Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2012–1:14pm] [1–12]
K:/PIA/PIA 451411.3d (PIA) [PREPRINTER stage]
Original Article
Abstract
A combined direct and inverse iterative design method was developed for the hydraulic design of centrifugal pump
impellers. This method is based on the fluid continuity and motion equations and solves for the meridional velocity taking
into account the effects of the blade shape on the flow. The blade shape is drawn by point-by-point integration with blade
thickening and smoothing using conformal mapping. Two examples designed using the direct and inverse iterative design
method are compared to results using the traditional design method with significantly different meridional velocity
distributions and three-dimensional blade shapes. Numerical simulations and tests show that the highest pump efficiency
is 2.2% higher with this design method than with the traditional design method. The numerical results agree well with the
experiments with a smoother flow pattern than with the traditional design, especially in the volute.
Keywords
Centrifugal pump, direct and inverse iterative, design method, experiment, numerical simulation
dV1
¼ PðsÞV1 ð1Þ
ds
Figure 1. Orthogonal curvilinear coordinate system and
d @ 1 sin @ ln quasi-orthogonal line.
PðsÞ ¼ sin þ sin
ds @l cos r @l
ð2Þ the S1 stream surface is solved using the finite element
method.10 The meridional velocity gradient equation of
where V1 is the meridional velocity, s the quasi-ortho- the S2 stream surface based on the quasi-orthogonal
gonal line, l the meridional streamline, the angle lines shown in Figure 1 is
between the meridional streamline and vertical, the
angle between the meridional streamline and direction dV1 C
¼ AV1 þ B þ ð5Þ
normal to the quasi-orthogonal curve, as shown in ds V1
Figure 1, the blockage factor and r the calculation
point radius. The parameters A, B and C in the blade zone are
The general solution of equation (1) is
Rs 1 1 @ sin 1 d
A¼ 2 þ þ
V1 ðsÞ ¼ V1c e sc
PðsÞds
ð3Þ @ @l r cos ds
1þ r
@l
d @ 1 @ d @
where V1c is the meridional velocity at the impeller hub sin þ r2 þ 1 þ r2 sin
and sc the quasi-orthogonal curve length at the impeller ds @l cos @l ds @l
hub. The integration constant can be obtained from the d @ 2 @ @ d 2 @
þ r r
continuity equation ds @l @l @l ds @l
ð6Þ
Q
V1c ¼ R Rs ð4Þ
sb
2r e sc
PðsÞds
cos ds 2!r d @
sc B¼ 2 sin cosð Þ ð7Þ
@ ds @l
1þ r
@l
where Q is the flow rate and sb the quasi-orthogonal
curve length at the impeller shroud. Equation (1) is
1 dEr
solved based on the principle that the volume flow C¼ 2 ð8Þ
rates in each sub-flow channel are identical to calculate @ ds
1þ r
the meridional velocity. @l
This method is superior to the traditional design
method by calculating the meridional velocity using where Er is the mechanical energy per unit mass. The
both the fluid continuity and motion equations and parameters A, B and C in the non-blade zone are
taking the effects of blade shape on the flow into con-
sideration. Thus, the direct and inverse iterative design 1 @ d sin
A¼ sin sin ð9Þ
method possesses a stronger theoretical foundation. cos @l ds r
The meridional velocity is calculated in the direct
and inverse iterative design method from two stream B¼0 ð10Þ
surfaces. The velocity potential function equation of
Tan et al. 3
r2 ! þ rV3 dðrV3 Þ dEr where ’ is the wrap angle, e the blade angle and l0 the
C¼ þ ð11Þ total meridional streamline length. The blade angle dis-
r2 ds ds
tribution can be expressed by the quadratic function
where ! is the impeller angular velocity, the calcula-
tion point circle angle and V3 the circumferential com- e ¼ ae l 2 þ be l þ c e ð13Þ
ponent of the velocity.
With the given blade angle distribution along the where ae, be and ce are coefficients. The coefficients be
streamline, the blade bone line shape can be determined and ce can be found from the given e1 for the blade
by integrating the blade differential equation point- leading edge at l ¼ 0 and e2 for the blade trailing edge
by-point as at l ¼ l0. Then, the blade angle distribution can be writ-
ten as
Z l0
1
’¼ dl ð12Þ e ¼ e1 þ l ðe2 e1 Þ=lo þ ae l ðl lo Þ ð14Þ
0 tan e r
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of centrifugal pump performance test apparatus: 1. inlet valve; 2. vacuum gauge; 3. centrifugal pump;
4. torque meter; 5. motor; 6. pressure gauge; 7. flow meter; and 8. outlet valve.
