Hello, all. I'm new to this group. I saw steinaman's project and couldn't wait
any longer. I also live in CT, USA. I have land in New Hampshire, with a stream
I want to harness. Seeing something local brings it home.
Now on to his site potential.
How about a submersible at the bottom of the weir? Is that a drain valve? Can
a submersible be installed (teed in to retain the function of the drain). With
a large submersible, and a control valve to operate at all or nothing, perhaps
you can also generate most of your power in the daytime. Connecticut Light and
Power also has lower rates at night. Can you benefit more by generating during
the day? Remember, CL&P pumps water up MT Tom, in Massachusetts, and into
Candlewood Lake, in Danbury, during light loads to use during peak loads. It
may be necessary to bypass some at all times, to keep the streambed wet, so
keep the function of the drain and also allow min flow rates for night.
This sounds very interesting to me. I live in CT. Can I see it?
camperrod
--- In [email protected], "steinaman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Given this site, whats easist design to install and maintain?
>
> Hello all.
> I joined just recently and have avidly followed the dialog re Daniel's
> AC/DC site.
> I share his inexperience and (i hope) enthusiasm to do something with
> my land's potential.
> I've saved copies of lots of instructive responses he got and need to
> spend time absorbing the lessons therein.
> Its an impressive amount of detail.
>
> I'd like to introduce my 'problem' for input without diverting the
> help you all are ready to give him, or repeating what's all transpired
> in that dialog.
> I can do my 'homework' re-reading those answers.
> Any advice appreciated.
> My first concerns are less to do with the electronics than with the
> site 'engineering'.
> How best to select the proper turbine, place it and channel flow to
> it.
> How to do it in a low impact, low cost and best ROI way with long life
> and low maintenance.
> Once that's more clear to me I can focus on the wiring issues.
>
> DESCRIPTION: (in Northern Ct., USA)
> A one acre manmade (1960s) pond, 17 ft at deepest, fed by two
> streams,
> which outlets through a vertical concrete wieron the dam side.
> The dam is earthen, the wier is built like a fireplace/chimney
> structure standing about 14 feet into pond from the dam base, which
> is about 12' deep water at that point.
> Water flows in at the top and exits from the base.
>
> A pipe leads from chamber at bottom of wier through the base of
> the dam to let stream flow continue past pond.
> The 30"x24" trash grate at the top has a perimieter of 108".
> All flow goes through that , nearly year round.
> Flow over this varies from zero(some, not all Augusts) to 3" most
> winters.
> Lets say it averages 1".
> There is a 10' drop inside the concrete structure.
> Access to wier is a wooden bridge from earthen dam edge.
> My land boundaries are the outer base of the dam and levelfrom the
> points of stream entry. The wier is the only place to achive 'head',
> and not much of it.
>
> Here are my primary questions:
> * is my math right? I am not sure the standard 'wier' calculations I
> see, all illustrated as a board in a stream, apply here.
> I.e. do I calculate flow potential correctly? Using the 1" average
> spillover height....
> -table lookup gives .72 CFS for 9'(108") at 1" or 325 GPM
> -head is approx 10 ft.(no alowance for turbine height at this point)
> -continueous watts = 325 GPM x 10ft / 10 constant = 325 watts
> -kwh/M = 325GPM x 10Ft / 13.8 constant = 235 kwh/M
>
> * do I increase pressure and gained output by channeling the 108" of
> flow through a pipe or sluice to the turbine?
> or does channeling only help me attain maximum potential still set
> at 325 continuous watts?or 235 kwh/M?
>
> * which turbine gains most from this setup?
> -do I construct a flow diversion to concentrate water flow over a
> pelton turbine installed in bottom of wier,
> or
> -do I mount a flow through turbine at top. If so, is the impeller
> at top or bottom of tube? (I remain confused by readinge on
> power of water dropping AFTER is passes through blades)
>
> Besides obvious differences in installation logistics (possibly
> requiring draining of pond to access wier base)are there major
> tradeoffs in achieved output?
>
> I think those are the most important issues for me to begin with.
> thanks to all in advance.
> ------ crude text diagram follows -------
>
>
> ----dam top\
> \
> \\
> \\^^^^^^^water level^^^^^^^^^^^^ \ /^^^^^^^
> \\ [[[[wier grate ]]]
> \\ [[[ ]]]
> \\ [[[ F ]]]
> \\ [[[ L ]]]
> \\ [[[ O ]]]
> \\ [[[ W ]]]
> \\ [[[ ]]]
> \\ [[[ | ]]]
> \\ [[[ V ]]]
> \\ [[[ V ]]]
>
> O<<____________<<<_______outflow pipe__OOOOOOO<<OOOO ]]]
> [[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/FGYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Does your company feature in the microhydro business directory at
http://microhydropower.net/directory ? If not, please register free of charge
and be exposed to the microhydro community world wide!
NOTE: The advertisements in this email are added by Yahoogroups who provides us
with free email group services. The microhydro-group does not endorse products
or support the advertisements in any way.
More information on micro hydropower at http://microhydropower.net
To unsubscribe: send empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microhydro/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
