0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

A Review of the Dynamics of Cavitating Pumps

[+] Author and Article Information
Christopher Earls Brennen

Hayman Professor of Mechanical Engineering
Emeritus,
California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, CA 91125

Manuscript received March 26, 2012; final manuscript received November 30, 2012; published online April 8, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Olivier Coutier-Delgosha.

J. Fluids Eng 135(6), 061301 (Apr 08, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: FE-12-1153; doi: 10.1115/1.4023663 History: Received March 26, 2012; Revised November 30, 2012

This paper presents a review of some of the recent developments in our understanding of the dynamics and instabilities caused by cavitation in pumps. Focus is placed on presently available data for the transfer functions for cavitating pumps and inducers, particularly on the compliance and mass flow gain factor, which are so critical for pump and system stability. The resonant frequency for cavitating pumps is introduced and contexted. Finally, emphasis is placed on the paucity of our understanding of pump dynamics when the device or system is subjected to global oscillation.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Ng, S. L., and Brennen, C. E., 1978, “Experiments on the Dynamic Behavior of Cavitating Pumps,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 100(2), pp. 166–176. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C. E., Meissner, C., Lo, E. Y., and Hoffman, G. S., 1982, “Scale Effects in the Dynamic Transfer Functions for Cavitating Inducers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 104(4), pp. 428–433. [CrossRef]
Rubin, S., 1966, “Longitudinal Instability of Liquid Rockets Due to Propulsion Feedback (POGO),” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 3(8), pp. 1188–1195. [CrossRef]
Rubin, S., 1970, “Prevention of Coupled Structure-Propulsion Instability (POGO),” NASA Space Vehicle Design Criteria (Structures), Report No. NASA SP-8055.
Oppenheim, B. W., and Rubin, S., 1993, “Advanced Pogo Stability Analysis for Liquid Rockets,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 30(3), pp. 360–373. [CrossRef]
Tsujimoto, Y., Kamijo, K., and Brennen, C., 2001, “Unified Treatment of Instabilities of Turbomachines,” J. Propul. Power, 17(3), pp. 636–643. [CrossRef]
Dotson, K. W., Rubin, S., and Sako, B. H., 2005, “Mission-Specific Pogo Stability Analysis With Correlated Pump Parameters,” J. Propul. Power, 21(4), pp. 619–626. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C. E., 1994, Hydrodynamics of Pumps, Oxford Univ. Press., New York.
Ohashi, H., 1968, “Analytical and Experimental Study of Dynamic Characteristics of Turbopumps,” Report No. NASA TN D-4298.
Anderson, D. A., Blade, R. J., and Stevens, W., 1971, “Response of a Radial-Bladed Centrifugal Pump to Sinusoidal Disturbances for Non-Cavitating Flow,” Report No. NASA TN D-6556.
Brennen, C. E., and Acosta, A. J., 1976, “The Dynamic Transfer Function for a Cavitating Inducer,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 98(2), pp. 182–191. [CrossRef]
Shimura, T., 1995, “Geometry-Effects in the Dynamic Response of Cavitating LE-7 Liquid-Oxygen Pump,” J. Propul. Power, 11(2), pp. 330–336. [CrossRef]
Hori, S., and Brennen, C. E., 2011, “Dynamic Response to Global Oscillation of Propulsion Systems With Cavitating Pumps,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 48(4), pp. 599–608. [CrossRef]
Sack, L. E., and Nottage, H. B., 1965, “System Oscillations Associated With Cavitating Inducers,” ASME J. Basic Eng., 87(4), pp. 917–924. [CrossRef]
Rosenmann, W., 1965, “Experimental Investigations of Hydrodynamically Induced Shaft Forces With a Three-Bladed Inducer,” Proc. ASME Symp. on Cavitation in Fluid Machinery, pp. 172–195.
