HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Feature
Automation & Control

Case Study: Building Your Own 20kW Hydroelectric Power Plant

NO RATINGS
5 saves
Page 1 / 4 Next >
View Comments: Threaded|Newest First|Oldest First
Alexander Wolfe
User Rank
Blogger
80/20 Rule
Alexander Wolfe   11/16/2011 8:17:03 AM
NO RATINGS
This interesting case study spotlights the old rule that most great engineering efforts are 80% perspiration (actually, I think it's 90%) and 20% technical smarts. This project simply wouldn't have happened without all that digging, building, and dirt moving.

ChrisP
User Rank
Silver
Re: 80/20 Rule
ChrisP   4/5/2012 12:55:34 AM
NO RATINGS
Design News asked for people to moderate and presumably add comments to their web site.  You had to make a certain number of posts to remain in the system and to receive a stipend or whatever it was called.  I get the feeling that this thread is more about maintaining a posting record than making real comments about an idea that is impractical in almost every state.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: 80/20 Rule
Rob Spiegel   4/5/2012 4:19:16 PM
NO RATINGS
The idea may or may not be impractical, but the comments are entusiastic. Those who comment on the Design News site are passionate about their views. I think that's very clear in this thread as well as the other comment threads.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Connected to the grid
Rob Spiegel   11/16/2011 12:04:44 PM
NO RATINGS
Great idea. Getting tied into the grid seems to be an important factor here. Saves the whole problem of storage. The perspiration will probably pay for itself in time, since the foundation is the least likely part of this power plant to fail over time. 

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Connected to the grid
Ann R. Thryft   11/16/2011 12:16:42 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree, Rob, this sure eliminates the storage problem. And it's heartening to read that the minimum for generating hydroelectric power is only a two-foot drop and two gallons per minute. That's a lot less than I would have guessed.

I've often wondered if we could generate power from the creek in back of our house. At least part of the year, it fulfills those minimum requirements. 

Lauren Muskett
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Connected to the grid
Lauren Muskett   11/16/2011 2:53:26 PM
NO RATINGS
This case study is interesting and a good read. Even though it took a lot of effort and time they are already seeing a return on their investment, which is always a good thing. 

Charles Murray
User Rank
Blogger
Micro
Charles Murray   11/16/2011 1:13:45 PM
NO RATINGS
If renewables are going to make a significant impact, a certain percentage of the power and a certain percentage of the storage will have to happen on the micro level. This is a great effort and it's a perfect example of what can happen at that micro level.

Beth Stackpole
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Micro
Beth Stackpole   11/17/2011 6:44:13 AM
NO RATINGS
I agree that there needs to be support and commitment at the micro level. The challenging economic climate of the last few years has definitely fanned the flames of the local movement and a do-it-yourself mentality. Perhaps that will translate into more people attempting projects as ambitious as this one.

Ray Jorgenson
User Rank
Silver
Re: Micro
Ray Jorgenson   11/17/2011 9:50:11 AM
NO RATINGS
Home Power magazine has a wealth of information on small hydro plants, as well as PV and solar hot water. A mature & well respected magazine.    homepower.com

letsthink
User Rank
Iron
The numbers don't add up;
letsthink   11/16/2011 3:15:45 PM
NO RATINGS
Two gallons per minute is a far cry from; 

average of 40 cubic feet per second flowed through the pond, making it a marginally feasible hydroelectric project

So now everybody is getting all fired up to dump two gallons, let it run down into another bucket, then dump that water back up to the top and expect to make the electric meter run backwards!!

 

 

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
Re: The numbers don't add up;
Dave Palmer   11/16/2011 3:50:20 PM
NO RATINGS
@letsthink: I agree with you that the numbers don't add up.  If 40 cubic feet per second of water (18,000 gallons per minute) falling 10 feet generates 20 kW, then 2 gallons per minute falling 2 feet should generate about 1/90,000 as much power, or 0.2 W.  Maybe you could make a LED light up with this.

