0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Evaluation of Rotor–Stator Interface Models for the Prediction of the Hydraulic and Suction Performance of a Centrifugal Pump

[+] Author and Article Information
Hyeon-Seok Shim

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Inha University,
100 Inha-Ro,
Incheon, Michuhol-Gu 22212, South Korea
e-mail: shs_8341@inha.edu

Kwang-Yong Kim

Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Inha University,
100 Inha-Ro,
Incheon, Michuhol-Gu 22212, South Korea
e-mail: kykim@inha.ac.kr

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received January 4, 2019; final manuscript received March 18, 2019; published online May 8, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Philipp Epple.

J. Fluids Eng 141(11), 111106 (May 08, 2019) (13 pages) Paper No: FE-19-1010; doi: 10.1115/1.4043272 History: Received January 04, 2019; Revised March 18, 2019

The effects of a rotor–stator interface model on the hydraulic and suction performance of a single-stage centrifugal pump have been evaluated. A three-dimensional Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) analysis was performed using the shear-stress transport turbulence model. The cavitating flow was simulated using a homogeneous two-phase mixture model and a simplified Rayleigh–Plesset cavitation model. Three performance parameters were selected to compare different cases: the hydraulic efficiency, head coefficient, and critical cavitation number for a head-drop of 3%. Frozen-rotor and stage models were evaluated for the rotor–stator interface. The evaluation was done using three different computational domains: one with a single passage of the impeller with a vaneless diffuser, one with a single passage of the impeller with the whole shape of volute casing, and another with the whole passage of the impeller with the whole shape of volute casing. Two different volute shapes were also tested. The results show that it is desirable to use the whole domain of the impeller and volute with the frozen-rotor model for accurate prediction of the suction performance. The stage model is not recommended for the prediction of the suction performance of the centrifugal pump with the volute in severe off-design conditions.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Goto, A. , 2016, “ Historical Perspective on Fluid Machinery Flow Optimization in an Industry,” Int. J. Fluid Mach. Syst., 9(1), pp. 75–84. [CrossRef]
Hirschi, R. , Dupont, P. , Avellan, F. , Favre, J. N. , Guelich, J. F. , and Parkinson, E. , 1998, “ Centrifugal Pump Performance Drop Due to Leading Edge Cavitation: Numerical Predictions Compared With Model Tests,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 120(4), pp. 705–711. [CrossRef]
Medvitz, R. B. , Kunz, R. F. , Boger, D. A. , Lindau, J. W. , Yocum, A. M. , and Pauley, L. L. , 2001, “ Performance Analysis of Cavitating Flow in Centrifugal Pumps Using Multiphase CFD,” ASME Paper No. FEDSM2001-18114.
Coutier-Delgosha, O. , Fortes-Patella, R. , Reboud, J. L. , Hofmann, M. , and Stoffel, B. , 2003, “ Experimental and Numerical Studies in a Centrifugal Pump With Two-Dimensional Curved Blades in Cavitating Condition,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 125(6), pp. 970–978. [CrossRef]
Mejri, I. , Bakir, F. , Rey, R. , and Belamri, T. , 2006, “ Comparison of Computational Results Obtained From a Homogeneous Cavitation Model With Experimental Investigations of Three Inducers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 128(6), pp. 1308–1323. [CrossRef]
Pouffary, B. , Patella, R. F. , Reboud, J.-L. , and Lambert, P.-A. , 2008, “ Numerical Simulation of 3D Cavitating Flows: Analysis of Cavitation Head Drop in Turbomachinery,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130(6), p. 061301. [CrossRef]
Kunz, R. F. , Boger, D. A. , Stinebring, D. R. , Chyczewski, T. S. , Lindau, J. W. , Gibeling, H. J. , Venkateswaran, S. , and Govindan, T. R. , 2000, “ A Preconditioned Navier–Stokes Method for Two-Phase Flows With Application to Cavitation Prediction,” Comput. Fluids, 29(8), pp. 849–875. [CrossRef]
Zwart, P. J. , Gerber, A. G. , and Belamri, T. , 2004, “ A Two-Phase Flow Model for Predicting Cavitation Dynamics,” Fifth International Conference on Multiphase Flow, Yokohama, Japan, May 30–June 3, Paper No. 152.
Dellanoy, Y. , and Kueny, J. L. , 1990, “ Two Phase Flow Approach in Unsteady Cavitation Modeling,” Proceedings of Cavitation and Multiphase Flow Forum, the Spring Meeting of ASME Fluids Engineering Division, Toronto, ON, Canada, June 4–7, pp. 153–158.
Mani, K. V. , Cervone, A. , and Hickey, J.-P. , 2016, “ Turbulence Modeling of Cavitating Flows in Liquid Rocket Turbopumps,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 139(1), p. 011301. [CrossRef]
ANSYS, 2014, “ ANSYS CFX-Solver Theory Guide-Release 15.0,” ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
Gu, F. , Engeda, A. , Cave, M. , and Di Liberti, J.-L. , 2001, “ A Numerical Investigation on the Volute/Diffuser Interaction Due to the Axial Distortion at the Impeller Exit,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 123(3), pp. 475–483. [CrossRef]
Steglich, T. , Kitzinger, J. , Seume, J. R. , Van den Braembussche, R. A. , and Prinsier, J. , 2008, “ Improved Diffuser/Volute Combinations for Centrifugal Compressors,” ASME J. Turbomach., 130(1), p. 011014. [CrossRef]
Heo, M. W. , Kim, J. H. , and Kim, K. Y. , 2015, “ Design Optimization of a Centrifugal Fan With Splitter Blades,” Int. J. Turbo Jet-Engines, 32(2), pp. 143–154. [CrossRef]
Zheng, X. , Lin, Y. , and Sun, Z. , 2018, “ Effects of Volute's Asymmetry on the Performance of a Turbocharger Centrifugal Compressor,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part G, 232(7), pp. 1235–1246. [CrossRef]
