
958 H. OLGUN

defined as follows:
H "P /c#»2/2g#Z1 (1)
0 1%& 1 1
where P is the effective inlet pressure, » is the inlet flow velocity, Z1 is the zero while the Bourdan-type
1%& 1 1
manometer is at the same level as water in the tank.
The performance of turbines are reflected by their efficiencies. In general, efficiency is an indication of what
percentage of the input to the turbine is converted into power. Efficiency is then defined below:

g"M u/cQ H (2)

% 0
where M is the torque, u is the angular velocity of runner shaft, Q is the flow-rate, c is the specific weight,
%
H is the head.
0
The efficiency values are plotted against the speed and reduced speed. In order to determine some of the
characteristics, dimensionless turbine parameters are used for the analysis of the results. These parameters
are given as follows:
Reduced power N "N /D2 H3@2 (3)
%11 % 1 0
Reduced speed n "nD /H1@2 (4)
11 1 0
where N is the output power, H is the available head, and n is the rotational speed.
% 0

Figure 6. Characteristic curves of A—1

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
 PERFORMANCE OF A CROSS-FLOW TURBINE 959

In all series of tests, nozzle—runner combinations were chosen as follows: Nozzle A was used with runners
1, 2, 3 and 4 as follows: A—1, A—2, A—3 and A—4. The head available was limited to 30 m. Hence, the tests were
conducted for the heads varying from 8 to 30 m. Also, tests were done at six different gate openings from full
gate to 2/7 gate. Nozzle B was used only runner 2. The head available was limited to 17 m. The corresponding
experiments were conducted for the heads varying between 4 and 17 m, and the gate openings were changed
from full to 2/12 gate. The parameters analysed are as follows: variation of output power and efficiency with
speed at various heads, variation of reduced power and efficiency with reduced speed at various gate
openings.
Figures 6—10 show the characteristic curves for the nozzle—runner combinations namely A—1, A—2, A—3,
A—4 and B—2. Each figure consists of four different diagrams denoted a, b, c and d. For example, a and b show
the variation of the efficiency of turbine and reduced power with reduced speed at different gate openings,
and c and d show the variation of efficiency and power with speed at different heads. It can be seen in these
figures that the speeds at maximum efficiency increase with increasing heads. These results are important for
the generator speed because it gives the constant voltage only at constant speed. Therefore, the turbine must
work at a constant head. In order to keep optimum working conditions, generator speed must be arranged,
depending on its head. Furthermore, the efficiency increases with increasing the heads for nozzle runner
combination namely A—2, A—3, and B—2, and decreases with increasing the heads for A—1 and A—4. Also, the

Figure 7. Characteristic curves of A—2

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
960 H. OLGUN

Figure 8. Characteristic curves of A—3

maximum output power reached 9 kW at all tests. It was found that in the operation of the turbine at
different heads, the efficiency curves did not give a wide range of variation in efficiency. For the values of
D /D ranging from 0)54 to 0)75, the maximum efficiency changed slightly between 69 and 72% for all gate
2 1
openings of nozzles at any heads. Therefore decreasing gate openings decreased the turbine efficiency. In
conjunction with this, A—2 nozzle—runner combination for 2/7 minimum gate opening, as 58%, gave the
relatively maximum efficiency of turbine. Therefore, the runner with diameter ratio of 0)67 is more efficient
than the runners with diameter ratios of 0)54, 0)58 and 0)75.
Figure 11 presents the variations of head in nozzles against the flow rate for A—2 and B—2. It is obvious that
the maximum flow rate was obtained with B—2 combination. Increasing flow-rate increased the head in
a certain range. It is important that if the cross-flow turbine is operated at low heads and high flow rates,
¹ must be taken higher than 0)40. The results obtained here are very important for standardization of
3
cross-flow turbines. For example, with the same size of runners were used at different heads and flow rates by
adjusting of nozzle throat widths.
Figure 12 show the variation of gate openings with flow rates for A—2 and B—2 turbines. Here, Nozzle B is
tested with 8 m heads and nozzle A is tested with 25 m heads. As can be seen, the flow rate decreases with the
decreasing of gate openings from full to minimum.

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
 PERFORMANCE OF A CROSS-FLOW TURBINE 961

Figure 9. Characteristic curves of A—4

CONCLUSIONS
In the present study, the following concluding remarks can be extracted: (i) Cross-flow turbines can be
operated efficiently in a wider range of gate openings than most turbines. (ii) Maximum efficiency practically
occurs at a constant speed for all gate openings at constant head. (iii) The speeds for maximum efficiency
changes with increasing the head at constant gate openings. (iv) There is a distinct place for the cross-flow
turbine in the micro turbine field. (v) The runner with diameter ratio 0)67 is more efficient than the runners
with diameter ratios of 0)54, 0)58 and 0)75. (vi) The maximum efficiency obtained with B—2 nozzle—
runner combination was found to be 72%, almost equal to A—2, even though for the different working
conditions.

