Design of Regenerative Pump

International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow
Design optimisation of a regenerative pump using numerical and experimental

techniques
Francis Quail, Thomas Scanlon, Matthew Stickland,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Francis Quail, Thomas Scanlon, Matthew Stickland, (2011) "Design optimisation of a regenerative pump
using numerical and experimental techniques", International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid
Flow, Vol. 21 Issue: 1, pp.95-111, https://doi.org/10.1108/09615531111095094
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by Universidad del Norte At 21:49 24 October 2017 (PT)
https://doi.org/10.1108/09615531111095094
Downloaded on: 24 October 2017, At: 21:49 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 30 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 611 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2010),"Development of a regenerative pump impeller using rapid manufacturing
techniques", Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16 Iss 5 pp. 337-344 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/13552541011065731">https://doi.org/10.1108/13552541011065731</a>
(2014),"CFD flow analysis in the centrifugal vortex pump", International Journal of Numerical
Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow, Vol. 24 Iss 3 pp. 545-562 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/
HFF-05-2012-0124">https://doi.org/10.1108/HFF-05-2012-0124</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:538276 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0961-5539.htm
Design of a
Design optimisation of a regenerative
regenerative pump using pump
numerical and experimental
95
techniques
Received 27 February 2009
Francis Quail, Thomas Scanlon and Matthew Stickland Revised 4 September 2009,
Mechanical Engineering, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, UK 2 December 2009
Accepted 3 December 2009
Abstract
Purpose – Regenerative pumps are the subject of increased interest in industry as these pumps are
low-cost, low-specific speed, compact and able to deliver high heads with stable performance
characteristics. However, these pumps have a low efficiency (35-50 per cent). The complex flow field
within the pumps represents a considerable challenge to detailed mathematical modelling. Better
understanding of the flow field would result in improvement of the pump efficiency. The purpose of this
paper is to consider a numerical and experimental analysis of a regenerative pump to simulate the
flow field and math pump performance.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper outlines the use of a commercial computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) code to simulate the flow field within the regenerative pump and compare the CFD
results with new experimental data. A novel rapid manufacturing process is used to consider the effect
of impeller geometry changes on the pump efficiency.
Findings – The CFD results demonstrate that it is possible to represent the helical flow field for the
pump which has only been witnessed in experimental flow visualisation until now. The CFD
performance results also demonstrate reasonable agreement with the experimental tests.
Research limitations/implications – The design optimisation only considers a number of blade
geometry changes. The future work will consider a much broader spectrum of design modifications
which have resulted in efficiency improvements in the past.
Practical implications – The ability to use CFD modelling in conjunction with rapid manufacturing
techniques has meant that more complex geometry configurations can now be assessed with better
understanding of the flow field effects and resulting efficiency.
Originality/value – This paper presents new flow field visualisation and better correlation to the
matched performance than the current limited mathematical models. This paper also presents a novel
method for rapid manufacturing of the pump impeller.
Keywords Design, Optimization techniques, Pumps, Flow, Mathematical modelling
Paper type Research paper
Nomenclature
A ¼ cross-sectional area (m2) U ¼ mean fluid velocity (m/s)
CFD ¼ computational fluid m ¼ dynamic viscosity (N S/m2)
dynamics r ¼ density (kg/m3)
CO2 ¼ carbon dioxide A ¼ cross-sectioned area (m2)
D ¼ impeller diameter (m) H ¼ head (m)
HPC ¼ high-performance k ¼ turbulent kinetic energy International Journal of Numerical
Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow
computer (m2/s2) Vol. 21 No. 1, 2011
P ¼ power (kW) 1 ¼ turbulent dissipation pp. 95-111
Q ¼ volume flow rate (m3/s) energy (m2/s3) q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0961-5539
Re ; (rUA)/m ¼ Reynolds number p ¼ pressure (kN/m2) DOI 10.1108/09615531111095094
HFF g ¼ gravitation acceleration v ¼ angular velocity (rad/s)
(m/s2) f ¼ Q/vD3 ¼ flow coefficient
21,1 yþ ¼ boundary layer wall c ¼ gH/v2D2 ¼ head coefficient
function IP ¼ P/rv3D5 ¼ power coefficient
h ¼ efficiency N ¼ rotation speed (rev/min)
j ¼ experimental uncertanty TWH ¼ terawatt hour
96
Introduction
Pumps are the single largest user of electricity in industry in the European union, and of
those pumps, centrifugal pumps represent some 73 per cent of all pump types
(IMechE, 2007). The regenerative pump like the centrifugal pump is a kinetic pump;
however, the regenerative pump can in many applications offer a more efficient
alternative (Muller, 2004). There is limited published data and insufficient design
guiding criteria to allow more intuitive industrial selection of this pump type,
particularly to meet more stringent European pump selection criteria defined in EU
Directive 2005/32/EC (2005). The existing numerical models are limited in representing
the complex flow field within the pump and require significant experimental correction.