David12345
User Rank
Platinum
Re: The numbers don't add up;
David12345   11/17/2011 12:02:18 PM
NO RATINGS
I read the article as saying that technically you CAN generate electricity with as little as 2 gpm and only 2 feet of head.  This doesn't necessarily mean it is economically attractive, or even that much of a benefit.  I gather that in this application they have 10 feet of head and run close to 320 gpm, when generating 20KW.  It sounds like the lake does not always have enough flow to permit continuous generation at this rate. The use of three 15 HP motors is to adequately load the 50 HP turbine. 

This was an interesting article.  I have been very interested in low rise lakes for storing wind or solar photovoltaic energy.  When you have wind or sun, you can drive pumps to pump up to a reservoir/lake/tank from a lower lake or river. Then you can generate hydroelectric power when you need it, or when the peak load gives the best payback to feed the grid.  The "potential energy" of gravity on water may be more cost effective than batteries.

letsthink
User Rank
Iron
Re: The numbers don't add up; But it's cool
letsthink   11/16/2011 6:00:17 PM
NO RATINGS
the big system earns;

20KW ~= $2/hour == $17000 per year if it runs 24/365;  pretty nice!

The other cool thing is that the Dad figured this out long ago, and the sons discovered it and made it happen!  Nice one!

Froese
User Rank
Iron
Re: The numbers don't add up;
Froese   11/17/2011 1:51:02 PM
This "2 Gal/minute...2 feet drop" was added by an editor. I agree this is not realistic. Several gallons per minute might be feasible for a high-head (100+ feet), pelton wheel installation, and a 2 foot drop might make sense for a small river, but I actually think our installation is about as small as you can justify unless it is just a hobby.

Sawmill Engineer
User Rank
Iron
Details, please!!
Sawmill Engineer   11/16/2011 9:34:20 PM
NO RATINGS
What wasn't clear to me is if they generated single phase or three phase power.  Why the three motors?  15hp is about equal to 20kW, so any one motor could have been a generator.  Can anyone fill in the blanks here?

Also, I'm curious what prompted the report--it does read suspiciously like an Automation Direct ad....

But a very interesting read. 

Jon.

 

Froese
User Rank
Iron
Re: Details, please!!
Froese   11/17/2011 2:18:29 PM
NO RATINGS
We generate single phase power, since 3 phase is not available in this rural location. The largest single phase induction motor we could find was only 15 hp; this is the reason we have three (15 hp = 11 KW, and we were expecting to generate 33 KW.)

Yes, I wrote this article for "User Solutions" in AutomationDirect's magazine: Automation Notebook.

Sawmill Engineer
User Rank
Iron
Re: Details, please!!
Sawmill Engineer   11/18/2011 11:40:20 PM
NO RATINGS
Froese, thanks for taking the time to respond to my question. You have done something I wish to do, although my application would be a pelton wheel system since I have fairly low flow but a  900 foot head.

It looks like you took the time to research the highest efficiency in belt power transmission- are all your drives toothed belting? The video is not clear--the main drive from the turbine looked like it might be a multiple v-belt setup but the motor drives certainly looked like toothed belt drives.  Do the toothed belt drives on the motors allow for automatic synchronization of all three motors with each other? Did you have to play with the shaft orientation on each motor to get all three sinewaves from the motors to coincide?

Congratulations on your efforts!  You can be justifiably proud of your accomplishment. And I probably will investigate Automation Direct as well!

Jon.

 

Froese
User Rank
Iron
Re: Details, please!!
Froese   11/19/2011 8:03:18 PM
NO RATINGS
The main belt (from the turbine shaft to the secondary shaft) is toothed, but the belts to each individual motor/generator are ordinary v-belts. We have found that the slippage allows them to synchronize. On rare occasion, when starting starting a generator after other(s) have been running for sometime, it can be 180 degrees out and cause the breaker to trip, but most of the time they seem to sync up by themselves in a fraction of a second.

dougspair
User Rank
Gold
Re: Details, please!!
dougspair   12/7/2011 8:21:57 PM
NO RATINGS
...try again with the watts to horsies...as one horse is 746 watts...so a 15 horse motor would be around 10 KW....

