0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Head Drop of a Spatial Turbopump Inducer

[+] Author and Article Information
Nellyana Gonzalo Flores, Eric Goncalvès, Regiane Fortes Patella

 LEGI-INP, Grenoble, BP53, 38041 Grenoble, France

Julien Rolland

 CNES, Direction des Lanceurs, Rond point de l’espace, 91023 Evry, France

Claude Rebattet

 CREMHyG-INP, Grenoble, BP95, 38402 Saint Martin d’Hères, France

J. Fluids Eng 130(11), 111301 (Sep 22, 2008) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2969272 History: Received April 16, 2007; Revised June 17, 2008; Published September 22, 2008

A computational fluid dynamics model for cavitation simulation was investigated and compared with experimental results in the case of a three-blade industrial inducer. The model is based on a homogeneous approach of the multiphase flow coupled with a barotropic state law for the cool water vapor/liquid mixture. The numerical results showed a good prediction of the head drop for three flow rates. The hydrodynamic mechanism of the head drop was investigated through a global and local study of the flow fields. The evolution of power, efficiency, and the blade loading during the head drop were analyzed and correlated with the visualizations of the vapor/liquid structures. The local flow analysis was made mainly by studying the relative helicity and the axial velocity fields. A first analysis of numerical results showed the high influence of the cavitation on the backflow structure.

Copyright © 2008 by
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Details of the inducer: (a) photograph of the inducer CREM1 and (b) a view of the inducer meshing

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Position of the pressure taps at the shroud used to measure pump performance (i.e., τ and Ψ pressure coefficients)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Experimental head drop charts for the three different flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The barotropic state law ρ(p) for cold water

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Inducer views: (a) Inducer meridian view. Representation of mesh blocks and boundary conditions. (b) Representation of inducer blade-to-blade view mesh blocks.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Cavitation head drop curves obtained with three different grids at 1.4Qn flow rate

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Experimental and numerical head drop charts. (a) 1.4Qn, (b) 1.35Qn, and (c) 1.25Qn.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Evolution of (a) the computational dimensionless available power as a function of the cavitation parameter τ∗ and (b) the hydraulic efficiency as a function of the cavitation parameter τ∗

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Planes h3, h2, and h1 and the midspan represented in the meridian view considered for the blade load analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Pressure distributions around the blade for decreasing τ∗ at the 1.4Qn flow rate in four locations: (a) midspan, (b) h1, (c) h2, and (d) h3

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Isoline of density (ρ=950 kg/m3) during the τ∗ decrease at 1.4Qn; 1 is no cavitation, 2 is τ∗=0.31, 3 is τ∗=0.14, and 4 is τ∗=0.11

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Frontal view of the experimental and numerical results with an isoline of density ρ=950 kg/m3 for τ∗=0.17 at 1.4Qn

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Lateral view of (a) the experimental and numerical results with an isoline of density (ρ=950 kg/m3) for τ∗=0.17 at 1.4Qn and (b) the numerical result with an isoline of density (r=950 kg/m3) for τ∗=0.08 at 1.25Qn

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Location of the analyzed flow sections in the inducer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Section representation for the local analysis of the secondary flow

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Secondary flows: dimensionless relative helicity representation at three locations in the blade-to-blade channel: (a) Sec. 1, (b) Sec. 2, and (c) Sec. 3. Blue represents the maximum anticlockwise vorticity zone and red the maximum clockwise vorticity zone. The results are shown for the noncavitating condition (1) and typical cavitating regimes: τ∗=0.31, τ∗=0.14, and τ∗=0.11 (2, 3, and 4).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Secondary flows: radial velocity evolution in the noncavitating regime in Secs. 1,2,3 for 1.4Qn

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Secondary flows: dimensionless relative helicity (Cut I) at 1.4Qn at τ∗=0.24. Representation of numerical results in Grids V1, V2, and V3.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Secondary flows: axial velocity distribution in the blade-to-blade channel: (a) Sec. 1, (b) Sec. 2, and (c) Sec. 3. The results are presented for the noncavitating regime (1) and cavitating regimes τ∗=0.31, τ∗=0.14, and τ∗=0.11 (2, 3, and 4).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Streamlines in the meridian plane: (a) noncavitating regime, (b) cavitating regime corresponding to τ∗=0.31, (c) cavitating regime corresponding to τ∗=0.14, and (d) cavitating regime corresponding to τ∗=0.11

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