Advertisement

CFD-based analysis for finding critical wall roughness on centrifugal pump at design and off-design conditions

  • Dhairyasheel DeshmukhEmail author
  • Abdus Samad
Technical Paper
  • 54 Downloads

Abstract

Three-dimensional numerical analyses were conducted to study fluid flow behavior over the rough surface in an electric submersible pump at the design and off-design conditions. The entire range of smooth, transition and fully rough surfaces was considered for the study of the turbulent boundary layer properties and its effect on the pump performance. The calculated performance using CFD showed a good agreement with the experimental data. For wall-bounded turbulent flow through a pump passage, the kω SST turbulence model was used along with automatic wall function. To study wall roughness effect at the design and off-design conditions, the parameters such as flow rate, impeller speed and roughness factors were varied. Strong interaction between the rough wall and fluid changes the pressure, velocity gradients and turbulence parameters within boundary and affects the overall pump performance. The result showed that performance initially reduced to a critical value as the roughness increased and increased thereafter. A clear observation of turbulent kinetic energy and eddy viscosity showed that near-wall turbulence over the critical wall roughness increases the momentum transfer, and consequently the head developed by pump increases.

Keywords

Electric submersible pump Surface roughness Off-design condition Wall-bounded turbulent flow 

List of symbols

Abbreviations

BEP

Best efficiency point

EV

Eddy viscosity (Pa s)

ESP

Electric submersible pump

RANS

Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes

SST

Shear stress transport

TKE

Turbulence kinetic energy (m2/s2)

Symbols

b

Width of pump passage (mm)

B

Additive constant in logarithmic law

C

Power law multiplicative factor

Cf

Skin friction coefficient

Cp

Coefficient of pressure

H

Head developed (m)

F

Friction factor

i/p P

Input power (kW)

ks

Equivalent sand roughness (mm)

K

Roughness factor

M

Hydraulic mean depth of radial flow at impeller outlet (mm)

N

Impeller speed (RPM)

Ne

Power coefficient

ns

Specific speed (RPM)

p

Pressure (Pa)

Q

Volume flow rate (m3/s)

R

Radius (m)

Ra

Arithmetic average roughness (mm)

RRMS

Root-mean-square roughness (mm)

t

Blade thickness (m)

U

Mean velocity (m/s)

Uf

Frictional velocity (m/s)

U

Free stream velocity (m/s)

z

Number of blades

D

Characteristic length

Greek letters

φ

Flow coefficient

Ψ

Head coefficient

τ

Pump shaft power coefficient

θ

Blade angle Theta (°)

η

Pump efficiency (%)

ρ

Density of fluid (kg/m3)

τw

Wall shear stress (N/m2)

ω

Angular rotational speed of impeller (rad/s)

υ

Kinematic viscosity (m2/s)