Most of the theories presented relied on assumptions not based on detailed
measurements or precise computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling. The
previous published theories rely on experimental correction that take no spanwise
account of flow (one dimensional). To date, the most fruitful research work has come
from corresponding flow visualisation studies conducted by Engels (1940), Bartels
(1947), Lazo and Hopkins (1953) and Lutz (1953). This paper considers a numerical and
experimental analysis of a regenerative pump to simulate the flow field and match pump
performance. This paper also considers the effect of impeller blade geometry changes on
the pump efficiency. This paper presents the use of a commercially available solver;
FLUENT (2006b) version 6.3.26, in conjunction with new experimental testing to resolve
the flow field. The main characteristic of regenerative pumps is the ability to generate
high discharge pressures at low flow rates and ability to operate with very small net
positive suction head (NPSH) (Engeda, 2003). Although the pump has other advantages
over centrifugal-type pumps, the main challenge is to understand and improve the
hydraulic efficiency, typically 35-50 per cent. The highest ever reported efficiency for the
regenerative pump of 50 per cent was given by Crewdson (1956).
The ability to apply CFD to represent the 3D flow domain within the pump would
represent a significant advance on current 1D mathematical models. Until this point, the
best interpretation of the flow field came from flow visualisation work for regenerative
pumps. This paper describes the use of new experimental data to compare, not correct,
with CFD numerical results, and to consider if this can be done across a range of
performance points. The paper also investigates how representative the CFD model is of
previously published flow visualisation studies.
The regenerative pump

The pump uses an impeller with turbine-type blades mounted on the periphery,
running in an annular channel surrounding the periphery of the impeller (Figure 1).
In the standard design, the impeller has radial teeth machined into the impeller
periphery and the fluid passes through an open annular channel and circulates
repeatedly through the impeller vanes (Figure 2).
OUTLET INLET Design of a
STRIPPER
regenerative
pump
Casing
97
Impeller
Figure 1.
Flow Regenerative pump
passage schematic
Figure 2.
Regenerative pump helical
flow path
This paper also considers the effect of impeller blade geometry changes to the pump
efficiency from a standard radial blade configuration (Figure 3). The regenerative
pump is sometimes also referred to as a peripheral pump, turbulence pump, friction
pump, turbine pump, drag pump, side channel pump, traction pump or vortex pump.
The suction region is separated from the discharge region by a barrier on the casing
known as a stripper (Figure 1). The repeated fluid circulation during the flow process
or “multistaging” principally allows regenerative pumps to generate high heads at
relatively low-specific speeds. In spite of having operating characteristics that mimic a
positive displacement pump (power directly proportional to head, with maximum
power required at shutoff, and a steep head-capacity curve), the regenerative pump is a
kinetic pump. That is, kinetic energy is imparted to the fluid by the series of impulses
HFF
21,1
98
Figure 3.
Regenerative pump
impeller
given to the fluid by the rotating impeller blades. At inlet, the fluid splits to both sides
of the impeller and continuously circulates between the blades and the channel.