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
962 H. OLGUN

Figure 10. Characteristic curves of B—2

Figure 11. Variation of heads with flow rate for A—2 and B—2

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
 PERFORMANCE OF A CROSS-FLOW TURBINE 963

Figure 12. Variation of gate openings with flow rate for A—2 and B—2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to thank the Karadeniz Technical University Research Foundations for its financial
support.

NOTATION
D runner outer diameter, mm
1
D runner inner diameter, mm
2
H head, m
0
n shaft rotational speed, rpm
Q flow rate, m3/s
g efficiency, %
c specific weight of water, N/m3
e nozzle entry arc, °
S nozzle throat width, mm
0
B runner width, mm
B nozzle width, mm
0
N output power, kW
%
¹ nozzle throat width ratio
3
M shaft torque, Nm
%
u angular velocity
P effective pressure at the nozzle entrance, bar
1%&&
» velocity at the nozzle entrance, m/s
1

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)
964 H. OLGUN

REFERENCES
Arter A. and Meier, U. (1990). Harnessing ¼ater Power on a Small Scale Hydraulics Engineering Manual, Vol. 2, Swiss Centre for
Appropriate Technology, Switzerland.
Desai, V.R. and Aziz, N. M. (1992). ‘An Experimental Investigation of Cross-flow Turbine Efficiency’, Hydropower Fluid Mach., ASME,
Fed-136, 7—13.
Fukutomi, J., Nakase, Y. and Hasui, S. (1985). ‘A Study of a cross-flow turbine- effects of the blade number and blade exit angle on the
turbine performance’, Bull. JSME, 0322 B, 407—412.
Haimerl, L.A. (1960). ‘The Cross-flow Turbine’, ¼ater Power and Dam Construction.
Johnson, W., Ely, R. and White, F. (1983). ‘A new approach to ULH development using the cross-flow turbine’, Proc. ¼ater Power,
ASCE, New York.
Joshi, C.B., Seshadri V. and Singh, S.N. (1995). ‘Parametric Study on Performance of Cross-flow Turbine’, J. Energy Engng., 121 (1),
28—45.
Khosrowpanah, S., Fiuzat, A., and Albertson, M.L. (1988). ‘Experimental Study of Cross-flow Turbine’, J. Hydraul. Engng., 114 (3),
299—314.
Moore, L.F. (1986). ‘Streams of Power, Developing Small Scale Hydro Systems’, Renewable Energy in Canada Ltd.
Nakase, Y., Fukutomi, J., Watanabe, T., Suetsugu, T., Kubota, T. and Kushimoto, S. (1982). ‘A study of cross-flow turbine (effects of
nozzle shape on its performance)’, Proc. Small Hydropower Fluid Machinery, Am. Soc. Mech. Engng. New York.
Olgun, H. (1990). Banki (cross-flow) turbini tasarim parametrelerinin incelenmesi, Ph.D. Thesis, K.T.U., Mechanical Engineering
Department, Trabzon, Turkey.
Olgun, H., Ulku, A. (1992). ‘An Experimental Study of Cross-flow turbine’, ¹he First European Joint Conference on Engineering Systems
Design and Analysis, PD-Vol. 47-1, June 29-July 3 1992, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 71—76.
Olgun, H., Ulku, A. (1992). ‘A Study of Cross-flow turbine — effects of turbine design parameters on its performance’, Second ¼orld
Renewable Congress, Vol. 5, 13-18 September 1992, Reading, U.K., pp. 2834—2838.
Ott, R.F. and Chappel J.R. (1989). ‘Design and efficiency testing of a cross-flow turbine’, Proc. Int. Conf. Hydropower, Vol. 3, pp.
1534—1543.
Reddy, H., Seshadri, V. and Kothari, D.P. (1996). ‘Effect of draft tube size on the performance of a cross-flow turbine’, Energy Sources, 18
(2), 143—149.
Totapally, H.G.S. and Aziz, N.M. (1994). ‘Refinement of cross-flow turbine design parameters’, J. Energy Engng, 120(3), 133—147.
Toyokura, T. and Kanemeto, T. (1984). ‘Studies on Cross-Flow Turbines’, Res. Natural Energy, 8, 205—212.
Van Dixhorn, L.R., Mosses, H.L. and Moore, J. (1984). ‘Experimental determination of blade forces in a cross-flow turbine’. Paper
Presented at the Small Hydro Power Fluid Machinery Conf.

( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res., 22, 953—964 (1998)