newbie hydro power

[miner]

i am new to trying to understand hydro power but i would like to get started so this is what i have.  I have a 1inch line with a 110 feet of over 1600 ft fall which should give me 55lbs of head would i be able to generate substantial power off of this using a 1/4 inch line off of the 1inch main line.  Water is no problem year around, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you!

[joestue]

5 gallons a minute out of that line will drop your 47 psi down to about 32 psi, and that will get you 37 watts available.
(from here: http://www.rockyhydro.com/Free_Micro-Hydro_Calculator.php)

2 inch diameter pipe would let you pull 30 gallons a minute for about the same pressure drop, should get you 300 watts.
55 psi is 130 feet of head.

[miner]

thank you would that be per hr or daily. yes i am truly a newbie!

[joestue]

37 watts is enough to run a soldering iron.
with hydro its always assumed you're running 24/7.
so just multiply watts times hours and you get watt hours.
888 watt hours or .88 kilowatt hours.
2 inch pipe should get you about 7 kilowatt hours per day.

[sailawayrb]

This calculator might be useful for this exercise:

http://www.borstengineeringconstruction.com/Hydroelectric_Capacity_Calculator.html

Please be sure to read the instructions.

Bob B.

[joestue]

i find that calculator interesting but from a psychopathic engineer's point of view..
everything being optimization... i need a box to put in the price of pvc per kilogram.. the price of copper per kilogram...
you get the idea lol.

I find it slightly backwards from the excell spreadsheet linked from the url i linked...
but it matches up approximately within 20%.

for example, the optimum penstock loss is 33% assuming the pipe is the constriction. so why put box for that percentage without explaining the cubic relationship between friction and flow rate

[sailawayrb]

Yes, I noticed the spreadsheet version that you linked to appears less than accurate as well.  The one I linked to is Hazen-Williams based, not as accurate as our Darcy-Williams based software, but still plenty good for an initial hydroelectric capacity assessment.  Not sure why you think 33% penstock head loss is optimum?  One typically trades penstock head loss for hydroelectric performance.  If hydroelectric performance is more important, one may spend more on the penstock pipe and use a larger diameter.  Most DIY folks typically only want to know how much power they will be able to generate for their given penstock investment (i.e., diameter, length and material) and it is typically only us engineers who care about the details of the friction loss empirical equation formula.  The one I linked to allows this penstock head loss versus hydroelectric trade to be easily accomplished.

[joestue]

i haven't solved the math to find the derivative or whatever but 33% pressure drop is the optimum amount when the pipe is the constriction.

if the water supply is limited you can use this to find out how much extra power you'd get from an infinity large pipe.. and the answer is only 33% more.

[bob g]

fwiw

the 50 post limit ought to be waved in this instance because of the content that it offered by member "sailawayrb"

i have known Bob for a number of years and he is a member in excellent standing on our forums, also it isn't every day a forum has the benefit of both an EE and a ME, especially rolled into one.

Bob's website offers a plethora of very useful formula's that would be of definite use to the members of this forum in my opinion and the experience of others that i have the privilege of knowing.

while Bob might also offer services for sale on his website, in my opinion what he offers free of charge far out ways those things that are for sale... lets face it he ain't gonna make enough money selling engineering service's to a bunch of DIY'es to buy a "big mac", we all know that and so does he... so whats the rub?

what he offers for sale is for the benefit of those with the means not only to pay for those services, but generally these are folks that don't have the time or inclination to diy build anything.

in short, this forum is screwing up by not allowing the posting of his website.

in my opinion and your mileage might vary.

bob g

[DamonHD]

Bob G,

You may be aware that we had a lot of unhappiness with people posting links not so very long ago.  Bruce was all for reinserting that particular link (we were still deciding) until we were accused of being corrupt and slow and useless and smelling like skunks to boot.

I'm not at home at the moment, and have little time to re-enter this debate now.

Rgds

Damon

[Bruce S]

Bob G;
Thoughts to ponder.
Don't suppose you noticed we left this link in tack?
Also, in my post I did say he could PM it to a member with long standing  so they could post the link.
It would have been nice if you had sent to the Moderators a little note explaining such and for the other Bob to act like a scout instead of being rude.
Scouting's pledge has that cool old school thing called "obey".
These are the rules, we did not make them, but we enforce them, otherwise we get chewed out by the top brass and pay gets docked from our envelopes.

Miner>>>
Pardon our intrusion into your post, any further intrusion and I'll split them, and move them to a different posting.
Bruce S

[bob g]

Bruce

please accept my apologies, i did not go back and check to see that the link was posted.... my bad for not checking on that

we lost our internet over the last few days, mucho lightening and 10-12 inches or rain over about 36 hours... we also lost our cell tower and our dish tv was in an out during the same time.

i had read the problem with Bob's post earlier and did not respond, i thought i might do so when the internet came  back up, but seeing how it was still raining i thought to post without going back to read what took place... so yes i reacted poorly.

it has never been my position to go against the rules here, even though i may not agree with all of them, i realize there is a reason for them and at time the unintended consequence of a rule can lead to something folks might not like.

for the record i really like this forum and have for years, my main goal was to provide some background to Bob and provide some level of support for what he has to offer.

anyway, i don't want to cause heartburn for any of the moderators/administrator/owners of this forum... and if i did, i apologize

bob g
ps. if the admin or moderators want to remove this post and my earlier post, please feel  free to do so... no reason to clutter the OP topic?

[Bruce S]

Bob g:
No worries ! life is way too short to get nickers in a twist as they say.
The Mods certainly not angels ! at least not me  .
IF we mess up let us know, we try to keep each other in check, but there are those times.
Cheers;
Bruce S