Tan et al. 5
Figure 5. Meridional velocity distributions from the direct and Figure 6. Final meridional velocity distribution from the direct
inverse iterative design method for the two stream surfaces for and inverse iterative design method.
the initial impeller.
continuity and motion equations and takes into The result gives the coordinate data for the 3D
account the effects of the blade shape on the flow; model to complete the hydraulic design of the centrifu-
(c) the velocities determined by the direct calculation gal pump impeller.
are used in the inverse design using point-by-point
integration to draw the blade shape with the con-
Numerical and experimental verification
formal mapping method to thicken and smooth the
blade; and The reliability of the design results was evaluated using
(d) once the updated impeller is designed, direct calcu- numerical 3D turbulent flow simulations with actual
lations are again used to obtain the meridional tests of the hydraulic performance.
velocity.
Numerical simulations
Steps (c) and (d) are repeated until the blade shape The commercial CFD code Fluent was used to solve the
change between two iterations falls below the designed incompressible continuity equation and Reynolds time
tolerance. The present impeller designs used a tolerance averaged Navier–Stokes equation to simulate the flow
of 0.0001. through the pump passage, with the renormalization
Figure 8. Computational grids for pump A2: (a) volute and (b) impeller.
Figure 9. Pressure coefficient distributions on the blade surfaces of pump A2: (a) Q ¼ 0.6Qd; (b) Q ¼ Qd; and (c) Q ¼ 1.3Qd.
Tan et al. 7
Figure 10. Pressure coefficient distributions in pump A2: (a) Q ¼ 0.6Qd and (b) Q ¼ Qd; and (c) Q ¼ 1.3Qd.
Figure 11. Relative velocities between the blade of pump A2: (a) Q ¼ 0.6Qd; (b) Q ¼ Qd; and (c) Q ¼ 1.3Qd.
Tan et al. 9
group k–" turbulence model.11 The governing equa- difference scheme used to discretize the other terms.
tions above were solved using the SIMPLEC algorithm. The boundary conditions were: (a) constant flow vel-
The second order upwind scheme was used to discretize ocity at the inlet; (b) constant pressure at the outlet and
the convective term with the second order central (c) no-slip conditions along the impeller blades, side-
walls, volute casing and the inlet and outlet pipe
walls. The rotating impeller domain was coupled to
the stationary volute domain using the multiple rotat-
Table 2. Design parameters for pumps B1 and B2.
ing reference frame method.
Flow rate, Qd (m3/h) 220 The pressure coefficient Cp was defined as
Head, H (m) 32
p
Rotational speed, n (r/min) 1480 Cp ¼ ð17Þ
Number of blade, Z 6
0:5U22
Impeller diameter, D2 (mm) 322
Blade width at exit, b2 (mm) 22
where p denotes the pressure, the density and U2 the
peripheral velocity.
Figure 13. Impeller models for pumps (a) B1 and (b) B2.
Figure 14. Predicted and measured hydraulic performance characteristics for pumps (a) B1 and (b) B2.
Figure 15. Relative velocity distributions in the impeller for pumps (a) B1 and (b) B2.
Tan et al. 11
Figure 16. Relative velocity distributions in the volute for pumps (a) B1 and (b) B2.
surface causes a small low pressure zone on the SS at as with pumps A1 and A2. The numerical models
the blade leading edge for all three flow rates. Figure 10 had 1,350,000 elements. The predicted hydraulic per-
shows the pressure coefficient distribution inside the formances of the centrifugal pumps are compared
centrifugal pump. The pressure gradually increases with the test data in Figure 14. The optimum efficiency
from the pump entrance to the outlet, and is not even of pump B1 was 75.2% for Q ¼ 225.7 m3/h and
between the blades due to the asymmetrical volute geo- H ¼ 30.5 m and for pump B2 was 77.4% for
metric structure and the interaction between the impel- Q ¼ 225.8 m3/h and H ¼ 31.5 m. Thus, the efficiency of
ler and volute. The flow rate has a great impact on the pump B2 was 2.2% higher than the highest efficiency of
pressure distribution with the best distribution at the pump B1. The simulation results are in good agreement
design flow rate. Figure 11 shows the relative velocity with the experimental data with a maximum difference
between the blades. The relative velocity gradient is of less than 5%.