  Article says 3 of the 15 horse motors...so yes...about 20KW...if all goes well.

  Then, to get the buy-back...I'm assuming the generator must be exactly 60 Hz...?

I've worked at a couple small (30-40) Mega-watt Bio-Mass plants...the on-line syncro is extremely important...and...I'd assume this set-up here in the article has at least a transfer switch of some kind...? That is one of the first things any hydro or PV set-up requires. Otherwise I would think you could end up with utility power running your motors and pumping the water backwards...but then, I could be wrong....

makatak
User Rank
Iron
Hydro power
makatak   11/17/2011 9:24:14 AM
NO RATINGS
How many hoops did they have to jump through to get permits for zoning, excavation, disruption of "wetlands", don't step on this beetle, utility easements, etc. These are the real cahllenges to a project of this type. The technical part is simple!

DaveSheffield
User Rank
Iron
Re: Hydro power
DaveSheffield   11/18/2011 3:25:30 PM
NO RATINGS
"How many hoops did they have to jump through to get permits for zoning, excavation, disruption of "wetlands", don't step on this beetle, utility easements, etc. These are the real cahllenges to a project of this type. The technical part is simple!"

I also have this question.

Froese
User Rank
Iron
Re: Hydro power
Froese   11/19/2011 8:11:30 PM
NO RATINGS
"It is easier to ask forgiveness than permission." Seriously, the environmental impact is minimal since the lake has been there for 100+ years, and there was already a spillway here. Regarding utility interconnection and net metering, our state (South Carolina) does not have rules and regulations for this yet and our local electrical co-op was actually quite helpful and generous in this regard. I'm quite certain that if we had to fulfill all the environmental, engineering, seismic, etc. regulations California has, this project would have been a "no go."

melllowfelllow
User Rank
Gold
Re: Hydro power
melllowfelllow   11/20/2011 2:16:33 AM
NO RATINGS
Froese beware. The term "environmental impact" in the 21st century is NOT related to a technical assessment or common sense. "Environmental impact" is a legal and political term that is based on a maze of disjointed, over bearing, and convoluted laws, regulations, and policies writen by some clueless folks, supposedly with good intensions. The majority of the enforcers are egotistical morons who have a basic policy of 'deny/reject all applications unless unless forced to approve them".

To be clear-

1. We need to protect and care for our planet.

2. Some of the 'enforcers' are very competent and diligent.

3. We need a single set of intelligently integrated [and understandable] laws and regulations with a workable enforcement mechanism.

My favorite 'bonehead policy' relates to petroleum-  [oops-way off topic]


Choice A-extract it from the earth in the US using the best companies, under the best supervision, using the best workers, creating the most domestic jobs, with the least chance of environmental damage.

Choice B-the current hypocritical, 'head in the sand' policy of exporting US dollars to pay countries who are not 'environment friendly' to extract petroleum, sometimes using marginally competent workers who 'do not spill much'. Petroleum is then placed into a leaky tanker that travels 1000s of miles to unload it in the US.

-rant over- [for now]








Jessie P, PE
User Rank
Iron
Typo?
Jessie P, PE   11/17/2011 9:27:40 AM
NO RATINGS
I think they meant to say two gallons per second, not minute. That would be comparable to a stream rather than a mediocre indoor plumbing faucet.

mikec711
User Rank
Silver
Details on smaller application
mikec711   11/17/2011 9:34:16 AM
NO RATINGS
Still trying to understand the ROI if I do have a creek without that nice dam the guys had to work with.  Thanks to my beavers ... I've got some 3 foot drops (some of the year) and good volume (but not 40 cubic feet per second).  I also have an issue that the creek is a good distance from the house and/or grid.  Would love to see more detail from the perspective of implementation.