When the circulation flow in the impeller and the peripheral flow in the channel
unite the momentum exchange that takes place develops a helical or corkscrew fluid
motion (Quail et al., 2009). The regenerative pump will develop significantly higher
heads than a centrifugal pump with comparable impeller size (Muller, 2004).
The objective of the numerical approach is to predict performance over a range of
running conditions that can be validated by experimental testing. Furthermore, a
suitably validated CFD model provides the opportunity to demonstrate flow field
representation without the significant expense of such experimental flow visualisation.
Experimental procedure
The experimental rig arrangement (Figure 4) incorporates a reservoir tank which
stores and ultimately receives the working fluid, in this case water. The fluid is drawn
to the pump from the tank via a flow control valve.
The fluid flow rate is measured using a hall effect turbine flow meter (0-30 l/min),
situated downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the pump. The pump
itself was driven by a 3 kW induction motor operating at a constant speed of 3,000 rpm.
The motor housing is coupled to a dynamometer containing a load cell to measure
strain and hence indicates input torque to be used in the pump efficiency calculations
(Figure 5).
The load cell (using a Wheatstone bridge arrangement) strain measurement has
been calibrated against force and is converted to a reaction torque (0-20 Nm). The pump
differential pressure was measured using a high-performance millivolt output pressure
transducer (0-5 Bar). The fluid flow rate is adjusted via a flow control valve metering
the flow to allow a range of measurements to be taken to develop a running
characteristic. This enables a range of flows and the corresponding pump inlet/outlet
pressures and input torque values to be measured.
The test impeller had 30 blades of width 12 mm and diameter 74.5 mm. The pump is
of double suction shape designed with alignment of the blades to balance axial thrust
(Figures 1 and 3). In this design, the impeller has radial teeth or vanes machined into
each side at its periphery.
1.5 m
Design of a
3
Reservoir regenerative
cistem pump
Flow control valve to supply
Reservoir
0.55 m tank Flow control valve 99
0.44 m
15 mm
'Approx 30
Pipe work
Hydraulic
Flowrate Flowmeter Diameters'
signal to
DRU Differential
pressure X'mitter
signal to DRU
0.44 m
1.5 m
4m
0.4
0.44 m
0.4
4m
4m
0.4
Suction tapping
0.4
4m
MOTOR
0.16 m
Dynamometer
PUMP
Discharge tapping
signal to DRU
Figure 4.
Regenerative pump
rig schematic
Regenerative pump rig schematic layout - Not to scale
The measurements are collected using a data acquisition unit and pump characteristic
flow, head, power and efficiency coefficients can be calculated as expressed in equations
(4)-(7). Every independent measurement xi will have an associated uncertainty jxi. When
measurements are combined, the “stackup” of uncertainties determines the final
experimental uncertainty. To estimate the overall experimental uncertainty jR, the root
of the sum of the squares is used (Kirkup, 1994):
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X 2ffi
jR ¼ ^ di jxi ð1Þ
where R is the dependent variable of interest, i is the index representing the measured
variable and di is the sensitive coefficient of R with respect to Xi given as:
dR
di ¼ ð2Þ
dX i
For pump efficiency, input power and head, we have:
HFF
21,1
100
Figure 5.
Experimental test
arrangement
" 2 #1=2
H Q 2 QH 2
j h ¼ ^ rg jQ þ jH þ jP 2 ð3Þ
P P P
The dimensionless plots are used to illustrate the regenerative pump is a hydrodynamic
unit obeying the same similitude laws as centrifugal and axial pumps, turbines and
compressors. In conventional dimensionless terms:
gH
C¼ ð4Þ
v2 D 2
Q
C¼ ð5Þ
vD 2
QDp
h¼ ð6Þ
P
P
IP ¼ ð7Þ
rv3 D 5
For a typical case of the regenerative pump, a 5 per cent error was determined for the
flow rate, a 0.6 per cent error for the head and 4.3 per cent error in the power calculation.
