william lane wrote:thanks. I figure all my numbers could be off. I'm just parroting what I was told by the engineer next door. It didn't really match what i have read else where on this and other sites, hence the open invite for advice . I have no expectations other than water will turn a wheel and i will build out from there. Maybe he meant if we get another 15 of drop chasing the exit up the hill? 25 foot of drop at 500 gal make 9 horse?
william
You can figure this yourself by knowing the underlying definitions.
One hp is 550 foot pounds per second. If you harness the energy of 550 pounds of water falling a vertical distance of one foot, then this is 550 foot pounds of work energy. If you can deliver this quantity of energy at continual rate of one second (i.e. 550 foot pounds per second), then you'll have one hp.
A gallon of water weighs 8.35 pounds. So, if you have 500 gallons per hour, then you have (500)(8.35) = about 4180 pounds of water per hour. If this water falls over 25 vertical feet, then you have (25)(4180) = about 105,000 foot pounds of work over a period of one hour. Since there are 3600 seconds in each hour, then this provides (105,000) / (3600) = about 29.1 foot pounds per second. Compared to one hp (which is 550 foot pounds per second), this system provides a theoretical maximum of (29.1) / (550) = about 0.053 hp (about 1/20 hp). Since a hp is also 746 watts, then this represents (0.053)(746) = about 40 watts. A real system would see many losses that would take the actual electricity generation down to half this figure at best. So, you can expect a good system to generate electricity from this source at a rate of about 20 watts. So, you see, assuming the numbers are correct with respect to water flow rate and the drop height, then developing this hydro resource is not worth the effort. Of course, as a reliable source of clean water it seems brilliant, and that's a great deal more important.
The fundamentals are both important and not difficult. Feel free to ask questions at any time. It's easier to learn than to unlearn, so it's better to have no knowledge on a topic than incorrect "knowledge".