BobGroh
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Details on smaller application
BobGroh   11/17/2011 10:10:57 AM
If you are interested in small hydroelectric installations, spend some time on the internet and following some of the other links provided by the other post'ers (is that a word??). 

I did a short analyisis on a similar system for my brother who has a trout farm down south  - he has a fair amount of water flowing (the details are buried away someplace on this computer) and he thought that maybe he could make some money from that by selling (or at least 'replacing') electrical power.  Unfortunately, from the information I could find, the ROI was clearly NOT in his favor even for a mainly DYI system.

The author's system is impressive - very impressive.  But I doubt if it makes economic sense IMHO.

dchristopherson
User Rank
Silver
Probably Not Commercially Viable...
dchristopherson   11/17/2011 9:59:58 AM
This is a great DIY project, but it probably doesn't scale well to similar sized commercial applications.  I'm thinking mainly because of labor costs involved.  It sounds like the two brothers did most of the work, with no costs associated with their time.  Labor costs alone can be a very significant cost in projects like this.  Many applications may also require the design services of professional engineers (structrual, electrical and mechanical), another significant cost. 

Incentives (and hardware requirements) vary from utility to utility, also.  Sounds like these guys got the best of both worlds...simple grid-tie in requirements and very attractive buy-back rates for surplus power.  In some areas its exactly opposite.  Very expensive equipment required for grid connection and buy back rates less than what you typically pay as a consumer.

And even a 100W generating system may require the same level of automation and control of this 20kW system.  This means that there is really no way for the 2 gpm / 2 ft. drop system to have ANY payback if you want to make it grid-connected.  But, if all you want is a stand alone system to charge up your cordless drill, you're off the races.  A simple water wheel and a DC motor will get you up and running without even needing a dam.

I don't mean to be a pessemist, but there are real technical and regulatory barriers to this kind of thing.  The real success story in this applciation is the amount of time and effort (the perspiration) that these two guys put into the job.  Kudos to them.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Probably Not Commercially Viable...
Ann R. Thryft   11/17/2011 12:53:07 PM
NO RATINGS
When I was wondering whether the creek in back of our house would support a system like this, even a very small one, I was also wondering about potential difficulties with local and state zoning requirements.

Anybody have any ideas? I know that in our area I found out we're a protected salmon run, so that tosses that idea out the window.

bob from maine
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Probably Not Commercially Viable...
bob from maine   11/17/2011 3:09:16 PM
NO RATINGS
If you have a creek with fairly constant flow and you want to do it as a hobby to charge batteries or the like, a fairly simple undershot wheel (essentially paddles that turn a wheel with a horizontal axle), belts or gears to speed up the output and an alternator would work. Narrow up the creek to speed up water flow a bit and you have it. Building a dam with all the permitting, fish ladders, environmental concerns could take a lifetime. Making a waterwheel and watching it turn just because you could is reason enough to do it, even if it doesn't do more than charge a battery.

 

Larry J Manson
User Rank
Iron
lets check the math
Larry J Manson   11/17/2011 10:31:09 AM
NO RATINGS
40 cubic feet per second is 320 gallons per second.

This is 2,560 pounds per second, with a 10 food drop, that is 25,600 foot pounds per second or 34.7 killowatts.  If an efficiency is achieved of 57%, you have 20 kw.  

I have no concept of achievable efficiencies.

320 gallons per second and 10 foot drop is a far cry from the teaser of 2 gallons per minute and 2 foot drop.

2 gallons per minute with a 2 foot drop gives .72 watts prior to taking in account inefficiencies.  

Please let me know, if I am in error in this reasoning.

Despite these little physics differences, it is still a very interesting application.

 

 

 

 

 

Sport
User Rank
Silver
Re: lets check the math
Sport   11/17/2011 12:09:35 PM
Indeed.  I did a quick check. First, I assume the typo of minutes vs. seconds. 2 gallons per sec is about 16 pounds per sec over a 2 ft drop is 32 pound-ft/sec is about 43 watts at near 100% efficiency.

