Predicting Performance Curves of Centrifugal Pumps In the
Absence of OEM Data
Jayanthi Vijay Sarathy, M.E, CEng, MIChemE, Chartered Chemical Engineer, IChemE, UK
Abstract: Chemical and Mechanical
Engineers in the oil & gas industry often
carry out the task of conducting technical
studies to evaluate piping and pipeline
systems during events such as pump trips
and block valve failures that can lead to pipes
cracking at the welded joints, pump impellers
rotating in the reverse direction and
damaged pipe supports due to excessive
vibrations to name a few. Although much
literature is available to mitigate such
disturbances, a key set of data to conduct
transient studies are pump performance
curves. A pump performance curve is a plot
between pump head and flow rate. In
Greenfield projects, when no pump vendor
data is available, a necessity arises to use
performance curves to conduct
pipeline/piping studies to check for
parameters such as design pressure.
In Brownfield projects, when a plant
undergoes revamp for new process
conditions, often existing pumps are reused
for different applications with or without
impeller trimming. Towards this, pumps
need to be re-evaluated for head available for
the new process conditions. With wear and
tear in pumps systems in ageing facilities that
causes deviation from the manufactured OEM
pump curves, it becomes difficult to
accurately predict if the pump can deliver the
required head for the new application.
Traditionally performance curves are
provided by the pump original equipment
manufacturers (OEM) based on their
customized/proprietary models of pump
impellers which are designed using methods
such as computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
and also field tested to provide guarantee in
meeting the requirements of the customer.
The present paper is aimed at applying
engineering research in industrial
applications for practicing engineers. It
provides a methodology called from available
literature from past researchers, allowing
engineers to predict performance curves for
an End Suction single stage radial pump. This
article is provided for guidance alone and
engineering advice should be sought before
application.
Keywords: Performance Curves, End Suction
Single Stage Radial Type Centrifugal Pump,
Euler Turbomachine Equation, Pump Losses
Introduction
The working principle of a centrifugal pump
involves using centrifugal force of a rotating
enclosed impeller in a casing to impart
energy to a fluid. In doing so, a portion of the
energy is lost in the form of mechanical
losses with the remaining being transferred
to the fluid that raises the fluid’s pressure
when discharging from the pump casing. A
pump impeller consists of vanes that are
positioned on a disc to hold fluid and transfer
energy as the impeller rotates. The impeller
vane geometry is mainly of three types,
namely, forward, straight and backward.
Backward positioned vanes are popularly
used for the reason that with increase in
volumetric flow, the power consumed
decreases. A representation of the power
consumption trends between the three vane
geometries is shown in figure 1.
Page 1 of 17

Figure 1. Vane Geometry and Power Consumption
In the current undertaking, a backward vane
positioned impeller is chosen considering
lower power consumption at higher flow
rates for a single stage radial flow pump.
Principle of Performance Curves
Based on the impeller geometry,
performance curves are derived from an
aerodynamic analysis of the pump impeller.
The basic equation that governs fluid
behaviour at the pump’s impeller is the
Euler’s Turbomachine equation relating
pump head and fluid velocity. To apply
Euler’s Equation, the fluid’s velocity
components are expressed as shown in Fig. 2.
Figure 2. Velocity Triangle of Pump Impeller
Net Theoretical head Relationship
From the velocity triangle shown in Fig. 1, the
net theoretical head is the head developed
based on a finite number of vanes in the
impeller. The aerodynamic relationship
between the net theoretical head (HNet
Theoretical) developed by the fluid for a given
impeller speed and its respective velocity
components at the impeller inner diameter
(ID) represented by subscript ‘1’ and outer
diameter (OD) represented by subscript ‘2’ is
written as,
HTheoretical 
1
U 2V 2  U1V1  (1)
g
H Net Theoretical 
1
g

U 2V' 2  U1V'1  (2)
Volumetric Flow, Q  D2b2Vr 2 2 (3)
From the above relationships, a contraction
factor (2) is applied to estimate the flow that
takes into account the decrease in inlet area
of the impeller due to vane thickness. The
impeller outlet diameter passage width (b2)
is considered to estimate the flow rate (Q)
into the impeller. The chief parameter based
on which other impeller parameters such as
vane angle, passage width, number of vanes,
etc. are calculated is the impeller inner
diameter (ID), D1 and outer diameter (OD),
D2 for a given impeller speed (N).
Pump Specific Speed (Ns)
Pump specific speed is a measure to
determine what kind of pumps can be
selected for a given service. Based on the
pump specific speed value, the choice of
pumps can vary from radial, Francis Vane,
mixed flow or axial flow. The pump specific
speed [3] is calculated in metric terms with
the below described equation,
 m3 
N Q  rpm. 
Specific Speed, s
N  min  (4)
H  m 4 
4 
3 3
 