Natanzon, M. S., Bl'tsev, N. E., Bazhanov, V. V., and Leydervarger, M. R., 1974, “Experimental Investigation of Cavitation-Induced Oscillations of Helical Inducers,” Fluid Mech.-Sov. Res., 3(1), pp. 38–45.
Miller, C. D., and Gross, L. A., 1967, “A Performance Investigation of an Eight-Inch Hubless Pump Inducer in Water and Liquid Nitrogen,” Report No. NASA TN D-3807.
Braisted, D. M., and Brennen, C. E., 1980, “Auto-Oscillation of Cavitating Inducers,” Polyphase Flow and Transport Technology, R. A.Bajura, ed., ASME, New York, pp. 157–166.
Zoladz, T., 2000, “Observations on Rotating Cavitation and Cavitation Surge From the Development of the Fastrac Engine Turbopump,” Proc. 36th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conf., Huntsville, AL, Paper No. AIAA-2000-3403.
Kamijo, K., Shimura, T., and Tsujimoto, Y., 1994, “Experimental and Analytical Study of Rotating Cavitation,” ASME Cavitation and Gas-Liquid Flow in Fluid Machinery and Devices, Lake Tahoe, CA, ASME FED, Vol. 190, pp. 33–43.
Tsujimoto, Y., Kamijo, K., and Yoshida, Y., 1993, “A Theoretical Analysis of Rotating Cavitation in Inducers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 115(1), pp. 135-141. [CrossRef]
Hashimoto, T., Yoshida, M., Watanabe, M., Kamijo, K., and Tsujimoto, Y., 1997, “Experimental Study on Rotating Cavitation of Rocket Propellant Pump Inducers,” J. Propul. Power, 13(4), pp. 488–494. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C. E., 1973, “The Dynamic Behavior and Compliance of a Stream of Cavitating Bubbles,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 95(4), pp. 533–541. [CrossRef]
Otsuka, S., Tsujimoto, Y., Kamijo, K., and Furuya, O., 1996, “Frequency Dependence of Mass Flow Gain Factor and Compliance of Cavitating Inducers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 118(2), pp. 400–408. [CrossRef]
Rubin, S., 2004, “An Interpretation of Transfer Function Data for a Cavitating Pump,” Proc. 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Florida, Paper No. AIAA-2004-4025.
Cervone, A., Tsujimoto, Y., and Kawata, Y., 2009, “Evaluation of the Dynamic Transfer Matrix of Cavitating Inducers by Means of a Simplified ‘Lumped-Parameter’ Model,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 131(4), p. 041103. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C. E., 1978, “Bubbly Flow Model for the Dynamic Characteristics of Cavitating Pumps,” J. Fluid Mech., 89, pp. 223–240. [CrossRef]
Yonezawa, K., Aono, J., Kang, D., Horiguchi, H., Kawata, Y., and Tsujimoto, Y., “Numerical Evaluation of Transfer Matrix of an Inducer Under Cavitating Condition,” (unsubmitted manuscript).
Batchelor, G. K., 1967, An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics, Cambridge University, Cambridge, England.
Wylie, E. B., Streeter, V. L., and Suo, L., 1993, Fluid Transients in Systems, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Yoshida, Y., Sasao, Y., Watanabe, M., Hashimoto, T., Iga, Y., and Ikohagi, T., 2009, “Thermodynamic Effect on Rotating Cavitation in an Inducer,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 131(9), p. 091302. [CrossRef]
Yoshida, Y., Nanri, H., Kikuta, K., Kazami, Y., Iga, Y., and Ikohagi, T., 2011, “Thermodynamic Effect on Subsynchronous Rotating Cavitation and Surge Mode Oscillation in a Space Inducer,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 133(6), p. 061301. [CrossRef]
Iga, Y., Nohmi, M., Goto, A., and Ikohagi, T., 2004, “Numerical Analysis of Cavitation Instabilities Arising in the Three-Blade Cascade,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 126(3), pp. 419–429. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Scale model of the low pressure liquid oxygen pump impeller for the space shuttle main engine (SSME) in moderate cavitating conditions in water