The basic premis is all wrong.  You can't do a whole lot with 40W but it might be better than nothing in some circumstances.

N. Christopher Perry
User Rank
Gold
Re: lets check the math
N. Christopher Perry   2/6/2012 7:02:23 PM
NO RATINGS
You're numbers look spot on.  At that scale, standard induction motors might achieve 70%-80% efficiency, and the turbine/penstock losses are in that range as well.

bob from maine
User Rank
Platinum
Payback for low-head hydro
bob from maine   11/17/2011 12:51:54 PM
NO RATINGS
My 20 year old analysys of low-head hyrdo didn't come up with a service period that equalled or exceeded the payback. Power companies are notably fickle about allowing any frequency other than 60HZ, so generating AC, converting to DC, then back to 220VAC/60.00HZ was a significant expense. Older turbine water wheels had adjustable 'vanes' that kept speed constant independant of load but their accuracy was unacceptable; most newer wheels use a 'throttle' plate to control input flow which greatly reduces the efficiency of the set-up, though if flow can be held constant, speed can be controlled varying the field to control load.  Finding and rehabing a hundred year old bronze 20-50HP turbine was the best economic solution, though these are few and far between. In Maine, fish are more important than electricity, so we're tearing down 100 year old hydro dams in hopes there is a 100 year old salmon who may want to come home to spawn. Several of my fellow hyrdo co-conspirators genrate DC and use that to run resistive heat, controlling indoor temperature by opening or closing windows. Assuming you own a dam which will supply minimum flow, can find an old turbine wheel, can cludge-up the necessary controlls to meet the grid requirements, can meet the environmental concerns, can do most of the labor yourself, you still have to be aware that the government in all its wisdom will change the rules and remove the requirement that the power company must pay you at their 'cogeneration' rate, rather than some other contrived rate. Like electric cars, the analysis of the economics for hydro power is more emotional than economic. I congratulate the writer on an apparent successful installatioin, other than the typo of water flow, the research looks good, though I don't see how he controlls frequency to meet the grid requirements.

dchristopherson
User Rank
Silver
Re: Payback for low-head hydro
dchristopherson   11/17/2011 2:23:53 PM
NO RATINGS
Frequency appears to be controlled by the AC motors.  I'm no electrical engineer, but its sounds like they are fairly simply connected to the grid. If there were no water flow, they would drive the turbine...basically the same concept as dead-heading a pump.  If you put a clutch on the turbine,  they would run at no load, 3600 RPM or whatever. 

If instead you engage the clutch and use the turbine to supply torque TO the motors, you should get power out.  The RPM of the motor will not change because it is based on the frequency of the grid power. Conversely, if you starve the turbine with too little flow, the system will probably CONSUME energy as the motors will continue to drive the turbine at 3600 rpm (assuming 1:1 drive, etc.).

So, to start this system from an OFF state, you would probably have to go through the following.

1.  initiate flow to get turbine turning at some rpm close to final drive ratio, based on motor RPM and pulley diameters, etc.

2.  close contactors on motors.  If rpm was determined properly, the motors should see basically a no-load start and immediately sync with grid frequency.

3.  Increase flow to supply torque to the motors, thereby generating electricity.

The system is probably incapable of operating independently of the grid because it NEEDS that 60 Hz power to control the RPM of the turbine and motors.  I'm surprised his local utility allows them to operate like this.  Around here there are much more stringent requirements, and rightly so.  After all, back-feeding the grid in the event of a power failure is a serious issue.