Page 2 of 17
 the fluid making contact with the impeller tip.
This causes the actual fluid velocity leaving
the impeller diameter to be slightly lower
than the impeller tip speed with the slippage
expressed as a ‘slip factor’ (). The slip factor
Figure 3. Pump Specific Speed Chart [4] is incorporated into the velocity triangle
The above graph shows a distribution of the relationship to estimate the tangential
pump specific speeds based on which the velocity terms V1 and V2, radial velocity
type of pump is selected. Based on the pump terms Vr1 and Vr2 as,
speed the volumetric efficiency can be Vr1
calculated [3] using the relationship, V 1  U1  (8)
Tan1
1
Volumetric Efficiency,  v  (5) Vr 2
1.124
1 2/3 V 2  U 2  (9)
Ns Tan 2

Volumetric efficiency is used to estimate the The slippage factor () is computed by
total flow rate entering into the impeller eye relating to the number of vanes (Z) and inlet
which in turn is used to calculate the impeller and outlet diameter vane angle, 1 and 2 as,
eye diameter. Therefore (Qs’) is computed as,
Sin 2 R
  1 , For, 1   lim it (10)
Total Flow rate, Qs' 
Q
(6) 1 Z 0.7
R2
v
   
1
3 
Qs’ represents the flow that is required to    R1    lim it  
enter the impeller to meet the discharge flow Sin 2    R2   
And,   1  1  
conditions indicated by ‘Q’ since a portion of 1Z 0.7   1   lim it 
 
the incoming fluid is expected to accumulate    
   
in the pump. Hence all impeller design and
performance curves calculations are made R1
For,   lim it (11)
with Qs’ to meet conditions of Q. R2
 8.16 Sin 2 
Speed and Angular Velocity Relationship  
And,  lim it  e  Z 
(12)
The impeller diameters are calculated by
relating the impeller dimensions to the The number of vanes (Z) required is
impeller speed (N). The impeller speed is calculated as,
converted to velocity terms, i.e., angular
velocity (). The relationship between
 D  D1     2 
Z  6.5   2   Sin 1  (13)
impeller speed and angular velocity is,  D2  D1   2 

2    N rpm The vane angle at the inner diameter (ID) is

Angular Velocity, m / s   (7)
60
Impeller Vane Angle (1, 2) Relationship
It is to be noted that when a fluid is rotated
by a surface, a certain amount of slippage
occurs between the impeller diameter tip and
computed from the velocity triangle
relationship by relating it to the radial
component and impeller tip speed as follows,
 Vr1 
Impeller ID Vane Angle, 1  Tan1   (14)
 U1 

Page 3 of 17
Impeller Dimensions Relationship
The main parameters required to be
estimated are, End of Main Shaft Diameter
(Ds), Hub Diameter (DH), Hub Length (LH),
impeller inlet passage width (b1), impeller
outlet passage width (b2) impeller eye
diameter (D0), impeller inner diameter (D1),
and impeller outlet diameter (D2). The
impeller outer diameter (D2) can be
calculated using Stepanoff Chart [2]. To
calculate the above mentioned parameters,
the following equations can be used.
The contraction factor () for the inner and
outer diameters can be estimated by using
the thickness of the impeller passage (t) at
the inlet and outlet diameters as,
Zt
Contraction factor,   1  (28)
DSin
The values of Ku, Km1, Km2 and D2/D1 can be
computed from Stepanoff Chart [3],

 PHP  321000 
1
3
Shaft Dia, Dsh    (15)
 N rpm  S s  psi
Hub Diameter, DH  1.5 to 2.0  Dsh (16)

Hub Length, LH  1.0 to 2.0  DH (17)

The fluid velocity at Impeller Eye (Veye) is

calculated as,

Veye  0.07 to 0.11  0.00023N s  2gH (18)

The impeller eye diameter (D0) is taken to be,

4  Qs'
Impeller Eye Dia, D0   DH2 (19)
  Veye

Impeller OD Tip Speed, U 2  K u 2 gH (20)

OD Radial Velocity, Vr 2  K m2 2 gH (21)

ID Radial Velocity, Vr1  K m1 2 gH (22)

60  U 2
Impeller Outer Diameter, D2  (23)
 N
 D2  Figure 4. Stepanoff Chart for Ku, Km1, Km2, D2/D1
Impeller Outer Diameter, D1  D2   (24)
 D1  From the equations presented, design
procedures can be commenced by assuming
  D1  N
Impeller ID Tip Speed, U1  (25) ‘2’ and iteratively calculating until the actual
60
head calculated matches with the required
Qs' pump head. Followed by calculating the net
Inlet Passage Width, b1  (26)
D1Vr1 1 theoretical head, the actual head is calculated
Qs' by subtracting the pump losses for a range of
Outlet Passage Width, b2  (27) flow rates.
D2Vr 2 2