Applying equation (3), this equates to a pump efficiency error of 6.6 per cent. The random
scatter was evaluated from repeatability tests and sensitivity analyses. The systematic
inaccuracy due to aggregate systematic errors in transducers and changes in
performance due to build-to-build differences are difficult to evaluate (Woollatt et al.,
2005). To achieve this, it is essential that the data acquisition system incorporates
procedures which evaluate the quality of the data as it is acquired. This allowed
comparison of the actual data with expected and when necessary analysis of the raw
measurements to verify accuracy (Figure 6).
In the rig arrangement (Figures 4 and 5), measures were taken to minimise effects
which could reduce the inlet pressure to the pump. Selection of optimal inlet line length
and bore was considered as well as pump elevation and upstream discontinuities that
Design of a
regenerative
pump
101
Figure 6.
Data acquisition layout
affect inlet pressure. Regenerative pumps, typically, require lower net-positive suction
heads than other kinetic pumps, e.g. centrifugal pumps (Muller, 2004).
CFD modelling
Fluent (2006a, b) recommends that for complex turbomachinery geometry,
a non-conformal hybrid hexahedral/tetrahedral mesh is appropriate where the
rotation of the rotor is treated as a steady-state in a multiple reference frame (MRF)
model. In the case of the regenerative pump, separate meshes were generated for the
rotating impeller (Figure 7) and the stationary casing (Figure 8). The pump flow was
then solved in local rotating reference frames where fluxes are locally transformed
from one frame to another at the pump zone interfaces.
Figure 7.
Impeller fluid region
hex mesh
HFF
21,1
102
Figure 8.
Casing fluid
region tet mesh
For the regenerative pump application, a pressure-based solver was chosen as the
current analysis only considers incompressible flow. The velocity formulation selected
was to use absolute velocity formulation as the fluid inflow comes from a stationary
domain. In this case, absolute total pressure was measured during the regenerative
pump testing. The MRF model is appropriate for incompressible flows as the flow
field responds instantly to changes in rotor position. A different approach would be
required to consider compressibility of the fluid, e.g. in regenerative blowers
(Hollenberg and Potter, 1979; Sixsmith and Altmann, 1977), but for the current analysis
where the fluid is treated as incompressible, then use of MRF at multiple fixed rotor
positions is a suitable and a recommended approach (FLUENT, 2001, 2005, 2006a, b).
For modeling turbulence, realizable k 2 1 was chosen (Spalart, 2000; Shih et al., 1995),
for the regenerative pump as it is suitable for complex shear flows involving rapid strain,
swirl, vortices and locally transitional flows (boundary layer separation and vortex
shedding). Unlike many pump cases, the clearances are very small between the impeller
and the casing in the regenerative pump stripper region. In considering the above, there is
a balance to achieve good convergence, satisfying the performance matching, and in
modeling turbulence, the mesh should be made either coarse or fine enough to prevent the
wall-adjacent cells from being placed in the buffer layer (yþ¼5-30). Using excessive
stretching in the direction normal to the wall was avoided. It is important to have at least a
few cells inside the boundary layer, and for the pump, this was kept to a minimum of five
cells. For the wall functions, each wall-adjacent cell’s centroid should be located within the
log-law layer, 30,yþ,300. A yþvalue close to the lower bound (yþ,30) was sought.
When using adaption, this can result in large cell size changes which was to be avoided. In
Fluent application briefs, EX 143 (2001), EX 164 (2001) and EX 232 (2005) water pump
MRF simulations made use of tetrahedral and hybrid meshes of between 1 and 2.4 million
cells.
