Micro-Hydro Elect. System from Pump

[cookgraygoose]

This is my first post here, I'm a newbie to renewable energy. I'm on one of the best chicken forums in the world...I say world because we have members everywhere.  We can ask a question and members and experts in different fields of poultry answer and help solve our problems or others who have had the same difficulties can share how they overcame the obstacles.  I'm no expert at anything.  But I love my chickens, guineas and peacocks and I truly appreciate the support and friendships we have developed on our chicken forum.  I can't wait to connect everyday.

I have hope that this is another positive problem solving forum that will encourage newbie's in the exploration and development of micro hydro systems.  I try to check for answers and mail twice a day or at least before calling it a night. With grand kids and animals it can get hectic around the farm at times.

I am truly interested and excited about the possibility of developing a grid tied battery based micro-hydro electrical system.  I am trying to learn as much as fast as I can.  The information on the systems that I'm looking at don't seem to be readily available.  I guess it's just new or as yet unavailable.  Nowhere have I seen information on pump based systems.  These pumps would make the systems available to a vast number of farms that already have ponds and large pumps available.  Our pumps are very small compared to the giant irrigation pumps on a lot of the farms around here.  I say that with the sure knowledge a chicken friend of ours is now paying out around $5000 a month for her electricity from a REA.  These ponds would provide an endless base of water to recirculate and these systems would pay for themselves in a reasonable amount of time if do-able. The water would be recycled right back into the ponds.

I know very little about electricity other than it can knock the fire out of you.  We have a 300 amp box and other needs not on this box.  I had read that the Harris hydro turbine has up to 40% more output also that there is a "machine" instead of the turbine that others are using. Do you know of this? Or is it just advertizing?

The idea that there is friction loss and loss of energy if we use a pump is a given.  In my way of thinking if you know that there will be a loss it would become part of the equation in developing the system...ie;  if there will be a 40% loss, then there is a 60% gain.  So if you need  A amount of electricity to operate and the loss is B then you are looking at A+B=C , C being the amount of electricity we would want to generate from our system to support our needs and lifestyle. I realize that we may need more than one pump/system to generate the amount needed and thankfully, ours is no where as great as the above friends.

Right now we have a 5 hp, 3 phase pump with an output of 120 gpm water flow.  It is my understanding from what I've read that the turbine/generators output before it goes to the converter is 3 phase. We have two other pumps, one being a 7 hp however, I don't know it's gpm tonight. How much power could these pumps generate?

I would think a reaction turbine would be what we need as they require the water to be piped to the turbine and are both closed diversion systems. I also wonder if the tailrace or discharge pipe might be utilized in another turbine to generate the power for the first pump or would the gpm be so reduced as to be non-useable.  Maybe use a smaller impulse instead of the reaction turbine? Would the jets increase the power?

The idea of solar power is great, however, with the cost of solar and considering our natural bad weather it would call for a back up wind system and the cost combined to account for bad weather would be out of our ballpark.

If you have information about a supplier of  turbines and information that would be helpful we would sincerely appreciate your willingness to share this with us and any constructive assistance. Also if you know of anyone else using pumps for the water in these systems we would like to hear of them.  Thank you for your patience.

Grace and Blessings,

Mary

[wdyasq]

These ponds would provide an endless base of water to recirculate and these systems would pay for themselves in a reasonable amount of time if do-able. The water would be recycled right back into the ponds.

This would result in a loss. Any drop and lift is a net zero +the inefficiencies in the system.

Few pumps make good 'hydro' driving devices. Most machinery is designed to either produce work from power or power from work. Seldom are they 'reversable'. To find one that is reversable and efficient is rare enough I doubt anyone here has seen one.

Unless one has a good supply of water and decent 'head' or height of water fall, 'hydro' is not practical. If one has the resource, it is probably the best RE system that can be had.

Ron

[DanG]

Swamps can be called ponds too - the topography & hydrological details are missing from your post. Also missing is to what end does this water get used for - recycling certain effluents w/o treatment back to a pond is a good way to kill the pond.

The energy required to move 120 gallons per minute is a very large amount. In an hour that is 60,000 pounds of water and at our MN urban electrical costs gets close to 80-cents an hour. The collective buying power of the utility's customer base has a lot of weight behind it, is it's been said on this forum to start calculating RE electricity at 75-cents an hour when all costs are considered so you'd be looking at $3.60 an hour to run that same pump with alternative energy sources. Yes, those figures would make an accountant scream for supporting facts but the above is just a crude outline to reveal the hidden costs.