Page 4 of 17
Pump Losses
In a realistic scenario, centrifugal pumps
experience different forms of mechanical
losses. The different types of losses expected
during pump operation are (i) Circulation
losses, (ii) Inlet Incidence losses, (iii) Surface
Friction losses, (iv) Volute Friction losses and
(v) Diffusion losses. In addition, parasitic
losses are also considered such as (vi) Disc
Friction losses and (vii) Recirculation losses.
When these losses are subtracted from the
theoretical head, the actual head developed
by the pump is arrived at. The below figure
shows the difference between the net
theoretical head and actual pump head.
Figure 5. Theoretical Head vs. Actual Head
Circulation Losses
Circulation flow losses are characterized by
circulatory flow that exists within a closed
impeller channel when the impeller is
rotating. At this point, there would be a
mismatch of relative velocity (W) between
the inlet side and outlet side of the impeller
vane. The circulation head is calculated as,
H circ  H Theoretical  H Net Theoretical
(29)
U 2V 2  U1V 1   U 2V' 2  U1V'1 
H circ  (30)
g
H circ 
  
U 2 V 2  V' 2  U1 V'1  V 1  (31)
g roughness. As a result when the fluid enters
U 2 Vs 2   U1 Vs1 
H circ  (32)
g
The slip velocity is normalized by the
impeller tangential velocity as [6],
Vs
 s  1 (33)
U
Therefore the slip velocities at the inlet
diameter (ID) and outlet diameter (OD) are,
Vs1  1   s1   U1  V'1  V 1 (34)
Vs 2  1   s 2   U 2  V 2  V' 2 (35)
With the assumption that the slip factor is
nearly equal at both the impeller ID and OD,
the whirl velocities are written as,
V'1  U1 2   s1   Vr1Cot1 (36)
V' 2  U 2 s 2  Vr 2Cot 2 (37)
Inlet Incidence Losses
Incidence flow losses are characterized by
losses resulting from a forced change of
velocity when fluid enters the pump impeller.
When fluid enters the impeller eye in a
normal direction, it is followed by a radial
change in the direction of fluid flow.
Additionally due to difference between the
vane inlet angle and angle at which the fluid
enters the vane cascade, a loss of head occurs
due to forced change in velocity. The
incidence losses are calculated as [6],
hin  f in 
U1  V 1 2
(38)
2g
Where, f in  0.5  0.7
Qs'
V 1  U1  (39)
 Z  t  b1 
Tan1  D1b1 
 Sin1  
Surface Friction Losses
No pump system has perfectly smooth
surfaces but instead has some amount of
the impeller eye, friction is caused between
the fluid and the disc surface. Taking into
account the losses at the solid boundaries
Page 5 of 17
such as stationary vanes, diffuser and the rest Disc Friction Losses
of the impeller surfaces, the surface frictional Disc friction losses are the result of a viscous
head loss is calculated as, friction between the outside portion of the
impeller Disc and the surface of the pump
b2 D2  D1   W1  W2 2
hsf  (40) casing. Hence in the case of open impellers,
2  Sin 2  H r  4 g
the Disc friction is lower than the case where
 D  closed impellers are used. The Disc friction
b2  2   Sin 2 losses can be calculated as [6],
 Z 
Where, H R  (41)
 D   D  D1 
5

b2   2   Sin 2 Pdf  CM       2
3
 (49)
 Z   2 
V Rearranging with =Qs’/v,
Where, W1  r1 (42)
Sin1  D  D1 
5

CM   3   2 
Vr 2
hdf 
Pdf
  2 
J / kg (50)
Where, W2  (43)
Sin 2 m Qs'
 D  D1 
5

Diffusion Losses CM     2
3

 2   kJ 1 
Diffusion Losses are characterized by a loss hdf     (51)
of head when the inlet impeller relative
Qs'  kg 1000 
 D  D1 
5
velocity exceeds the outer impeller’s relative
CM     2
3

velocity by a certain factor due to which a  2   102.04 
hdf    m (52)
portion of the velocity head difference is lost. Qs'  1000 
The diffusion head loss is calculated as [6],
 D  D1 
5

 W  2  W 2 0.10204 CM     2 3

hDL  0.25   1   2 2 (44) hdf   2 
m (53)
 W2   2g Qs'
Where,
If, W1 W2  1.4
0.25 0.1
 ks   s 
Volute Friction Losses CM        Re0.2 (54)
 0.5  D2   0.5  D2 
The pump volute receives the fluid pumped
Where, b4 is the volute width
by the impeller. Due to its curved shape and
changing area, pressure head is lost as the U 2  D2 2  
Re  (55)
fluid moves towards the discharge flange. 
Modifying Ref [1] with respect to volute The value of Disc friction loss coefficient (Cm)
throat area, the volute friction loss is, depends on the Disc surface roughness (ks)
2 and also the axial gap width (s).
  D2   Qs' 
2

  2     
V 
 D3   A3  Recirculation Losses
hvf  0.8   (45)
2g Recirculation losses are caused due to eddies
formed in the pump impeller. The
Assuming that, D3  1.3  D2 (46) recirculation losses also depend on the size of
Taking Volute Width, b3  2  b2 (47) the impeller in addition to the flow rates into
the pump that decide the flow pattern. Hence
Volute Throat Area, A3    D3  b3 (48) with larger diameter impellers the