It is essential to minimise cell skewness and aspect ratio. Skewness was kept below
0.9 and aspect ratios of greater than 5:1 are not recommended in FLUENT
turbomachinery applications (FLUENT, 2006a, b). Initially, the model was a complete
tetrahedral mesh (impeller and casing) which resulted in a 753,000 cell model; however,
the impeller was decomposed to prevent numerical error (false diffusion) across the
flow field and for greater post-processing control (impeller surfaces plots). The grids
were adapted until there was only small differences in (, 1 per cent change) Design of a
parameters. Five adapted grid sizes were assessed: 400,000, 800,000, 1.6 million, 1.9 regenerative
million and 2.4 million cells. Grid independence was established at around 1.9 million
cells. The results were comparable in accuracy with those published by FLUENT pump
(2001, 2005). There was no significant change in the solution at around 1.9 million cells,
and as grid independence is of importance, quality of the mesh (particularly in the
buffer region) and performance results are also important. 103
Most of the published data until now suffers from two fundamental problems which
limit their use as a design tool. The first is a reliance on empirically derived loss factors
which are not directly related to design parameters and the second defect is that they
are an essentially one-dimensional tool and take no account of spanwise variation
(Wilson et al., 1955).
Results
Considering the numerical modelling approach, the ability to successfully capture the
flow field in a manner that has not been achieved since the flow visualisation
experiments is shown in Figures 9 and 10. The pathlines plot indicates the helical or
corkscrew motion that occurs within the pump. The helicity can be displayed in an
iso-surface section through the impeller and the channel fluid region to depict the strong
helicity gradient at the interface region between the impeller and channel region.
When the flow in the side channel unites with the circumferential flow in the
impeller, the momentum exchange that occurs, described first by Wilson et al. (1955), is
the mechanism which initiates and sustains the helical fluid flow (Quail et al., 2009).
Experiments conducted by Lazo and Hopkins (1953) and Lutz (1953) used small thread
probes at different points in the annular flow passage of the pump to determine the
direction of the flow velocity. They were able to corroborate the helical streamlines
when plotting the results. Engels (1940) demonstrated that with decreasing flow rate,
pump circulation is considerably increased reaching a maximum as the flow from the
pump is reduced. Previous work (Pfleiderer, 1961) that does not describe the helical
flow nature instead concludes a constant circulation rate with reducing the flow rate.
Z Figure 9.
X Regenerative pump helical
Y pathlines plot
HFF 1.00e+04
21,1 9.00e+03
8.00e+03
7.00e+03
6.00e+03
5.00e+03
4.00e+03
104 3.00e+03
2.00e+03
1.00e+03
0.00e+00
–1.00e+03
–2.00e+03
–3.00e+03
–4.00e+03
–5.00e+03
–6.00e+03
–7.00e+03
Figure 10. Z
–8.00e+03
Regenerative pump –9.00e+03 Y
helicity contours –1.00e+04
X
These theories conclude that the circulation is only dependant on the resistance of
the flow in the side channel and the impeller and is independent of the pressure in the
working channel.
The current study indicates that in fact, as shown in Figure 11, local pressure
variations occur across each stage rise of the pump. The static pressure varies both in
the channel and in the impeller as it decelerates and accelerates in the pump as it makes
a helical flow path through the pump. This understanding is limited in the typical
Radial-coordinal
Outlet
4.50e+05
4.00e+05 Evidence of local pressure
variation across each vane
3.50e+05
as fluid flows in pump
Static pressure (pascal)
3.00e+05
2.50e+05
2.00e+05
1.50e+05 Stripper
1.00e+05 region
5.00e+04
0.00e+00
–5.00e+04
0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.01 0.125 0.15 0.175 0.2 0.225
Inlet Curve length (m)
Figure 11.
Local pressure Static pressure vs Curve length Jan 16, 2009
variations from inlet FLUENT 6.3 (3d, pbns, rke)
port to outlet port
Note: Curve length = circumferential position around pump
straight linear representation of pressure distribution presented (Wilson et al., 1955; Design of a
Badami, 1997; Song et al., 2003; Engeda, 2003; Raheel and Engeda, 2005; Figure 12). regenerative
It is not only in the flow visualisation that the CFD approach is beneficial in
extending the knowledge of the flow physics but also the ability to predict the pump
performance of the pump in the model without the need for experimental correction
factors being applied is clear in Figures 13-19.