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Left: Typical transfer functions for a cavitating inducer obtained by Brennen et al. [2] for the 10.2-cm-diameter SSME inducer operating in water at 6000 rpm and a flow coefficient of φ1=0.07. Data is shown for four different cavitation numbers, σ= (A) 0.37, (C) 0.10, (D) 0.069, (G) 0.052, and (H) 0.044. Real and imaginary parts are denoted by the solid and dashed lines, respectively. The quasistatic pump resistance is indicated by the arrow. Right: Polynomial curves fitted to the data on the left. Adapted from Brennen et al. [2].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Dimensionless cavitation compliance (left) and mass flow gain factor (right) plotted against tip cavitation number for: (a) Brennen et al. [2] SSME 10.2-cm model inducer in water (solid squares); (b) Brennen et al. [2] SSME 7.6-cm model inducer in water (open squares); (c) Brennen and Acosta [11] J2-Oxidizer (circles) analysis; (d) Hori and Brennen [13] LE-7A LOX data (solid triangles); (e) Shimura [12] LE-7 LN2 data (open triangles)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Left: Nondimensional cavitation surge frequency as a function of cavitation number for the SSME model inducers at various speeds and flow coefficients, as shown. The theoretical prediction is the dashed line, (5σ)1/2 (adapted from [18]). Right: A dynamic model of the main flow and the parallel tip clearance backflow in a cavitating inducer.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Nondimensional time lags for the compliance, τC, and the mass flow gain factor, τM, as functions of the cavitation number for the SSME 10.2-cm model inducer in water. Taken from the data of Brennen et al. [2].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Real and imaginary parts of the dimensionless compliance (per bubble) of a stream of cavitating bubbles as functions of a reduced frequency based on the length of the cavitation zone, Ls, and its typical velocity, Us. Results shown for several cavitation numbers, σ, and bubble nuclei size, rN (from Ref. [23]).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Left: Schematic of the bubbly flow model for the dynamics of cavitating pumps. Right: Transfer functions for the SSME inducer at φ1=0.07 calculated from the bubbly flow model (adapted from Ref. [27]).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Dimensionless cavitation compliance (left) and mass flow gain factor (right) plotted against tip cavitation number for: (a) Brennen et al. [2] SSME 10.2-cm model inducer in water (solid squares); (b) Brennen et al. [2] SSME 7.6-cm model inducer in water (open squares); (c) Brennen [27] bubbly flow model results (short dash lines); (d) Brennen and Acosta [11] SSME low pressure oxidizer turbopump blade cavitation prediction (dot dash line); (e) Brennen and Acosta [11] J2-Oxidizer data (circles); (f) Brennen and Acosta [11] J2-Oxidizer blade cavitation prediction (long dash line); (g) Yonezawa et al. [28] quasistatic CFD cascade data (diamonds)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The four hydraulic system configurations whose dynamic responses are compared (reproduced from Ref. [13])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Model calculations (upper graphs) and test facility measurements (lower graphs) of the pump inlet pressure (left) and the inducer discharge pressure (right) from the cold test facility without an accumulator, the first configuration (reproduced from Ref. [13])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Model calculations (upper graphs) and test facility measurements (lower graphs) of the pump inlet pressure (left) and the inducer discharge pressure (right) from the cold test facility with an accumulator, the second configuration (reproduced from Ref. [13])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Model calculations (upper graphs) and test facility measurements (lower graphs) of the pump inlet pressure (left) and the inducer discharge pressure (right) from the hot-firing engine test, the third configuration (reproduced from Ref. [13])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Model calculations for the flight configuration subject to global acceleration. Upper graphs: in the absence of pump cavitation. Lower graphs: when the pump cavitation number is σ=0.02. Pressure amplitudes (left) and flow rate amplitudes (right) over a wide range of different oscillation frequencies and an oscillating acceleration magnitude of 0.1 m/s2. Solid, dashed, and dotted lines, respectively, present the pump discharge, inducer inlet, and tank outlet quantities (reproduced from Ref. [13]).

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