Is weight a better way to derive energy than flow?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on evaluating the energy potential of a system of falling buckets compared to traditional turbines in hydroelectric applications. The participants utilize the mgh formula to calculate energy, factoring in variables such as pulley radius and bucket speed. They highlight the efficiency of modern turbines, which can reach up to 90%, and discuss the inefficiencies associated with water spillage and friction in bucket systems. The conversation concludes that while bucket systems may offer an alternative, they face significant challenges in efficiency compared to established turbine technology.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the mgh formula for gravitational potential energy
  • Knowledge of mechanical systems, specifically pulleys and gearboxes
  • Familiarity with efficiency metrics of water turbines and water wheels
  • Basic principles of fluid dynamics and energy loss in mechanical systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the efficiency calculations for various water turbine types, including the Modern Fitz I-X-L steel overshoot water wheel
  • Explore the impact of friction and water spillage on energy efficiency in mechanical systems
  • Investigate advanced gearbox designs that optimize power extraction from low-speed systems
  • Study the principles of fluid dynamics to understand energy loss during water discharge from buckets
USEFUL FOR

Engineers, renewable energy researchers, and anyone involved in the design and optimization of hydroelectric systems will benefit from this discussion.

  • #31
CherryB said:
Ah. So there’s the tie-in to momentum. So if it traveled the 30m in 1 minute then it would be 294.3 mw divided by 60?
Yep. It's worth noting that this is per bucket as well, so if you had 10 full buckets descending at once, it would be 294.3/60 per bucket * 10 buckets for a total of around 50 MW.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CherryB
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
russ_watters said:
As demanded by conservation of energy, yes.

Yes, mgh... but I don't see why pulley radius matters. bucket speed insofar as it tells you mass flow rate, yes.

It depends where the water level is at the bottom. If the buckets are submerged they act like paddles. If not, they drop the water and you aren't using all the available "h".
I guess I'm confusing moment with force, and translating that conflation into energy, because I can definitely hold a 10 lb barbel in my hand indefinitely if it's close to my body, but I can't do the same if my arm is outstretched. Seems to make some sense for me viscerally
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #33
cjl said:
Yep. It's worth noting that this is per bucket as well, so if you had 10 full buckets descending at once, it would be 294.3/60 per bucket * 10 buckets for a total of around 50 MW.
Right. So that's quite a bit of power, but it just seems like an awfully fast rotation to keep up with mechanically. I'm guessing that I would have to utilize a gearbox like the ones they use for wind turbines. I saw something about a 600 shaft rpm turbine gearbox yielding 8mw, but I'm not sure how to calculate the shaft input power needed to turn the gearbox
 
  • #34
 
  • #35
A full minute of descent time to cover 30m seems fast to you? Sure, you can gear them however you want, but if anything, I'd actually expect you'd want to gear it up, since generators are smaller, cheaper, and more efficient if spun faster.

EDIT: Also, the power you get out of a gearbox is the same as the power you put in (minus losses). If the gearbox is outputting 8MW at 600 RPM, the input will also be 8MW (at some other RPM - probably around 9RPM for a turbine that size).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #36
What I meant to say is that maybe a gearbox like that could be used, just to slow things down, then connect it to the near 50mw input from buckets. The speed of 30 meters per minute seems large to me, only due to the buckets having to turn around the sprocket, and how much destructive force will be acting on the chain and buckets. But I may be overly conservative about that
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
8K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
15K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
12K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
7K