Ed, P.E.
User Rank
Iron
17 Ft hole, grid synchro
Ed, P.E.   11/17/2011 1:48:46 PM
NO RATINGS
I caught that they dug a 17-Ft hole, and combined with the 10 Ft drop they mentioned, there could be a roughly 25-Ft head of water with the turbine down at the bottom of the hole.  About 12 PSI.  Also, induction motors, run as motors, turn at a slip frequency a bit slower than the 60 Hz driving them.  BUT, when you run them for a bit as a motor and they achieve near synchro speed, 1750 RPM or so, then try to spin the shaft faster than that, you will push power into the grid as a generator once you try to turn it faster than 1800 RPM.  The grid is bigger than the motor, so the grid prevents the motor from going as a generator faster than the 60 Hz grid frequency, but power will flow into the grid as you push harder.  This was a Motors Lab exercise we did at the University of Idaho back in the 70s.  Of course, if the grid drops, the motor will run overspeed because the hydro turbine wants to spin it faster than 1800 RPM, so the need for shutdown controls.  This project is a LOT of work, but very nice.  Here in  California, the utility companies might not accept a home-grown control system for Netmetering or grid-tie operation.  I have always wanted to do a hydro generator system, but here in the Mojave Desert, we have no water....

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: 17 Ft hole, grid synchro
Ann R. Thryft   11/17/2011 3:15:53 PM
NO RATINGS
I'm in California, too, and I second your mention that the utilities would not appreciate anything that detracts from their profits.

My main question, though, had to do with municipal and state regulations. We only own the land down to the creek, not the creek itself. It passes by our property and many others' as well.

Otherwise, I'd love to build a system something like this, even if it were just to charge batteries. It would be fun and at least a stab in the direction of self-sufficiency.

Ed, P.E.
User Rank
Iron
Re: 17 Ft hole, grid synchro
Ed, P.E.   11/17/2011 4:58:36 PM
NO RATINGS
California is a horrific state to do anything in.  Regulations and tree-huggers pretty much wipe out anything that is likely to step on a bug or threaten a fish by touching the water.  I put in 5 KW of tracking solar and went through "heck" to get the approvals, because I wanted some storage batteries for power outages, rather than the simple grid-tie Netmetering.  New wind and seismic regulations make a lot of projects more expensive and difficult.  Water pretty much does not belong to us, and my well on my property may become regulated by the State, as they want to find out usage and to require a Certified water technician to be in charge of the well.  I plan to study and then take the test for the Certification.  So many of the people I work with are abandoning the state when they retire, and a lot of businesses are fleeing.  I plan to stay because I live out in the middle of nowhere, so not right under the nose of every meddling regulator, even though I would not knowing do anything damaging to the environment.  Regulators are often people with no degrees, telling those of us with engineering degrees that we don't know what we are doing, or simply say NO to our requests to use some resource.  I work for the Government and am so disgusted by what is going on that my retirement in 11 months will be a tremendous relief.

Larry J Manson
User Rank
Iron
Utilities
Larry J Manson   11/17/2011 4:13:33 PM
NO RATINGS
Actually applications like this may not subtract from utility profits.  The ideal utility model may be a model where it owns no generation (high capital cost, enviromental issues, ....) and where it merely makes money buying, transporting,  and selling.

True, this is awful close to the Enron model.

Therefore they may not be opposed to this and they may have government incentives (financial or political) to be helpful.  This is green renewable energy.  Even if the amount is very small, to be able to tell the enviormentalists all they are doing in renewable energy can be big.

 

 

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Utilities
Ann R. Thryft   11/18/2011 12:15:33 PM
NO RATINGS
That's a really interesting point, Larry. Right now, at least in California, if I have a solar power system that produces more electricity than I need, PG&E will but it back from me. (I won't go into how long it took to get that accomplished!). But I'm not aware of any similar setup for sellback to a utility of hydroelectric-generated electricity, here or in other states.

Anyone?

 

Charles Murray
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Utilities
Charles Murray   11/18/2011 6:22:38 PM
NO RATINGS
Ann: Taking a quick look on the Internet, it appears that many states (possibly as many as 40?) have buyback programs, but it's not clear if that energy buyback is mandated.