Shim, H. S. , Afzal, A. , Kim, K. Y. , and Jeong, H. S. , 2016, “ Three-Objective Optimization of a Centrifugal Pump With Double Volute to Minimize Radial Thrust at Off-Design Conditions,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 236(5), pp. 598–615. [CrossRef]
Khoeini, D. , and Shirani, E. , 2018, “ Enhancement of a Centrifugal Pump Performance by Simultaneous Use of Splitter Blades and Angular Impeller Diffuser,” Int. J. Fluid Mach. Syst., 11(2), pp. 191–204. [CrossRef]
Thakur, S. , Lin, W. , and Wright, J. , 2002, “ Prediction of Flow in Centrifugal Blower Using Quasi-Steady Rotor–Stator Models,” J. Eng. Mech., 128(10), pp. 1039–1049. [CrossRef]
Dai, Y. , Engeda, A. , Cave, M. , and Di Liberti, J.-L. , 2009, “ Numerical Study and Experimental Validation of the Performance of Two Different Volutes With the Same Compressor Impeller,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 223(2), pp. 157–166. [CrossRef]
Lorett, J. A. , and Gopalakrishnan, S. , 1986, “ Interaction Between Impeller and Volute of Pumps at Off-Design Conditions,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 108(1), pp. 12–18. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C. E. , 2007, “ Multifrequency Instability of Cavitating Inducers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 129(6), pp. 731–736. [CrossRef]
Wang, Y. , Liu, H. , Liu, D. , Yuan, S. , Wang, J. , and Jiang, L. , 2016, “ Application of the Two-Phase Three-Component Computational Model to Predict Cavitating Flow in a Centrifugal Pump and Its Validation,” Comput. Fluids, 131, pp. 142–150. [CrossRef]
Franc, J. P. , 2007, The Rayleigh-Plesset Equation: A Simple and Powerful Tool to Understand Various Aspects of Cavitation, Springer, Vienna, Austria.
Stepanoff, A. J. , 1957, Centrifugal and Axial Flow Pumps: Theory, Design, and Application, Wiley, New York.
Karassik, I. J. , Messina, J. P. , Cooper, P. , and Heald, C. C. , 2001, Pump Handbook, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Menter, F. R. , 1994, “ Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32(8), pp. 1598–1605. [CrossRef]
Bardina, J. E. , Huang, P. G. , and Coakley, T. J. , 1997, “ Turbulence Modeling Validation Testing and Development,” NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA, Report No. 110446.
Kim, S. , Lee, K.-Y. , Kim, J.-H. , and Choi, Y.-S. , 2014, “ A Numerical Study on the Improvement of Suction Performance and Hydraulic Efficiency for a Mixed-Flow Pump Impeller,” Math. Probl. Eng., 2014, p. 269483.
Zhang, D. , Shi, W. , Pan, D. , and Dubuisson, M. , 2015, “ Numerical and Experimental Investigation of Tip Leakage Vortex Cavitation Patterns and Mechanisms in an Axial Flow Pump,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 137(12), p. 121103. [CrossRef]
Zhu, B. , and Chen, H. , 2017, “ Analysis of the Staggered and Fixed Cavitation Phenomenon Observed in Centrifugal Pumps Employing a Gap Drainage Impeller,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 139(3), p. 031301. [CrossRef]
Shim, H.-S. , Kim, K.-Y. , and Choi, Y.-S. , 2018, “ Three-Objective Optimization of a Centrifugal Pump to Reduce Flow Recirculation and Cavitation,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 140(9), p. 091202. [CrossRef]
Roache, P. J. , 1998, “ Verification of Codes and Calculations,” AIAA J., 36(5), pp. 696–702. [CrossRef]
Celik, I. , and Karatekin, O. , 1997, “ Numerical Experiments on Application of Richardson Extrapolation With Nonuniform Grids,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 119(3), pp. 584–590. [CrossRef]
Choi, Y. -S. , Kim, K. -Y. , Yoo, I. -S. , and Lee, Y. -K. , 2017, “ Development of Design Program for Centrifugal and Mixed-flow Pump (4th Year Report),” Korea Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Sejong-si, South Korea, Report No. 10044860ASME.
Korean Standard Association (KSA), 2015, “ Testing Methods for Centrifugal Pumps, Mixed Flow Pumps and Axial Flow Pumps,” Standards Korean Association, Seoul, South Korea, Standard No. KS B 6301.
API, 2010, “ Centrifugal Pumps for Petroleum, Heavy Duty Chemical and Gas Industry Services,” American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC, Standard No. ANSI/API STANDARD 610.
Brennen, C. E. , 2011, Hydrodynamics of Pumps, Concepts ETI, Hartford, VT.
Gülich, J. F. , 1989, Centrifugal Pumps, Springer, New York.
Adkins, D. R. , and Brennen, C. E. , 1988, “ Analyses of Hydrodynamic Radial Forces on Centrifugal Pump Impellers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 110(1), pp. 20–28. [CrossRef]
Wang, J. , Wang, Y. , Liu, H. , Si, Q. , and Dular, M. , 2018, “ Rotating Corrected-Based Cavitation Model for a Centrifugal Pump,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 140(11), p. 111301. [CrossRef]
Fu, Y. , Yuan, J. , Yuan, S. , Pace, G. , d'Agostino, L. , Huang, P. , and Li, X. , 2014, “ Numerical and Experimental Analysis of Flow Phenomena in a Centrifugal Pump Operating Under Low Flow Rates,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 137(1), p. 011102. [CrossRef]
Visser, F. C. , 2001, “ Some User Experience Demonstrating the Use of Computational Fluid Dynamics for Cavitation Analysis and Head Prediction of Centrifugal Pumps,” ASME Paper No. FEDSM2001-18087.
Cavazzini, G. , Pavesi, G. , Santolin, A. , Ardizzon, G. , and Lorenzi, R. , 2015, “ Using Splitter Blades to Improve Suction Performance of Centrifugal Impeller Pumps,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 229(3), pp. 309–323. [CrossRef]
Parrondo-Gayo, J. L. , González-Pérez, J. , and Fernández-Francos, J. , 2002, “ The Effect of the Operating Point on the Pressure Fluctuations at the Blade Passage Frequency in the Volute of a Centrifugal Pump,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 124(3), pp. 784–790. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Example of grid system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Diagrams of different computational domains of the centrifugal pump