Page 6 of 17
recirculation losses increase. Pumps with
high specific speeds also tend to exhibit a
higher chance of recirculation. The head loss
due to recirculation is estimated as [5],
 3  D12  Q 
2.5
hRL  0.005 1   (56)
Q  Q0 
Where, Q0 = Design Flow rate
The value of 0.005 for the loss coefficient is
described as the default value as per Ref [5].
Using the default value of 0.005, it is
observed by the Author to be very high and
yields recirculation losses with negative
numbers. The recirculation loss coefficient
depends on the piping configuration
upstream of the pump in addition to the
geometrical details of the inlet. The current
paper does not account for the upstream
piping and the Author iteratively estimates
that the recirculation losses coefficient is to
be taken in the order of 1  10-3 to 1  10-2 in
order to compensate for the piping losses and
arrive at non-negative recirculation loss
coefficients.
Pump Leakage Losses
Pump leakage losses cause a loss of head and
subsequently efficiency due to leakages
through the Disc and wearing ring. These
volumetric losses can be modelled as loss of
flow through an orifice. From Ref [8] and Ref
[9], the leakage loss can be worked out as,
QL  CL  AL  2  g  H L (57)
As per Ref [8], a wearing ring clearance of
0.01 inch for rings up to 6 inch diameter or
less is a good practice. For rings greater than
6 inches and up to 12 inch, the clearance is
increased by 0.001 inch for every inch of ring
diameter. For over 12 inch, increase by
0.0005 inches per inch of ring diameter over
12 inches. Therefore the clearance width
taking into consideration the above criteria,
 D  D1  
bcl  0.01in  0.001  2   6in (60)
 2  
Actual Pump Head
The Actual Pump Head is calculated by
subtracting all the different head losses
calculated from the theoretical pump head.
Therefore the actual head (HAct) is,
H Act  H NT  hcirc  hin  hsf  hdL  hvf  hdf  hRL 
(61)
A Case Study
To understand and validate the described
methodology, procedures are applied to
estimate the performance curves for a certain
model of an industrial water pump with a
chosen set of process data. The pump model
used for validation is a Grundfos Model No.
NB 200-400/392, 4 Pole, 50 Hz, End Suction
single stage centrifugal pump, Ref [10]. The
table below gives a summary of the input
data used to predict the performance curves.
Table 1. Input Process and Mechanical Data
Service Industrial Water

From Ref [5], leakage Area is estimated as, Flow Rate [Q] 364 m3/h

AL    D1  bcl (58) Rotational Speed [N] 1493 rpm

Operating Temperature 250C

And Leakage Head Loss, from Ref [8] as,
3  U 22  U12  Fluid Density [] 973.6 kg/m3
HL    (59)
4  2 g  Suction Pressure [P1] 5.0 bara

Ref [9] provides an approximated value of 0.6 Discharge Pressure [P2] 10.0 bara
and this has been incorporated into the Required Head [H] 52.4 m
present undertaking.

Page 7 of 17
OEM Pump Efficiency [p] 73.1 % manufacturer’s data, the percentage
deviation for predicted pump head is largely
Motor Rated Capacity 110 kW
within 5% for most data points. The pump
OEM Impeller ID [D2] 392 mm hydraulic efficiency calculated however
shows a deviation of most points in the range
Results of 10% with respect to manufacturer’s data.
With the data presented in Table 1, The pump curve upon approaching shut-off
calculations were performed and repeated as head droops towards y-axis indicating a fall
shown in Table 3 for various range of pump in head as the pump approaches zero flow.
flow rates to arrive at the pump performance This is a characteristic of end suction
curves as shown in below (H vs. Q,  vs. Q). centrifugal pumps where the volute friction
losses begin to increase at lower flow rates
contributing to a decrease in pump head as
shut-off conditions approach. The key
impeller geometry parameters calculated is
shown in Table 2 as follows,
Table 2. Calculated Impeller Parameters

Diameter of Main Shaft End 48 mm

Hub Diameter 84 mm
Figure 6. Calculated Pump Performance Curve
Hub Length 126 mm
In deriving the performance curves, the
Diameter of Impeller Eye 195 mm
min/max operable region is assigned for a
range of 80% to 110% of the best efficiency Impeller Outer Diameter 392 mm
point (BEP) while the preferred region of Impeller Inner Diameter 177 mm
operation is 70% to 120% of BEP to
Vane Angle at Inlet 27.60
minimize failure due to seal and bearing
failure. A plot is made between Vane Angle at Outlet 190
manufacturer’s data and predicted pump Number of Impeller Vanes 7
performance curves to assess the deviation
Blade Thickness 3.175 mm
as shown below.
Inlet Impeller Passage Width 57 mm

Outlet Impeller Passage Width 26 mm

Affinity Laws
Pump flow can be treated as incompressible
flow since liquids are largely incompressible.
Fan laws can be used to derive performance
curves for various speeds based on the
following relationships.
Figure 7. Deviation between Predicted and OEM Values Q N (62)
From the deviation calculated between the H  N2 (63)
predicted pump performance data and

Page 8 of 17
Constants ‘k1’ and ‘k2’ can be estimated for 4. It is not always possible to operate the
the base speed of 1493 rpm by re-writing as, pump at the BEP for the conditions
Q required and hence a flow variation of
Q  k1 N  k1    (64)
 N 1493rpm 10% of BEP is allowed.