Subscripts

1 and 2

Impeller inlet and outlet

3 and 4

Diffuser inlet and outlet

References

  1. 1.
    Clegg J, Bucaram S et al (1993) Recommendations and comparisons for selecting artificial-lift methods (includes associated papers 28645 and 29092). J Pet Technol 45(12):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wilson BL et al (1990) The effects of abrasives on electrical submersible pumps. SPE Drill Eng 5(02):171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Van Esch B, Kruyt NP (2001) Hydraulic performance of a mixed-flow pump: unsteady inviscid computations and loss models. J Fluids Eng 123(2):256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thin KC, Khaing MM, Aye KM (2008) Design and performance analysis of centrifugal pump. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 46:422Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maitelli CP, Bezerra F, Mata W (2010) Simulation of flow in a centrifugal pump of ESP systems using computational fluid dynamics. Braz J Pet Gas 4(1):1–9Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gulich J (1999) Pumping highly viscous fluids with centrifugal pumps part 2. World Pumps 1999(396):39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clauser FH (1954) Turbulent boundary layers in adverse pressure gradients. J Aeronaut Sci 21(2):91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gulich J et al (2003) Effect of Reynolds number and sur-face roughness on the efficiency of centrifugal pumps. Trans Am Soc Mech Eng J Fluids Eng 125(4):670Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Woodcock J, Marusic I (2014) The attached eddy hypothesis and von Karmans constant. Dynamics 7:8Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perry A, Li JD (1990) Experimental support for the attached-eddy hypothesis in zero-pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layers. J Fluid Mech 218:405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nikuradse J (1933) VDI Forschungsheft. CiteseerGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nece R, Daily J (1960) Roughness effects on frictional resistance of enclosed rotating disks. J Basic Eng 82(3):553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang L, Zhao Y, Fu S (2017) Computational study of drag increase due to wall roughness for hypersonic flight. Aeronaut J 121(1237):395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McClain ST, Hodge BK, Bons JP (2003) In: ASME Turbo Expo 2003, collocated with the 2003 international joint power generation conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, pp 31–42Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hodge B, Taylor R (1991) In: 27th joint propulsion conference, p 2435Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aupoix B (2015) Roughness corrections for the kω shear stress transport model: status and proposals. J Fluids Eng 137(2):021202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patel V (1998) Perspective: flow at high Reynolds number and over rough surfaces-achilles heel of CFD. Trans Am Soc Mech Eng J Fluids Eng 120:434Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bai T, Liu J, Zhang W, Zou Z (2014) Effect of surface roughness on the aerodynamic performance of turbine blade cascade. Propul Power Res 3(2):82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Adams T, Grant C, Watson H (2012) A simple algorithm to relate measured surface roughness to equivalent sand-grain roughness. Int J Mech Eng Mechatron 1:66Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morrison JF (2007) The interaction between inner and outer regions of turbulent wall-bounded flow. Philos Trans R Soc Lond A Math Phys Eng Sci 365(1852):683MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krogstad P, Antonia R, Browne L (1992) Comparison between rough-and smooth-wall turbulent boundary layers. J Fluid Mech 245:599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cui J, Patel VC, Lin CL (2003) Large-eddy simulation of turbulent ow in a channel with rib roughness. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 24(3):372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cardwell ND, Vlachos PP, Thole KA (2011) Developing and fully developed turbulent ow in ribbed channels. Exp Fluids 50(5):1357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jimenez J (2004) Turbulent flows over rough wallsGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Caridad J, Kenyery F et al (2004) CFD analysis of electric submersible pumps (ESP) handling two-phase mixtures. J Energy Res Technol 126:99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Belamri BC, Galpin (2005) CFD analysis of a 15 stage axial compressor part 1: methods, ASME turbo expoGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Aldaş K, Yapıcı R (2014) Investigation of effect of scale and surface roughness on efficiency of water jet pump using CFD. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Dyn 8(1):14Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Menter FR (1994) Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 32(8):1598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cheah K, Lee T et al (2007) Numerical flow simulation in a centrifugal pump at design and off-design conditions. J Rotating Mach 1–8Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhou W, Zhao Z et al (2003) Investigation of flow through centrifugal pump impellers using computational fluid dynamics. J Rotating Mach 9(1):49–61MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Delgosha OC, Fortes-Patella R, Reboud JL (2003) Experimental and numerical studies in a centrifugal pump with two-dimensional curved blades in cavitating condition. J Fluids Eng 125(6):970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kaewnai S, Chamaoot M, Wongwises S (2009) Predicting performance of radial flow type impeller of centrifugal pump using CFD. J Mech Sci Technol 23(6):1620–1627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Boyle RJ, Stripf M (2009) Simplied approach to predicting rough surface transition. J Turbomach 131(4):041020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Masad J (1995) On the roughness reynolds number transition criterion. J Fluids Eng 117:727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goodhand M, Walton K et al (2016) The limitations of using “Ra” to describe surface roughness. J Turbo Mach 138(10):1010033Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Varley F (1961) Effects of impeller design and surface roughness on the performance of centrifugal pumps. Proc Inst Mech Eng 175(1):955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li WG (2011) Effects of exit blade angle, viscosity and roughness in centrifugal pump investigated by CFD computation. Task Q 15(1):21Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jafarzadeh B, Hajari A et al (2011) The flow simulation of low-specific-speed high-speed centrifugal pump. Appl Math Model 35:242zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Timar P (2005) Dimensionless characteristics of centrifugal pump. In: International conference of Slovak Society of Chemical Engineering (2005)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kaewnai S, Chamaoot M, Wongwises S (2008) Predicting performance of radial flow type impeller of centrifugal PMP using CFD. J Mech Sci Technol 23:1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Xing Y et al (2016) Experimental investigation of surface roughness effect on flow behavior and heat transfer characteristics for circular micro channels. Chin J Aeronaut 29(6):1575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Masad JA (1995) On the roughness Reynolds number transition criterion. J Fluids Eng 117(4):727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pope SB (2001) Turbulent flows. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Antonia R, Krogstad PA (2001) Turbulence structure in boundary layers over different types of surface roughness. Fluid Dyn Res 28(2):139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pimenta MM, Moffat RJ, Kays WM (1975) The turbulent boundary layer: an experimental study of the transport of momentum and heat with the effect of roughness ​(No. HMT-21). Stanford University, CAGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shafi H, Antonia R (1995) Anisotropy of the Reynolds stresses in a turbulent boundary layer on a rough wall. Exp Fluids 18(3):213CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ocean EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology MadrasChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations