Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Demonstration and Validation of a 3D CFD Simulation Tool Predicting Pump Performance and Cavitation for Industrial Applications

[+] Author and Article Information
H. Ding

 Simerics, Inc., Bellevue, WA 98004hd@simerics.com

F. C. Visser1

 Flowserve FSG, 4870 AA Etten-Leur, The Netherlandsfvisser@flowserve.com

Y. Jiang

 Simerics, Inc., Bellevue, WA 98004yj@simerics.com

M. Furmanczyk

 Simerics, Inc., Huntsville, AL 35801mf@simerics.com


Corresponding author.

J. Fluids Eng 133(1), 011101 (Jan 13, 2011) (14 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003196 History: Received March 17, 2010; Revised November 30, 2010; Published January 13, 2011; Online January 13, 2011

Due to complexities in geometry and physics, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) pump simulation has historically been very challenging and time consuming, especially for cases with cavitation. However, with the evolution and innovation of CFD technologies, pump cavitation simulation has improved significantly in recent years. In view of these developments, this paper will discuss a new generation CFD tool for pump cavitation simulation, using an axial flow water pump as a demonstration case. A novel CFD methodology and advanced cavitation model will be presented and discussed. Key components that are relevant to the improvement of accuracy and CFD simulation speed will be discussed in detail. An axial flow water pump is chosen as the test case to demonstrate and validate the capability and accuracy of the code discussed. Simulation results include pump head, hydraulic efficiency, and cavitation characteristic in terms of incipient net positive suction head for the whole pump flow passages using both multiple reference frame and transient approaches. Multiple operation conditions, from 70% to 120% of duty flow rate, have been evaluated and will be projected against experimental data. Furthermore, simulated cavitation patterns will be compared with video images recorded during the experiments.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Binary tree cell shown in a cutting plane of a centrifugal pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Cavitation damage on the blade of a centrifugal pump (Ref. 13)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Mismatched grid interface between the ends of two offset cylinders

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

CFD model of a centrifugal pump, with a detail of 0.3 mm seal gap

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Cavitation/aeration pattern of a gerotor, showing cavitation total volume fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Gerotor volumetric flow rate

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

CFD predicted cavitation bubble location compared with cavitation erosion on an axial piston pump valve plate

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Schematic of test setup for a water hammer experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Pressure ripple in a water hammer case

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Schematic layout of the model test loop

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Picture of the test setup with the close-up of test impeller mounted in the flow visualization part of the test section

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Pump model CAD surfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Grid of the pump

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Grid resolution in the tip gap

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Graphical user interface with the verification case loaded

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Typical static pressure distribution on the surfaces and a cutting plane

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Typical streamline, relative to their respective frame of reference, colored by velocity magnitude

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Gap induced cavitation: model impeller 1272 m3/h, 1150 r/min (80% duty flow τA=0.40)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Pump pressure head prediction compared with test result: model pump, 1150 r/min

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Predicted hydraulic efficiency compared with test result: model pump, 1150 r/min

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Cavitation bubbles on the impeller blade surface (model pump, 1150 r/min τA=0.40): [(a)–(e)] front view and (f) back view

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Comparison of (a) MRF and (b) transient simulation in cavitation bubble size distribution at 1414 m3/h (90% duty flow τA=0.40)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Comparison of predicted cavitation patterns and flow visualization images (τA=0.40)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Schematic of how NPSHi is determined in the experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Comparison between predicted and tested incipient NPSH: model impeller, 1150 r/min



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.

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