0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Parametric Design of a Waterjet Pump by Means of Inverse Design, CFD Calculations and Experimental Analyses

[+] Author and Article Information
Duccio Bonaiuti

 Advanced Design Technology Ltd., Monticello House, 45 Russell Square, London WC1B 4JP, U.K.

Mehrdad Zangeneh

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 7JE, U.K.

Reima Aartojarvi, Jonas Eriksson

 Rolls Royce Marine AB, Kristinehamn 68129, Sweden

J. Fluids Eng 132(3), 031104 (Mar 18, 2010) (15 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4001005 History: Received December 06, 2007; Revised December 21, 2009; Published March 18, 2010; Online March 18, 2010

The present paper describes the parametric design of a mixed-flow water-jet pump. The pump impeller and diffuser geometries were parameterized by means of an inverse design method, while CFD analyses were performed to assess the hydrodynamic and suction performance of the different design configurations that were investigated. An initial pump design was first generated and used as baseline for the parametric study. The effect of several design parameters was then analyzed in order to determine their effect on the pump performance. The use of a blade parameterization, based on inverse design, led to a major advantage in this study, because the three-dimensional blade shape is described by means of hydrodynamic parameters, such as blade loading, which has a direct impact on the hydrodynamic flow field. On the basis of this study, an optimal configuration was designed with the aim of maximizing the pump suction performance, while at the same time, guaranteeing a high level of hydrodynamic efficiency, together with the required mechanical and vibrational constraints. The final design was experimentally tested, and the good agreement between numerical predictions and experimental results validated the design process. This paper highlights the contrasting requirements in the pump design in order to achieve high hydrodynamic efficiency or good cavitation performance. The parametric study allowed us to determine design guidelines in order to find the optimal compromise in the pump design, in cases where both a high level of efficiency and suction performance must simultaneously be achieved. The design know-how developed in this study is based on flow field analyses and on hydrodynamic design parameters. It has therefore a general validity and can be used for similar design applications.

Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic representation of the stacking condition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Grid dependency analysis—(a) Normalized pump head at design point, (b) spanwise distribution of the total pressure at the diffuser exit, and (c) 3D view of Grid 3

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Sketch of the pump meridional channel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Baseline—Impeller blade loading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Baseline—Impeller blade suction side velocity vectors at (a) design point and at (b) M/Mdes=0.9

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Design point velocity vectors on (a) the blade pressure side and (b) on the hub section for a diffuser designed with constant blade loading distribution, and zero rVθ at the diffuser exit

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Baseline—(a) Diffuser blade loading and (b) normalized rVθ distribution at the diffuser exit, imposed in the inverse design

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Baseline—Velocity vectors on (a) the diffuser blade pressure side and (b) on the hub section at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Pitch-wise averaged, spanwise distribution of (a) the axial velocity and (b) of the tangential velocity at the diffuser exit at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Impeller blade loading distribution of (a) Des-ld1 and (b) Des-ld2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of (a) pump efficiency and (b) NPSHR characteristic curves of baseline, Des-ld1, and Des-ld2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Impeller blade pressure distributions of baseline, Des-ld1, and Des-ld2 at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Comparison of (a) pump efficiency and (b) NPSHR characteristic curves of baseline, Des-st1, and Des-st2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Impeller blade pressure distribution of baseline, Des-st1, and Des-st2 at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Pitch-wise averaged, spanwise distribution of (a) the meridional velocity and (b) of the tangential velocity in relative frame at the impeller midchord at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Normalized spanwise distribution of the impeller exit rVθ distribution for baseline, Des-rvt1, and Des-rvt2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Spanwise distribution of (a) total pressure and (b) meridional velocity at the impeller exit, at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Comparison of (a) pump efficiency and (b) NPSHR characteristic curves of baseline, Des-rvt1, and Des-rvt2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Impeller blade pressure distribution of baseline, Des-rvt1, and Des-rvt2 at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Leading edge shapes of Des-sw1 and Des-sw2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Comparison of (a) pump efficiency and (b) NPSHR characteristic curves of baseline, Des-sw1, and Des-sw2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Impeller blade pressure distribution of baseline, Des-sw1, and Des-sw2, at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Meridional channel of baseline, Des-rh1, and Des-rh2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Comparison of (a) pump efficiency and (b) NPSHR characteristic curves of baseline, Des-rh1, and Des-rh2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Impeller blade pressure distribution of baseline, Des-rh1, and Des-rh2 at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 26

(a) Comparison of the meridional channel development between baseline and final design. (b) Blade loading distribution of the final design.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 27

Comparison of (a) pump efficiency and (b) NPSHR characteristic curves of baseline and final design

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 28

Impeller blade pressure distribution of baseline and final design at design point

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 29

Cavitation CFD analyses: Visualization of the vapor volume fraction contours on the blade surface for (a) the baseline and (b) for the final design at design mass flow rate with inlet total pressure P1=P1−des

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 30

Cavitation CFD analyses: Visualization of vapor volume fraction contours on the blade surface for (a) the baseline and (b) for the final design at design mass flow rate with inlet total pressure P1=60% of P1−des

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 31

Comparison between numerical prediction and experimental results of (a) the total head and(b) efficiency characteristic curves of the final design

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 32

(a) Numerical and (b) experimental visualization of cavitation development on the final design at M/Mdes=0.86 and P1/P1des=0.8

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In