Talk:Francis turbine

Energy Mid‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Massachusetts / Lowell Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Lowell (assessed as Mid-importance).

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Notes[edit]

Francis type units cover a wide head range, from 20 meters to 700 meters and their output varies from a few kilowatt to 1000 megawatt. Their size varies from a few hundred millimeters to about 10 meters.

Topology of the runner varies with the head.

Runners operate at constant rotating speed. Power varies according to net head and guide vane openings.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric Demers (talk • contribs) 15:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

misstatement concerning water wheels[edit]

The article says "water wheels are inefficient" which is an overstatement that distorts historical fact. Early undershot waterwheels were grossly inefficient, usually less than 30%, but the later period overshot and backshot steel Fitz wheels and the Poncelet wheel have efficiencies comparable with the Francis turbine at considerably lower cost of manufacture. Unfortunately these innovations came after the turbine revolution, industrialists were not yet concerned about the excessive fish kill of bladed turbines, and (in the case of the Fitz wheels) costs of impoundment and diversion to a wheel are higher, so those designs were not widely adopted and have only recently re-entered production for environmental reasons. The Poncelet wheel is very nearly a turbine set sideways, although obviously it does not have axial flow like a Francis turbine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.153.180.229 (talk) 13:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vertical-shaft question[edit]

thanks for giving me a chance to grow myself,I've a question about vertical shaft turbine that is there any loss in the velocity of water flow through turbine blades when the motion is just horizontal as compared to vertical in horizontal shaft turbine pls clear my topic(lalit gandhi)>(27-may-2011) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalit gandhi (talk • contribs) 05:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Water head[edit]

While the articles states (with no source given) that Francis turbines operate in a water head from 40 to 600 m, I think this just holds for large installations. On a Czech website dedicated to small hydroelectric power plants the head is given as 2 to 8 meters (for horizontal axis turbine) [1] and 0,5 to 5 metres (for vertical axis turbine) [2]. --Jvs (talk) 08:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jvs: Free feel to fix it yourself if you can add reliable sources. In my opinion, a technical book about water turbine design would be the ideal source. I would say that a website about a water turbine manufacturer is not a reliable source, but it is still better that nothing. Mario Castelán Castro (talk) 13:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Blade efficiency & Degree of reaction[edit]

What is the point of these sections? A load of equations and diagrams with no attempt to explain what any of the terms mean and no links to other articles which might help explain it. Yet another typically badly written technical Wikipedia article which seems aimed at those who already know rather than enlightening anyone who doesn't. 130.246.57.110 (talk) 08:32, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]