As a comparison, using a brisk stream flow to turn a paddle wheel it would take three of these pumps (http://tinyurl.com/spiralpump) twenty-four hours to accomplish what that 5-Hp pump can output in an hour. If you have the flowing/dropping water keeping the mechanical to electrical to mechanical losses down by streamlining to a direct pump action is money saved. Constructing a tank on high ground to 'bank' non-grid work effort until demanded is also money saved.

If you have acreage and silage available putting in some type of oil seed crop and a screw-press extractor to burn bio-diesel in a primitive Lister style diesel for pumping water might be a viable alternative...

[cookgraygoose]

Ok, I feel like I'm back in school again.  Somehow I just don't seem to be able to retain as much as back then though. The birthdays are starting to show up more.  The pond is about 20 feet deep where we will be pulling from and is colored like tea.  It reflects the cypress trees and often is so still it looks like a mirror and the clouds float slowly by.  The bass can be seen jumping and the brim steal your bait.  If you know anything about our water then you know it's some of the cleanest anywhere in spite of the tannins.  The main pond is at least 18 acres and the back pond that feeds it just a few. There are two streams going into the pond now and the overflow isn't running right now as the ponds more than a foot low.  So the dam wouldn't be a source for a water power except after an unusually heavy rain. In the "old" days water coolers used a slatted wooden frame for the water to flow over for oxygenation.  There's no reason that the used water can't flow over one of these if needed as they are easy built and cypress is available as redwood is not. I dreamed this morning that if this would work in a pond, why not in a swimming pool?

Let's see where I'm at now.

Single phase = hp x 746 watts divided (can't find a symbol for that here) by voltage = amps pulled

Motor hp x 100 divided by voltage = amps

If you don't know the hp, take voltage x amps pulled divided by 746 = hp

Can check with voltmeter.

KW?   Volts x amp divided by 1000 = kilowatts

1000 kilowatts = 1 amp

A light bulb,  i.e.; 75 watts divided by 120 volts = 1.63 amp

1728. watts = 1 hp, running
      
5. hp = 8640 watts or 8.64 amps (Not calculating surge at start up)
   
   

Installing a "vent" to release the water pressure on the lines would reduce the startup surge on pump.

100. gpm generates 10, 000 watts divided by 240 volts = 41.67 amps ( Harris turbine) $3000.
     
41. 67 - 8.64 = 32.93 gain before subtracting the known 40% loss that I read somewhere.
    
    

If you are going to hook up more than one turbine/generator you need to build a roto phase converter...and you can have a generator converted for around $3 to 400.00 for the "high leg or bastard leg". I'm getting stretched out here now, is the limb about to break?  There's more, but for now that is enough.  I hear the crows calling and my pecan crop this year is probably just 5% of last years and I need to beat the crows to them...lol.

Oh, in answer to your idea about the silage, we are already trying to grow blueberries and that was the reason we got the pumps.  They keep our seedlings irrigated.  All the land not in pines we hope to have in berries.

Thanks for your replies, I'll keep plugging away at this and see where I go. It seems that I have been looking at "small" systems and need to go to the larger ones.  Social security just doesn't go far and I need my air like up north needs heat.  Sure can't take off enough to get cool. Wiil check back tonight.  m

[paulb662000]

Mary

As a resource for further info on hydro and pumps as turbines you might try looking over the selection of books from developmentbookshop.com. They publish info for 3rd world development and much of it may be of interest to members here. They have a link on their site to companies around the world that sell their product which may save on shipping.

This is a book on the topic, hope it helps.

http://developmentbookshop.com/product_info.php?cPath=15&products_id=620

Paul

[vawtman]

 Maybe she could use chicken gas to power a generator.Not sure how big the operation is though.

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

Your posting looked like you were trying for an overunity/perpetual motion device.

Assuming you actually plan to make use of water that's crossing a significant height difference (head) on its own (before and after you divert it)...

Yes, some people have used centrifugal pumps backwards as water turbines.  Centrifugal pumps are high pressure-difference devices.  So for this to work you need a high head / pressure (to get torque on the shaft).  Pressure is ballpark half a PSI per foot of head.