H 
2 5. Minimum stable continuous flow (MSCF)
H  k2 N  k2   2 
2
(65) is the minimum flow below which the
 N 1493 rpm
pump is not allowed to operate. Although
The calculated values of ‘k1’and ‘k2, can be
API 610 recommends that the rated region
used to estimate the H vs. Q performance
is located between 80% and 110% of BEP
curves for speeds of 60%, 70%, 80% and
the preferred region of flow is between
90%, as shown below.
70% and 120% of BEP.
6. Clause 6.1.12 of API 610 11th edition
states “Setting limits for preferred
operating region and the location of rated
flow is not intended to lead to the
development of additional sizes of small
pumps or preclude the use of high-specific-
speed pumps. Small pumps that are known
to operate satisfactorily at flows outside of
Figure 8. Pump Performance Curves – Various Speeds the specified limits and high specific speed
pumps that may have a narrower preferred
Technical Notes
operating region than specified should be
1. For a given set of hydraulic conditions, a
offered…” Therefore the Allowable
centrifugal pump is designed to operate
Operating Region is set by the
for one set of flow and head. Deviation
manufacturer as the allowable region to
from this operating point is allowed only
operate with stability whilst conforming to
to some degree.
predefined API 610 vibration limits.
2. Pump selection closer to the BEP will yield
7. The Net Positive Suction Head Available
a more efficient pump with the least
(NPSHA) should always be higher than the
amount of vibration and radial forces
(NPSHR) required.
acting on the shaft. Pump system
resistance curve should be calculated 8. Pumps that are expected to operate less
accurately because the pump operates frequent can be chosen such that they
where the performance curve intersects operate at lower speeds at the cost of
the system curve. efficiency. Since the pump is selected to
operate intermittently, a slightly lower
3. In the case of single volute pumps,
efficiency pump is acceptable compared to
operating away from the BEP will cause
a higher speed pump. This will ensure a
the shaft to deflect with bearings and seals
longer operating life cycle.
rubbing against the casing components.
The fluid flow angle into the impeller will
also not align to match impeller speeds
and vane angles causing suction
recirculation, fluid to stall and cavitation.

Page 9 of 17
 Calculations for Pump Performance Curves
A Set of calculations is presented to demonstrate the methodology for pump data presented.
Table 3. Pump Performance Curves Calculations

Output Data

Shaft Dimensions

 52.4  kJ
0.1011m s  973.6 kg
3
Shaft Power  
m H
3
m  102.04  kg
[L] L   69.1kW
0 0.731
3
Pump Specific N Q 1493 6.067 rpm. m min
Speed [Ns] NS    189
H
3
4 52.434 m
3
4

Main Shaft
 PHP  321000 
1 1
3
125 321000 3
End Diameter Dsh      1.89inch (~ 48mm)
[dsh]  N rpm  S s  psi  1493 4000 

1 1
Volumetric v    0.967 or 96.7%
1.124 1.124
Efficiency [v] 1 2
1 2
Ns 3 189 3

Hub Dimensions

DH  1.5 to 2.0  Dsh , Taking 1.75, DH  1.75  48mm  84mm

Hub Diameter
[DH]
Hub Length
LH  1.0 to 2.0 DH , Taking 1.5, LH  1.5  84  126mm
[LH]

Impeller Dimensions

Total Flow Q 0.1011 3

Qs'    0.1045m s
Rate [Qs’] v 0.967
Velocity of
Liquid at Veye  0.07 to 0.11  0.00023N s  2gH , Taking 0.09,
Impeller Eye Veye  0.09  0.00023190 2  9.81 52.4  4.3 m s
[Veye]
Diameter of
4  Qs' 4  0.1045  84 
2

Impeller Eye D0   DH2     0.195m or195mm

[D0]
  Veye   4.3  1000 
Coefficients
1.043 (From Stepanoff Charts, Fig. 4)
'KU'

'Km1' 0.149 (From Stepanoff Charts, Fig. 4)

'Km2' 0.113 (From Stepanoff Charts, Fig. 4)

'D2/D1' 0.452 (From Stepanoff Charts, Fig. 4)

Page 10 of 17
Angular 2    N rpm 2   1493
   156 m s
Velocity [] 60 60
Impeller
Outer Taken as D2 = 0.392m (392 mm) from Table 1)
Diameter [D2]
Impeller OD
D2 156  0.392
Tip Speed U2    30.6 m s
[U2]
2 2

