Wr Practical 2
Wr Practical 2
Wr Practical 2
INTRODUCTION
1
Water turbines are widely used throughout the world to generate power. In the type of water
turbines referred to as a Pelton wheel, one or more water jets are directed tangentially on to
vanes or buckets that are fastened to the rims of the turbine disc. The impact of the water on
the vanes generates a torque on the wheel, causing it to rotate and to develop power.
Although the concept is essentially simple, such turbines can generate considerable output at
high efficiency. Powers in excess of 100 MW, and hydraulic efficiencies greater than 95%
are not uncommon. It may be noted that the Pelton wheel is best suited to conditions where
the available head of water is greater and the rate is comparative small. For example, with a
head of 100m and a flow rate of 1m3/s, a Pelton wheel running at some 250rev/min could be
used to develop about 900kW. The same water power would be available if the head were
10m3/s, but a different type of turbine would then be needed.
To predict the amount Pelton wheel, and to determine its optimum rotational speed, we need
to understand how the deflection of the jet generates a force on the bucket and how the force
is related to the rate of momentum flow in the jet. In this experiment, we measure the force
generated by the jet of water striking a flat plate and a hemispherical cup, and compare the
results with the computed momentum flow rate in the jet.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this experiment was to measure force exerted by a jet of water which hits on
a flat plate and curved cup with the value of that deduced from momentum theory.
To compare the values of force obtained with a flat plate with those obtained with a
hemispherical cup.
APPARATUS
i. Flat plate
ii. Curved cup
iii. Water jockey
iv. Water tank
v. Stop watch
PROCEDURES
i. The apparatus was leveled and the level arm adjusted to the balanced position
with the jockey weight at its zero position.
ii. The pump was switched on and the flow rate adjusted to maximum value.
iii. The jockey weight position was adjusted on the level arm.
iv. The discharge, Q was measured using a volumetric tank.
v. Steps (iii) and (iv) were repeated for a number of reducing flow rates.
vi. The experiment was repeated with the hemispherical cup installed in the
apparatus.
DATA ANALYSIS
2
Data Sheet
Nozzle diameter, d = 10mm = 0.01m
2
πd
Nozzle area , A=
4
2
π × 0.01
Nozzle area , A=
4
Nozzle area, A = 7.854 × 10-5 m2
FLAT PLATE
Volume, (L) Time (sec) Discharge, Q Jockey weight
(m3/sec)×10-3 distance, y (m)
5 12.16 0.411 0.065
5 14.35 0.348 0.059
5 14.94 0.335 0.049
5 17.2 0.291 0.041
5 21.12 0.237 0.034
5 22.71 0.22 0.025
5 24.17 0.207 0.023
5 25.42 0.197 0.02
5 29.99 0.167 0.014
From Continuity equation;
3
Volume , m
Discharge , Q=
Time , sec
HEMISPHERICAL CUP
Volume, (L) Time (sec) Discharge, Q Jockey weight
(m3/sec)×10-3 distance, y (m)
+150mm
5 12.05 0.415 0.117
5 13.08 0.382 0.111
5 14.20 0.352 0.102
5 16.90 0.296 0.083
5 17.57 0.285 0.073
5 20.10 0.249 0.065
5 21.95 0.228 0.051
5 23.57 0.212 0.043
5 31.32 0.160 0.028
From Continuity equation;
3
Volume , m
Discharge , Q=
Time , sec
3
Table of results
FLAT PLATE
Exit velocity, u = Impact velocity, Mgy
Fx Theoretically =
Fx experimentally =
Q/A (m/s) V = √ u −2 gs L ρQv
2
Discharge, Q
(m/s) (Newton)
(m3/s)×10-3 (Newton)
0.411 5.23 5.167 2.551 2.12
0.348 4.43 4.353 2.315 1.51
0.335 4.27 4.184 1.923 1.40
0.291 3.71 3.611 1.609 1.05
0.237 3.02 2.902 1.334 0.69
0.22 2.80 2.676 0.981 0.59
0.207 2.64 2.502 0.903 0.52
0.197 2.51 2.367 0.785 0.47
0.167 2.13 1.958 0.549 0.33
Table of results
HEMISPHERICAL CUP
Exit velocity, u = Impact velocity, Mgy
Fx Theoretically =
Fx experimentally =
3
Discharge, Q (m /s)
Q/A (m/s) V = √ u −2 gs
2
L 2ρQv
(m/s) (Newton)
×10-3 (Newton)
0.415 5.28 5.219 4.591 4.33
0.382 4.86 4.793 4.356 3.66
0.352 4.48 4.405 4.002 3.10
0.296 3.77 3.677 3.257 2.18
0.285 3.63 3.533 2.865 2.01
0.249 3.17 3.06 2.551 1.52
0.228 2.90 2.782 2.001 1.27
0.212 2.70 2.569 1.687 1.09
0.16 2.04 1.861 1.099 0.60
From the above table, the values of force determined theoretically differ from those obtained
from the experiment for both the flat plate and hemispherical cup. This may be due to many
assumptions utilized when working the theoretical value and also due to accuracy while
carrying the experiment.
4
IMPACT OF A WATER JET ON A FLAT PLATE
2.50
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Fx THEORETICAL
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Fx THEORETICAL
5
CONCLUSION
The graph plotted was different, the graph of hemispherical plate has a larger slope of 1.01
about twice that of a flat plate which is 0.83 which implies that the force of water harnessed
by a hemispherical cup is about twice harnessed by a flat plate.
Also the values of force determined theoretically differ from those obtained from the
experiment for both the flat plate and hemispherical cup. This may be due to the some
assumptions utilized when working the theoretical value and also due to accuracy while
carrying out the experiment.
SOURCES OF ERRORS
i. Errors due to parallax
ii. Errors due to starting and stopping the stopwatch.
iii. Vibration of the surge tank when closing and opening valves causing variation of
levels.
RECOMMENDATIONS
i) The number of students per setup should be minimum for effective carrying out of the
experiment.
ii) The apparatus should be regularly checked for alignment to ensure better results.