Pumped Hydropower Storage PRESENTATION 30 th May 2006 University of Technology Sydney UTS: ENG 48670 Engineering Design Design Team Members • Richard Gallagher (c) – Mechanical Engineering • Felipe Thomas – Mechanical Engineering • Evan Beaver – Mechanical Engineering, – Environmental Science • Adrian Fernandes – Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering – Engineering Innovation • (Tom) Ka Lun Wong – Mechanical Engineering • (Billy) Ping Yung Chan – Mechanical Engineering Design Process • Needs Analysis • Limitations/Restrictions/Assumptions • Criteria Evaluation • Calculations and Sketches • Concept Evaluation • Concept Selection • Functional Specification Needs Analysis • Stakeholders – Engineering Design Students – Academic Staff – Australian Government – Australian Power Industry – Developing Nations Power Suppliers Problem Statement • The Australian Government is in need of efficient and sustainable technology solutions and are interested in renewable energy industries. • The benchmark pump/turbine energy storage system is located at Bendeela near the south coast of New South Wales • We are required to design and build a pump/turbine system that exceeds the current benchmark. Objectives • To design and build an efficient gravitational potential storage device for use in hydroelectric schemes. • During low - demand periods water is pumped up - hill storing potential energy • In higher demand times, the reservoir is tapped, and the potential recovered to generate electricity. Bendeela Pumping and Power Station (Benchmark) • Flow rate 5.7 m³/s • Head 607 m • Pipe Ø 3.68 m 3.1 m • Reversible Mixed Flow Pump/Turbine • 88.8% Efficiency Scaled Test Rig (Incomplete) Criteria for Evaluation • Efficiency! • Ease of Manufacture • Cost • Simplicity • Size and Weight • Speed Functional Requirements • Flow Rate (7.76L/s Max.) • Power Efficiency (Benchmark Min 88.8%) • Speed (1500 RPM Max.) • Size (Impeller Ø 120mm Max.) • Cost (Within student budget range ie: very low) • Simplicity (Less parts, less can go wrong) • Safety (All moving parts must be made safe) • Maintenance (None, One - test Prototype) Concurrent Engineering • Life Cycle Analysis • Team Based Design • Multiple Concept Generation and Evaluation • Design and Manufacture considered in parallel • Emphasis on Communication Concept Generation • All team members had an attempt at sketching 3 concepts keeping in mind the limitations, requirements and the needs of the stakeholders. Concept Analysis • Analysis was conducted on the 4 most practical pump/turbine combinations. – Bucket Elevator/Pelton Wheel – Centrifugal Pump/Pelton Wheel – Archimedes Screw/Francis Turbine – Axial Flow Pump/Turbine – Mixed Flow Pump/Turbine Morphological Diagram Function Decomposition Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4 Concept 5 (Benchmark) Conversion of Mechanical Energy into Fluid Kinetic Energy Bucket Elevator Centrifugal Pump Archimedes Screw Pump/ Inclined Plane Axial Flow Pump Mixed Flow Pump Conversion of Fluid Kinetic Energy Into Mechanical Energy PVC Pipe Pelton Wheel Soup Spoon Pelton Wheel Francis Turbine Axial Flow Turbine Mixed Flow Turbine Weighted Pugh Table Design Criteria % A1 - B1 A1 - B2 A2 - B1 A2 - B2 A3 - B3 A4 - B4 Bendeela (A5 - B5) Efficiency 35 - - - + - - Datum Manufacture 25 - + - - - - Datum Cost 20 + + + + - + Datum Simplicity 12.5 - - + - S + Datum Weight, Size 5 - - S S - + Datum Speed 2.5 - - - S - - Datum Σ 100 - 60 - 10 - 35 +42.5 - 17.5 - 20 0 Selected Concept Centrifugal Pump / Pelton Wheel Selected Concept Soup Spoon Pelton Wheel • Design Calculations For BEST Results – Ns = 0.164 (Pelton Range, 0.03 – 0.3) – Ds = 19 from Cordier Diagram – D = 220 mm – Jet Velocity = 5.5 m/s – RPM = 500 Max Pelton Wheel Construction Pelton Wheel Construction Pelton Wheel Construction