Impeller
D 
Inner D1  D2  2   0.392  0.452  0.177m or177mm
Diameter [D1]  D1 
Impeller ID
ND1  1493 0.177
Tip Speed U1    13.9 m s
[U1]
60 60
Inlet Flow
Radial Vr1  K m1 2gH  0.149  2  9.81 52.4  4.8 m s
Velocity [Vr1]
Outlet Flow
Radial Vr 2  K m2 2 gH  0.113 2  9.81 52.4  3.6 m s
Velocity [Vr2]

Vane Dimensions

Vane Angle at
Assume 2=27.60 (Note: To be solved iteratively till HActual=HRequired)
Outlet [2]

 Vr1 
  Tan 1 
Vane Angle at 4.8 
1  Tan1    19
0
Inlet [ 1]  U1   13.9 

 D  D1     2 
Z  6.5   2   Sin 1 
Number of  D2  D1   2 
Impeller
Vanes [Z]  0.392  0.177   27.6  19 
Z  6.5     Sin   6.84  Z  7
 0.392  0.177   2 
 8.16 Sin 2   8.16Sin27.6  
   
 lim it 2  e  Z 
 e 7 
 0.583
 8.16 Sin1   8.16Sin19  
   
Check  lim it1  e Z 
 e 7 
 0.685
R1
  lim it R1 0.177
  0.452   lim it1   lim it 2 ,
R2 R2 0.392
Sin 2
Therefore,   1 
1 Z 0.7

Slippage Sin 2 Sin27.6

 s1  1   1  0.991
Factor [s1] 1 Z 0.7
19  7 0.7

Page 11 of 17
Slippage Sin 2 Sin27.6
 s2  1   1  0.991
Factor [s2] 1 Z 0.7
19  7 0.7

Blade
Taking, 0.125 inches (0.0032m)
Thickness [t]

Thickness of
Inlet Impeller Taking, 0.3175 inches (0.0081m)
Passage [t1]
Thickness of
Outlet
Taking, 0.3175 inches (0.0081m)
Impeller
Passage [t2]

Inlet Zt1 7  0.0081

Contraction 1  1   1  0.688
Factor [1] D1Sin1   0.177  Sin19

Outlet Zt 2 7  0.0081
Contraction  2  1  1  0.901
Factor [2] D2 Sin 2   0.392  Sin27.6
Inlet Impeller
Qs'
 0.057 m 57mm
0.1045
Passage b1  
Width [b1]
D1Vr1 1   0.177  4.8  0.688
Outlet
Qs'
 0.026m 26mm
Impeller 0.1045
b2  
Passage D2Vr 2 2   0.392  3.6  0.901
Width [b1]

 D  D1  
bcl  0.01in  0.001  2   6in
Clearance  2  
Width (bcl)  0.392  0.177 1000  
bcl  0.01  0.001     6  0.0152in ~ 0.4 mm
 2 25.4  

Leakage Area 0.4

AL    D1  bcl    0.177   0.000223 m 2
(AL) 1000

Leakage Head   
3  U 2  U12  3  30.6 2  13.9 2 
HL   2

   28.5 m
Loss [HL] 4  2  g  4  2  9.81 

Leakage Head
QL  0.6  0.000223 2  9.81 28.5  0.00317m3 s
Loss [QL]

Outlet Qs'
Adding Leakage Loss, Qs’=Qs’ + QL, V 1  U1 
Tangential  Z  t  b1 
Tan1  D1b1 
Velocity [V1]
 Sin1  

Page 12 of 17
 0.1045  0.00317
V 1  13.9   2.7 m s
 7  0.0032 0.057
Tan19    0.177  0.057 
 Sin 190 
  
Qs'
V 2  U1 
 Z  t  b2 
Tan 2  D2b2 
Outlet
 Sin 2  
Tangential
0.1045  0.00317
Velocity [V2] V 2  30.6   24 m s
 7  0.0032 0.026
Tan27.6    0.392  0.026 
 Sin 27.60 
  
Actual Whirl
V'1  U1 2   s1   Vr1Cot1  13.9  2  0.991 
4.8
Velocity at  0.09 m s
Tan19
Inlet [V1']

Actual Whirl
V' 2  U 2 s 2  Vr 2Cot 2  30.6  0.991 
3.6
Velocity at  23.5 m s
Tan27.6
Inlet [V2']

Slip Velocity
Vs1  1   s1   U1  V'1  V 1  0.09  2.7  2.6 m s
at Inlet [Vs1]

Slip Velocity
Vs 2  1   s 2   U 2  V 2  V' 2  24  23.3  0.7 m s
at Inlet [Vs2]

Net
Theoretical
H Net Theoretical 
1
 
U 2V' 2  U1V'1 
30.6  23.5  13.9  0.09  73.1m
Head g 9.81
[HNetTheoretical]
Theoretical
Power Qs'    H 0.1045  0.00317 973.6  73.1
PNet Theoretical    75.1kW
Absorbed 102.04 102.04
[PTheoretical]
Theoretical
U 22  U12 30.6 2  13.9 2
Shut-off Head H Shutoff    75.6 m
[Hshut-off] g 9.81