JimT@Future-Product-Innovations
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Utilities
JimT@Future-Product-Innovations   11/20/2011 10:42:47 PM
NO RATINGS

Ann- I just made a similar query related to “power buy-back” in today's article describing low-cost Solar PV’s.  Hit this link:  Same issue.  Not legal in Florida. 

http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1365&doc_id=235817&itc=dn_analysis_element&

This astounds me.  “Big Brother” needs a nap, and to wake up refreshed with a clear head to start making logical choices for the good of the many.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Utilities
Ann R. Thryft   11/21/2011 12:02:38 PM
NO RATINGS

Jim, I agree. That's mind-boggling. But here in California, for decades PG&E fought solar power in homes tooth and nail. A once-famous local columnist, Herb Caen, once famously said "PG&E wants to put a switch on the sun." When PG&E finally had to give in, it then fought buy-back for many more years.

What part of free is so tough to get? I think it's actually about control, not about free.


William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Building your own power plant
William K.   11/21/2011 8:11:11 PM
NO RATINGS
I also read the article in the Automation Direct publication. and I found it fairly interesting. I can certainly imagine that there would be a whole lot of government people wanting to have control over exactly how it was done. 

The method of using standard induction motors driven a bit faster than synchronous speed was quite interesting. I can understand needing to have some belts that could slip, as a means of allowing the motors to synchronise with the mains power, because otherwise it would not work. It is also probably the cheapest approach, although it may not be the most efficient. My choice would be to drive three phase alternators and then convert the power to the correct frequency using a switching cycloconverter. That is more costly, however. The advantages are that one single device could be controlled to deliver the desired amount of power, and the generator would not need to have the drive speed controlled so precisely. Besides that, I like alternators more. 

One interesting thought is that one of the older mecanical meters could be driven backward quite simply, but the newer generation of smartmeters could easily be programmed to not run in reverse. In addition, It is certain that the power company could pull all kinds of tricks with the smartmeter programming.

One last comment is that it would be interesting to see a detailed description of both the mechanical and the electrical design of the system.

renuengineer
User Rank
Iron
Re: Building your own power plant
renuengineer   12/7/2011 10:01:14 PM
NO RATINGS
My admiration for all the hard work and ingenuity! 

Here in Michigan (and in most states I would think) the DNR would be all over this.  Also FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) claims jurisdiction and requires that a hydro have a license even with the tiniest stream generated electricity if it is grid interconnected.  These two entities would easily double the cost of the project even at this small scale.  I would like to know how you avoided these burdens.

A lot of people have trouble conceptualizing the induction aspect of a motor/generator.  An induction machine delivers the nameplate rated hp as a motor at the nameplate rated amount of slip below synchronous rpm and, in turn, will generate the rated equivalent electricity as a generator at the same amount of slip above synchronous rpm.  An electric motor is not "synchronized" at start up - that is just the condition under which it delivers maximum torque because it is at maximum slip.  The line sets the voltage, frequency and phase relation.  The induction machine simply uses those properties to operate without need for complex controls, regulation and phasing.

Froese
User Rank
Iron
Re: Building your own power plant
Froese   12/10/2011 9:56:10 PM
NO RATINGS
Thank you, renuengineer for that explanation of how induction generation works; I couldn't have done it better!


Re: FERC, they don't involve themselves with individual installations this small. In South Carolina, our department of Health and Environmental Control does regulate dams & reservoirs, but our lake had already been in existence for over 100 years. The utility company was satisfied with some cursory drawings and assurance that we were entirely induction-based. The only official inspection was that of the county building department.

nyeng
User Rank
Gold
Re: Building your own power plant
nyeng   4/11/2012 10:55:29 AM
NO RATINGS
I applaud this project from a technical and ingenuity standpoint. 