high near the blade surface. The relative velocity Figure 15 shows the relative velocity distributions in
streamlines in the channel middle are similar to the the impeller of pumps B1 and B2. The relative velocities
blade bone line and the relative velocity is uniform in the impeller of pump B2 are more uniform than in
without flow separation for the design flow rate. B1, especially at the impeller exit. Figure 16 shows the
Thus, the blade designed by the direct and inverse itera- relative velocity distributions in pumps B1 and B2 in
tive design method better controls the flow and is more the volute, where the fluid velocity gradually decreases
suitable for the 3D flow. along the flow direction as the kinetic energy changes
Figure 12 shows the hydraulic performance curves, into pressure energy. A vortex develops at the volute
with the head, H, efficiency, , shaft power PW in throat in pump B1, whereas the flow in this area in
function of the flow rate, Q. At the optimum pump pump B2 is very smooth. This shows that the hydraulic
working condition, the highest efficiency was 74.8% performance of the impeller designed by the direct and
for Q ¼ 22.6 m3/h and H ¼ 7.1 m. The high efficiency inverse iterative design method is better than that of the
region is wide near the pump design point and the cen- traditional design method for the same design
trifugal pump is stable over the entire operating range. parameters.
The head flow curve smoothly decreases.
Conclusions
Pumps B1 and B2 A direct and inverse iterative design method was devel-
Pump B1 was designed using the traditional design oped for centrifugal pump impellers based on the fluid
method while pump B2 was designed using the direct continuity and motion equations taking into account
and inverse iterative design method for the same design the influence of the blade shape on the flow. Two
parameters given in Table 2. designs were evaluated numerically and in tests to val-
Figure 13 shows the two impeller models given idate the hydraulic performance by the direct and
by the two methods with the blade shapes different inverse iterative design method. The blade twist in the
direct and inverse iterative design is more serious than 4. Asuaje M, Bakir F, Kouidri S, et al. Computer-aided
in the traditional design for both cases. The CFD ana- design and optimization of centrifugal pumps. Proc
lyses demonstrate that the flow patterns in the pumps IMechE Part A: J Power Energy 2005; 219(3): 187–193.
designed by the direct and inverse iterative design 5. Bonaiuti D and Zangeneh M. On the coupling of inverse
design and optimization techniques for the multiobjec-
method are better than in the pumps designed by the
tive, multipoint design of turbomachinery blades.
traditional design method, especially in the volute. The ASME J Turbomach 2009; 131: 021014.
experimental results also verify that the pumps designed 6. Bonaiuti D, Zangeneh M, Aartojarvi R, et al. Parametric
by the direct and inverse iterative design method have design of a waterjet pump by means of inverse design,
better hydraulic performance, with the highest effi- CFD calculations and experimental analyses. ASME J
ciency 2.2% higher than in the pump designed by the Fluids Eng 2010; 132: 031104.
traditional design method. 7. Cao SL, Peng GY and Yu ZY. Hydrodynamic design of
rotodynamic pump impeller for multiphase pumping by
combined approach of inverse design and CFD analysis.
Funding ASME J Fluids Eng 2005; 127: 330–338.
8. Tan L, Cao SL and Gui SB. Hydraulic design and pre-
This work was supported by the National Natural
whirl regulation law of inlet guide vane for centrifugal
Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 51176088 and
pump. Sci China Technol Sci 2010; 53(8): 2142–2151.
51179090), National Basic Research Program of China
9. Majidi K. Numerical study of unsteady flow in a centri-
(grant no. 2009CB724304) and Open Research Fund
fugal pump. ASME J Turbomach 2005; 127(4): 363–371.
Program of State key Laboratory of Hydroscience and
10. Peng GY, Cao SL, Ishizuka M, et al. Design optimization
Engineering (sklhse-2012-E-02).
of axial flow hydraulic turbine runner: Part I-an
improved Q3D inverse method. Int J Numer Methods
Fluids 2002; 39(6): 517–531.
References 11. Yakhot V and Orszag SA. Renormalization group ana-
1. Wang FJ. A method for inverse calculation of the blade S2 lysis of turbulence I: basic theory. J Sci Comput 1986;
stream surface in centrifugal pump and its application. 1(1): 3–51.
J Hydraul Eng 1998; 1: 10–13.
2. Lu JL, Xi G, Qi DT, et al. Research on the inverse design
method for 3D blades in centrifugal pumps. J Eng
Thermophys 2002; 23(S1): 61–64.
3. Goto A, Nohmi M, Sakurai T, et al. Hydrodynamic design
system for pumps based on 3D CAD, CFD, and inverse
design method. ASME J Fluids Eng 2002; 124: 329–335.