Pump Losses

Circulation Losses

Circulation
H Circ 
U 2Vs 2  U1Vs1   30.6  0.7  13.9   2.6  1.5m
Head Loss g 9.81

Inlet Incidence Losses

Inlet
Incidence hin  f in 
U1  V1 2 , Taking, f hin  0.5 
13.9  2.72  3.2 m
in=0.5,
Head Loss 2g 2  9.81

Page 13 of 17
Surface Friction Losses

Inlet Relative Vr1 4.8

W1    15 m s
Velocity [W1] Sin1 Sin19
Inlet Relative Vr 2 3.6
W2    8m s
Velocity [W2] Sin 2 Sin27.6
 D     0.392 
b2  2   Sin 2 0.026     Sin27.6
Hydraulic
HR   Z 
  7   0.02m
Diameter [DH]  D2     0.392 
b2     Sin 2 0.026     Sin27.6
 Z   7 
b2  D2  D1   W1  W2 2
Surface
hsf 
2  Sin 2  H r  4g
Friction
Losses 0.026  0.392  0.177  8  152
hsf   4.1m
2  Sin27.6  0.02  4  9.81

Volute Friction Losses

Volute Throat
Assuming, D3  1.3  D2  1.3  0.392  0.51m
Diameter [D3]

Volute Width
b3  2  b2  2  0.026  0.052m
[b3]
Volute Throat
A3    D3  b3    0.5096 0.052  0.084m2
Area [A3]
2
  D2   Qs' 
2

V 2      
 D3   A3 
Volute hvf  0.8  
2g
Friction Loss
2
  0.392    0.1034  0.00317
2
Head
 24       
  0.51    0.084 
hvf  0.8   13.8 m
2  9.81
Disc Friction Losses
Disc Friction
Taking Disc Surface Roughness [ks] = 5 microns (5 x 10-6)
Loss Head

Axial Gap [s] = 12.7 mm (1.27 x 10-2)

Viscosity of Water at 250C = 0.00091 kg/m.s

Reynolds U 2  D2 2 30.6  0.3922  973.6

Number Re    6,416,773
 0.00091
Disc 0.25 0.1
 ks   s 
Coefficient CM        Re0.2
Friction [Cm]  0.5  D2   0.5  D2 

Page 14 of 17
 0.25
 5 106 
0.1
 0.0127 
CM     0.2
  6416773  2.35 10
3

 0.5  0.392   0.5  0.392 

 D  D1 
5

0.10204 CM     2 3

hdf   2 
Disc Friction Qs'
Loss Head
 0.392  0.177 
5
3
0.10204 2.35 10 156   3

hdf   2   0.1m
0.1045  0.00317
Recirculation Losses

2.5
Recirculation  3  D12  Q 
hRL  0.005 1   , Here the value of 0.005 is replaced with 0.00075
Loss Head Q  Q0 

Taking Max Flow Rate, Q0= 110% of Rated Flow = 1.1 x 1.1 =0.11 m3/s
2.5
 3  D12  Qs' 
hRL  0.00075 1  
Qs'  Q0 
1563  0.1772  0.1045  0.00317 
2.5

hRL  0.00075  1    0m
973.6  0.1045  0.00317  0.11 
Diffusion Losses

Diffusion Loss
 W  2  W 2
hDL  0.25   1   2 2 , If, W1 W2  1.4
Head  W2   2g
 V   4.8   V   3.6 
W1   r 1      15m / s ; W2   r 2      8m / s
 Sin1   Sin19  Sin 2   Sin27.6
W1 15
  1.875  1.4
W2 8
 W  2  W 2  15  2  82
hDL  0.25     2
1 2
 0.25     2   1.24 m
 W2   2g  8   2  9.81
Actual Head
H Actual  H Net Theoretical  hcirc  hin  hsf  hvf  hdf  hRL  hDL 
[HActual]

H Actual  73.1   1.5  3.2  4.1  13.8  0.1  0  1.24  52.2 m

Required
Power PRe quired 
Qs'    H Act
  Losses 
0.1045  0.00317 973.6  52.2  20.7  74.3 kW
[PRequired] 102.04 102.04
Pump H Re quired 52.2
P    71.5%
Efficiency [P] H Re quired  H Losses 52.2  20.9

Page 15 of 17
Nomenclature LH Hydraulic Power [kW]

A3 Volute Throat Area [m2] m Mass flow rate [kg/s]

AL Leakage Area [m2] N Rotational Speed [rpm]

b1 Impeller Passage Width at Inlet [m] Ns Pump Specific Speed [rpm]

b2 Impeller Passage Width at Outlet [m] P1 Suction Flange Pressure [bara]

b3 Volute Width [m] P2 Discharge Flange Pressure [bara]

CL Leakage Loss Coefficient [-] PRequired Power Required [kW]

Cm Disc Coefficient Friction [-] Qs Flow Rate [m3/s]

Cv Volute Flow Coefficient [-] Qs’ Total Flow Rate [m3/s]

ds Diameter of Main Shaft End [m] QN Maximum Flow Rate [m3/s]