So if you've got a stream coming down many tens of feet of mountain from where you can tap it to where you can dump it - a head in the ballpark of the height the pump could lift water - you might consider a centrifugal pump as a cheap way to get a turbine.  (You can convert the motor in to a magneto or if you have a LOT of water power and are willing to throw maybe a quarter of it away on excitation you can use capacitors to get it to self-excite.)

If your head is small (like a couple tens of feet or less) you'll be better with other turbine or wheel designs.  (Even if it's large you'll probably be ahead with a purpose-built turbine, like a Pelton, rather than using a centrifugal pump backward.)

[wooferhound]

I am having a hard time understanding what the question is. Could you possibly ask the question again in as few words as as you can?

You want to pump water, What are you going to use this water for? You are going to return this water to the pond, Why? If you want to pump the water through a generator to make more power , it will not work. If you are pumping water for something like a Cooling System and returning the water to the pond through a generator to make power, then the generator will create back pressure on the line and cause the pump to use more power, so this will not work either. If you have flowing water entering or leaving the pond, it is possible to use that for making power.

[cookgraygoose]

Ok, Woof.  

In as few words as possible. Warning, if my hubby was awake he'd be laughing. He agrees that I can talk more about nothing than anybody.  

Our land is flat. We have no head or water flow.  We do have irrigation pumps.  Since we only run them about 2 hours a day, I wondered if we could use them the balance of the time to make electricity.

Paulb662000;  

Thank you for the site to find the kind of books I need.  I sincerely appreciate the information. I'll click over there shortly.

Vawtman;  

Oh, my.  Between the otters, hawks and now a bobcat my birds are getting fewer and fewer.  `Fraid there's just not enough poop...but there's a lot of hot air.

General info:

Woof, I'm fixing to ramble, you might want to click off now.  

I was about to toss in the towel yesterday when I realized we would need a 40kw or 50kw generator.  The Harris turbine (10,000 watts) on the irrigation pump would make enough power for the pump and some of the other stuff but not really come close to providing the 40,000 watts a month we need.  It would take four of the Harris systems then another for the pumps...Yikes...

Then I got to thinking, I know, that's dangerous...I can spin the shafts with my fingers on all the motors , 5 or 10 hp ect....what makes them different as they get larger...then I figured under power and pressure the torque must also increase as the motor size increases especially under a load.  

So if the increased torque is the problem in going up to the 40kw generator with the turbines I`ve been looking at then it becomes a mechanical problem...Glory be that`s better than electrical for me as I can "see" that...the propeller size and the amount of water it moves would need to be increased to compensate for the torque of a large generator.

Looking at the old fashioned water wheels where there is moving water ... the paddles hold a lot of water weight and torque wouldn't be a problem if you continued reducing the shafts in  a series of gears to increase the rpm's.  But we don't have running water like a river or creek or a dam so what I need to find out now is how much torque is on a 40 kw generator shaft and how much torque could be derived from 120 gpm of water with reducing gears.  I'm sure there must be a formula for both.  

Is it a realistic possibility that we could build a small water wheel with the amount of water being pumped to operate the generator?   Need a bribe to help figure this out?  Lol, I can send my famous juicy coconut cake recipe. m

[cookgraygoose]

http://www.angelfire.com/journal/pondlilymill/fitz.html#anchor2251391

Above is a site on the old water wheels if anyone is interested.

I found some sites that give the torque for  the motors...now to figure out how to use this information along with understanding the use of induction motors as generators.  I found a good book on the suggested site to order on this.

But all this will have to wait as I'm fixin' to turn in for the night.  Ya'll take care. m

[pidey]

The problem is you're still going to use more power than you make.  The pump takes power both to pump the water and to overcome any friction or resistance in the sytem and in itself.  The generator also has some inherent friction which must be overcome before any power is produced.  Even if there was no such resistance in the system, a situation only possible in theory, you wouldn't be saving any money since you can only get as much energy out of a system as you put into it.  By using an electric pump you are paying for all the energy in the system.

Now, one system I've heard tell of from those who can't or don't want to use batteries is based on a windmill pump and water tower.  By using the windmill they get the energy into the system from a free source (wind) and can store the energy by keeping the water up high in the tower until it's needed.  This way you can engineer your head without building a dam or needing a naturally flowing body of water.  The big problem with such a system would be the maintenance/upkeep of the windmill, water pump and tower.  This doesn't seem like much until you factor in a good, stiff winter freeze.

Anyway, in order for a hydropower system to be financially feasible the water has to be flowing for free (natural stream) or nearly free (water tower).

Just my two cents.