4.7 Article

Performance improvement of a Savonius turbine by using auxiliary blades

期刊

ENERGY
卷 244, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.122575

关键词

Wind turbine; Savonius rotor; Conventional type; Auxiliary blade; Gap ratio

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the performance enhancement of conventional Savonius turbines by adding auxiliary blades and examines the gap ratio in a newly developed turbine. The results show that the power coefficient can be significantly increased with the addition of curved and straight auxiliary blades, as well as in the newly developed turbine.
Renewable energy sources have proved their importance on a global scale as an optimum alternative for fossil fuels. Wind energy is one of the most promising sources of renewable energy due to its availability. Savonius turbine is considered one of the best vertical axis wind turbines for converting the kinetic energy from the wind into mechanical energy at low wind speeds. The current work investigates the enhancement in the performance of conventional Savonius turbines using two configurations of auxiliary blades that are employed to enhance flow characteristics in the overlap region. The performance of the Savonius turbine, fitted with auxiliary blades, is compared with a newly developed turbine where the gap ratio is studied. The numerical simulation is carried out by solving unsteady Reynolds Averaged NaviereStokes equations (URANS) using ANSYS fluent package. SST k -u turbulence model is used to resolve the flow characteristics through the turbine, and it is validated and verified using previous experimental and numerical works. The current investigation results proved that the best power coefficient of the Savonius turbine augmented with curved and straight auxiliary blades increased by 8.4% and 9%, respectively. For the newly developed turbine, the optimum power coefficient increased by 13.6%. (C)& nbsp;2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据