D0 Diameter of Impeller Eye [m] R1/R2 Radius Ratio [-]

D1 Impeller Inner Diameter [m] Re Reynolds Number [-]

D2 Impeller Outer Diameter [m] s Axial gap [m]

D2/D1 Stepanoff Coefficient Ss Shaft permissible Shear Stress [psi]

D3 Volute Mean Diameter [m] t Blade Thickness [m]

DH Hub Diameter [m] t1 Thickness of Impeller Passage at Inlet [m]

f Leakage Loss Coefficient t2 Thickness of Impeller Passage - Outlet [m]

H Pump Head [m] U2 Impeller OD Tip Speed [m]

HCirc Circulation Head Loss [m] U1 Impeller ID Tip Speed [m]

HIn Incidence Head Loss [m] Veye Velocity of Impeller Eye [m/s]

Hsf Surface Friction Head Loss [m] Vr1 Radial Velocity of Flow at Inlet [m/s]

Hvf Volute Friction Head Loss [m] Vr2 Radial Velocity of Flow at Outlet [m/s]

Hdf Disc Friction head Loss [m] V1 Tangential Velocity of Flow at Inlet [m/s]

HdL Diffusion Head Loss [m] V2 Tangential Velocity of Flow - Outlet [m/s]

HL Leakage Head Loss [m] V1’ Actual Whirl Velocity Flow at Inlet [m/s]

HRL Recirculation Head Loss [m] V2’ Actual Whirl Velocity Flow at Outlet [m/s]
HActual Actual head Loss [m] Vs1 Slip Velocity at Inlet [m/s]
HR Hydraulic Radius [m] Vs2 Slip velocity at Outlet [m/s]
ks Disc Surface Roughness [m] W1 Relative Velocity at Inlet [m/s]
Ku Stepanoff Coefficient W2 Relative Velocity at Outlet [m/s]
km1 Stepanoff Coefficient Z Number of Impeller Vanes [-]
km2 Stepanoff Coefficient 1 Vane Angle at Inlet [degrees]
L Shaft Power [kW] 2 Vane Angle at Outlet [degrees]
LAH Available Hydraulic Power [kW] limit1 Limiting Radius Ratio at Inlet [-]

Page 16 of 17
limit2 Limiting Radius Ratio at Outlet [-] 7. API 610, 11th Edition
1 Contraction Factor at Inlet [-] 8. Centrifugal Pumps and Blowers, Church
2 Contraction Factor at Outlet [-] A.H., John Wiley & Sons, 1950

 Liquid Density [kg/m3] 9. ‘A One-Dimensional Flow Analysis for the

Prediction of Centrifugal Pump
p Pump Efficiency [%]
Performance Characteristics’, Mohammed
v Volumetric Efficiency [%] Ahmed El-Naggar, International Journal of
s1 Slip Value at Inlet [-] Rotating Machinery Volume 2013
s2 Slip Value at Outlet [-] 10. Grundfos Product Center, https://product-
selection.grundfos.com/front-
 Liquid Viscosity [kg/m.s]
page.html?time=1514274719214&qcid=3
 Angular Velocity [m/s] 06774341
References
About the Author
1. ‘Design and Performance Analysis of
Vijay Sarathy holds a Master’s
centrifugal Pump’, Khin Cho Thin, Mya Mya
Degree in Chemical Engineering
Khaing, and Khin Maung Aye, World
from Birla Institute of Technology
Academy of Science, Engineering and
& Science (BITS), Pilani, India and
Technology, 22 2008
is a Chartered Engineer from the Institution
2. ‘Design and Construction of Single Stage of Chemical Engineers, UK. His expertise over
Centrifugal Pump (Impeller)’Khin Maung 10 years of professional experience covers
Htwe, GMSARN International Conference Front End Engineering, Process Dynamic
on Sustainable Development: Issues and Simulation and Subsea/Onshore pipeline
Prospects for the GMS, 12-14 Nov 2008 flow assurance in the Oil and Gas industry.
3. ‘Performance Prediction of Centrifugal Vijay has worked as an Upstream Process
Pump (Impeller)’, Nwe Ni Win, Engineer with major conglomerates of
International Journal for Innovative General Electric, ENI Saipem and Shell.
Research in Multidisciplinary Field, ISSN-
2455-0620, Volume 2, Issue 12, Nov 2016
4. https://www.introtopumps.com
5. ‘Theoretical Model to Predict the
Performance of Centrifugal Pump Equipped
with Splitter Blades’, Berge Djebedjian,
Mansoura Engineering Journal (MEJ), Vol
34, No.2, June 2009
6. ‘Development of an Empirical Equation to
predict the Disk Friction Losses of a
Centrifugal Pump’, Ali Nemdili, Diete Heinz
Hellman, The 6th International Conference
on Hydraulic Machinery and
Hydrodynamics Timisoara, Romania,
October 21-22, 2004

Page 17 of 17