0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Leakage Loss Study of a Synchronal Rotary Multiphase Pump With a Full Range of Inlet Gas Volume Fractions

[+] Author and Article Information
Xu Yang

School of Energy and Power Engineering,
Xi'an Jiaotong University,
28 Xianning West Road,
Xi'an 710049, China
e-mail: yangzx@mail.xjtu.edu.cn

Yao Qin

School of Energy and Power Engineering,
Xi'an Jiaotong University,
28 Xianning West Road,
Xi'an 710049, China
e-mail: qinyao.xy@stu.xjtu.edu.cn

Zongchang Qu

School of Energy and Power Engineering,
Xi'an Jiaotong University,
28 Xianning West Road,
Xi'an 710049, China
e-mail: zchqu@mail.xjtu.edu.cn

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received May 28, 2015; final manuscript received December 26, 2015; published online April 22, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Mark R. Duignan.

J. Fluids Eng 138(7), 071301 (Apr 22, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: FE-15-1364; doi: 10.1115/1.4032590 History: Received May 28, 2015; Revised December 26, 2015

The working performance of the synchronal rotary multiphase pump (SRMP), alike other types of positive-displacement multiphase pumps, is strongly affected by leakage loss. In this paper, the leakage loss in the SRMP with a full range of inlet gas volume fractions (GVFs) was theoretically and experimentally investigated. The leakage flows in the SRMP were modeled as the one-dimensional gas–liquid flows through narrow gaps. Two types of leakage flow models, homogeneous leakage flow model (HLFM) and separated leakage flow model (SLFM), were developed. The experimental work was conducted to measure the volumetric flow rate of the SRMP using the mixtures of air and N32 oil as working fluids under various inlet GVFs and differential pressures. Comparisons between the simulated and experimental pump flow rates showed that both the accuracies of the HLFM and SLFM related to the inlet GVF. In addition to the differential pressure, the leakage loss of the SRMP was affected by the inlet GVF. The leakage flow rate increased with the inlet GVF due to the changes in physical properties of the gas–liquid leakage flow. Parametric analysis showed that leakage loss in the SRMP can be effectively reduced by reducing the rotor radial clearance without much effect on its mechanical efficiency, whereas the optimum geometric parameters of the rotor and cylinder must be calculated by means of the optimization study with consideration of both the leakage loss and friction loss.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Simulated pressures along the rotor radial gap for different rotor radial clearances

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Models of the leakage gaps: (a) rotor radial gap and (b) vane end gap

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Leakage gaps in the SRMP

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic drawings of the SRMP: (a) sectional view and (b) cutaway view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Variation of the viscosity of N32 oil with the temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Experimental and simulated volumetric flow rates for the inlet GVFs of 0.5–0.98 and the differential pressures of 0–2 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Mean absolute errors of the HLFM and SLFM for different inlet GVFs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison between the leakage losses at the rotor radial gap (G1) and vane end gap (G2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Simulated leakage loss versus inlet GVF for the differential pressure of 0.8 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Differential momentum flux versus differential pressure for the rotor radial gap (G1) and vane end gap (G2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Variations in homogeneous viscosity and liquid mass fraction within the inlet GVF range of 0–1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Differential temperature versus differential pressure for the inlet GVFs of 0.7, 0.9, 0.95, and 0.98

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Leakage losses of the rotor radial gap versus radial clearance for the differential pressure of 0.4 MPa and inlet GVFs of 0.9 and 0.97

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Leakage loss at rotor radial gap versus eccentricity-cylinder radius ratio for the differential pressure of 0.4 MPa and inlet GVFs of 0.9 and 0.97

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Leakage loss at rotor radial gap versus cylinder length–radius ratio for the differential pressure of 0.4 MPa and inlet GVFs of 0.9 and 0.97

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