0
Technical Briefs

Multiobjective Optimization Design of a Pump–Turbine Impeller Based on an Inverse Design Using a Combination Optimization Strategy

[+] Author and Article Information
Wei Yang

e-mail: wyang@cau.edu.cn

Ruofu Xiao

e-mail: xrf@cau.edu.cn

College of Water Resources and Civil Engineering,
China Agricultural University,
Beijing 100083, China

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received May 13, 2013; final manuscript received September 3, 2013; published online October 15, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Frank C. Visser.

J. Fluids Eng 136(1), 014501 (Oct 15, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: FE-13-1312; doi: 10.1115/1.4025454 History: Received May 13, 2013; Revised September 01, 2013

This paper presents an automatic multiobjective hydrodynamic optimization strategy for pump–turbine impellers. In the strategy, the blade shape is parameterized based on the blade loading distribution using an inverse design method. An efficient response surface model relating the design parameters and the objective functions is obtained. Then, a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm is applied to the response surface functions to find a Pareto front for the final trade-off selection. The optimization strategy was used to redesign a scaled pump–turbine. Model tests were conducted to validate the final design and confirm the validity of the design strategy.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Pump–turbine design process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Sketch of the impeller meridional channel shape

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Whole machine passage model for CFD calculations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Pump–turbine optimization work flow chart

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Single impeller passage model for CFD calculations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Typical blade loading parameterization

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Definition of lean angle γ

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Pareto front for the optimization results

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of blade loading distributions for the baseline and optimized designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Measured Q-η curves of the turbine mode for the baseline and optimized designs at the design head Hd

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Measured Q-η curves of the turbine mode for the baseline and optimized designs at the rated head Hr

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Pump hydraulic efficiency simulation results for the baseline and optimized designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Turbine hydraulic efficiency simulation results at the design head Hd for the baseline and optimized designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

3D velocity streamlines in the blade passage for the pump mode at the design point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Velocity vectors at the 50% spanwise view for pump mode at the design point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Three-dimensional velocity streamlines in the blade passage for turbine mode at the design point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Velocity vectors at the 50% spanwise view for turbine mode at the design point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Model test rig for pump–turbine

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Measured Q-H and Q-η curves of the pump mode for the baseline and optimized designs

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