However,  I tend to agree with the pessimism on the regulatory stuff.  Here in NY, the environmental hurdles as well as the federal & state energy commisions/authorities and utilities would make it nearly impossible.  The thousands you would have to spend on attorneys, permits, fees, and political contributions to make it happen legally could buy you electric power from the utility for a hundred years or better.  I think in this state the only thing attempting such a project would get you is legal trouble and the related fines and attorney fees.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Building your own power plant
Rob Spiegel   4/13/2012 11:00:00 AM
NO RATINGS

I think you're absolutely right, NYeng. This would not be an easy hurdle. I would guess that you're right about it being cost prohibitive. That's a shame, because this is a technically sound project. 

boffin1
User Rank
Iron
so there is such thing as a free lunch!
boffin1   11/22/2011 7:51:19 AM
If I can get 20Kw from 2 gallons a minute falling from 2 feet,  I can easily pump it back up again with little ornamental pool pump, which uses less than 250 watts, so I will have 20250 Watts to sell back to the utility.

I dont even need a stream !

 

The story was talking about 40 cu ft per second, dropping 10 feet, which is  18,000 gallons per minute, or equivalent to   90,000 gallons per minute dropping 2 feet as opposed to the 2 gallons in the opening paragraph.

I was looking forward to a free lunch :-(

 

garyg1
User Rank
Iron
Re: so there is such thing as a free lunch!
garyg1   4/4/2012 9:49:49 AM
NO RATINGS
You are absolutely correct. There's little more than .001 hp available from water @ 2 GPM dropping 2 feet. If this was able to produce 20 Kw we'd have ourselves a nice perpetual motion machine! I think that the heading of the article is  misleading. The article itself is worthy.

Honders
User Rank
Iron
Another self designed and built 20kW Micro Hydro
Honders   2/10/2012 7:55:41 PM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
Wow! great job!

I have yet to connect our Micro Hydro to the grid. Except for a few hours of testing, when I discovered what 'absolute value' metering meant, we have been running autonomously since commissioning 2006. I used pumps as turbines and 3 phase motors as single phase generators to cut costs. I don't think I gave up any efficiency at all since I'm getting a bit more than my initial calculations indicated. NY just passed the net-metering law for under 25kW hydro, so we'll be hooking up soon.

Syncing induction generators of a few tens of KW to each other or the power-line is not a problem as long as they are within a few RPM or Hz of each other. 

Check it out here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRl0ztxn094

HTTP://EnergyIndependence-Rob.blogspot.com

Happy Hydro

Rob

Aldo Agraz
User Rank
Iron
Congratulations!
Aldo Agraz   3/22/2012 3:13:21 AM
NO RATINGS
This is a very good work! I wonder if this is affordable for developing countries like Mexico or Latin America where there is good potential for micro hydroelectric generation, how expensive is the system and where can I purchase one? Thanks

Rob-CapeTown
User Rank
Iron
Re: Congratulations!
Rob-CapeTown   7/8/2012 8:31:18 AM
NO RATINGS
Hi there, go have a look at this guy (Manfred) site that he built and developed in Chile

http://ludens.cl/paradise/turbine/turbine.html

Good luck

Robert

Cape Town 

South Africa

rkrudolph@mtnloaded.co.za

Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
As more electric cars and plug-in hybrids hit the highways, the need for battery chargers is growing.
Festo is developing small wind turbines for generating power to buildings. The model for the mini wind devices is the seagull wing.
MIT students modified a 3D printer to enable it to print more than one object and print on top of existing printed objects. All of this was made possible by modifying a Solidoodle with a height measuring laser.
A battery management system to support an electric motorcycle lithium-ion battery pack took first place in Texas Instruments' annual engineering innovation contest.
This Gadget Freak Review looks at a keyless Bluetooth padlock that works with your smartphone, along with a system that tracks your sleep behavior and wakes you at the perfect time in your sleep cycle to avoid morning grogginess.
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
7/23/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
7/17/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
6/25/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
5/13/2014 10:00 a.m. California / 1:00 p.m. New York / 6:00 p.m. London
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Sep 8 - 12, Get Ready for the New Internet: IPv6
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: September 30 - October 2
Sponsored by Altera
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service