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Comparison of computational results for different computational domains and interface models with experimental data: (a) ψ versus ϕ and (b) σ3 versus ϕ

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Variations of performance parameters with α at different ϕ/ϕd with frozen-rotor model for SILV: (a) ψ and (b) σ3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Variations of performance parameters with α at different ϕ/ϕd with frozen-rotor model for WILV: (a) ψ and (b) σ3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Static pressure contours of SILV with frozen-rotor model for different positions of rotating domain: (a) ϕ/ϕd = 0.75, (b) ϕ/ϕd = 1.00, and (c) ϕ/ϕd = 1.25

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Static pressure distributions on blade surfaces for different positions of rotating domain and σ values with frozen-rotor model for SILV: (a) 20% span at ϕ/ϕd = 0.75 and (b) 80% span at ϕ/ϕd = 1.25

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Head-drop curves for different computational domains with frozen-rotor model: (a) ϕ/ϕd = 0.75, (b) ϕ/ϕd = 1.00, and (c) ϕ/ϕd = 1.25

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Static pressure distributions on blade surfaces near σ3 with frozen-rotor model for WILV: (a) 20% span at ϕ/ϕd = 0.75 and σ = 0.15 and (b) 80% span at ϕ/ϕd = 1.25 and σ = 0.30

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Head-drop curves for different computational domains with stage model: (a) ϕ/ϕd = 0.75, (b) ϕ/ϕd = 1.00, and (c) ϕ/ϕd = 1.25

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Volute shapes for WILV and WISV: (a) normalized area ratio versus θ and (b) 2D shapes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparisons of η/ηref, ψ, and σ3 versus ϕ between WISV and WILV with different rotor–stator interface models

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparisons of computational results between WISV and WILV for different rotor–stator interface models: (a) ψi versus ϕ and (b) ζv versus ϕ

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparisons of τ versus ϕ between WISV and WILV with different rotor–stator interface models

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Head-drop curves for WISV and WILV with different rotor–stator interface models: (a) ϕ/ϕd = 0.75, (b) ϕ/ϕd = 1.00, and (c) ϕ/ϕd = 1.25

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Circumferentially averaged-static pressure at exit of impeller with different rotor–stator interface models: (a) definition of passage number, (b) WILV, and (c) WISV

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Liquid volume fraction and velocity vectors near σ3 with frozen-rotor model: (a) WILV at 10% span (ϕ/ϕd = 0.75 and σ = 0.15) and (b) WISV at 90% span (ϕ/ϕd = 1.25 and σ = 0.78)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Iso-surfaces of vapor volume fraction of 0.1 near σ3 for different flow rates: (a) WILV with frozen-rotor model, (b) WILV with stage model, (c) WISV with frozen-rotor model, and (d) WISV with stage model

Tables

Errata

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