The reasonable concurrence between the experimental results and the CFD 105
predictions is shown in Figures 13 and 14.
The “multistaging” effect that allows regenerative pumps to generate high heads at
relatively low speeds is not only captured but the efficiency challenge for the pump can
be seen where the measured efficiency (Figure 15) has matched the highest ever
reported efficiency for this pump type (Crewdson, 1956).
IDEAL
REAL ∆Pexit
Pexit loss
∆Pdesign
Ideal
+∆Pinlet loss
∆Pdesign
Real +∆Pexit loss
Pinlet
Fw (2p – qstripper)
∆Pinlet
loss
Inlet Acceleration Linear Deceleration

& outlet
Figure 12.
2p – qstripper qstripper Typical presented
pressure distribution of
Sources: Raheel and Engeda (2005); reprinted with permission of the regenerative pump
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Experimental results
Radial 30 SF 30 SB 45 CB 45 CF 60 CF 60 CB
7
6
Head coefficient (Ψ)
5
4
3
2
1 Figure 13.
Head coefficient vs flow
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 coefficient experimental
results
Flow coefficient (φ)
HFF CFD predictions
21,1 Radial 30 SF 30 SB 45 CB 45 CF 60 CF 60 CB
7
6
106 5
4
3
2
Figure 14. 1
Head coefficient vs flow
0
coefficient CFD 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
predictions
Expeimental results
Radial 30 SF 30 SB 45 CB 45 CF 60 CB 60 CF
60
50
Pump efficiency (%)
40
30
20
10
Figure 15.
0
Pump efficiency vs flow 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
coefficient
When considered against centrifugal devices of similar specific speed, the efficiency of
the regenerative pump can in many applications be higher (Muller, 2004). The benefit of
the regenerative pump in the ability to operate at low NPSH is shown in Figure 16.
An iso-plot of typical pressure contours show the rapid rise in pressure gradient
(Figure 17) within pumps of this type.
The rise follows the established characteristic of a regenerative pump.
In Fluent application briefs, EX 143 (2001), EX 164 (2001) and EX 232 (2005) water
pump MRF simulations made use of tetrahedral and hybrid meshes of similar scale.
In the current study, the experimental results and the CFD predictions are within
3 per cent (Figures 18 and 19), indicating that the meshing strategy was reasonable
(Woollatt et al., 2005). The examples referenced above, Ex 143 (2001) and Ex 164 (2001),
at best achieved a 7 per cent matching. Typical experimental spread even in calibrated
2 Design of a
1.8 Radial Optimised blade regenerative
Net positive suction head NPSH (m)
1.6 pump
1.4
1.2 107
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Figure 16.
NPSH vs flow coefficient
3.79e+05
3.55e+05
3.32e+05
3.08e+05
2.84e+05
2.61e+05
2.37e+05
2.14e+05
1.90e+05
1.67e+05
1.43e+05
1.20e+05
9.65e+04
7.30e+04
4.95e+04
2.59e+04
2.44e+03 Figure 17.
Z
–2.11e+04 Regenerative pump
–4.46e+04 X Y pressure contours
–6.81e+04
data was found to be around 6 per cent indicating a reasonable matching procedure
presented in the current paper.
Most authors have concluded that substantial efficiency and performance
improvement would be attained with better understanding of the flow field in the
regenerative pump (Wilson et al., 1955; Badami, 1997; Song et al., 2003; Engeda, 2003;
Raheel and Engeda, 2005). Whilst the current work indicates a reasonable concurrence
with experimental data (Figures 18 and 19), it is important to comment on the possible
sources of error.
In matching, there is often some simplification of geometry, or the mesh may be left
relatively coarse in the tip region, and other smaller features such as fillets may not be
HFF fully represented. The simplification of the true geometry, due to difficulties in obtaining
21,1 grids, or restrictions on the numbers of nodes which may be used due to the limitations in
processing power, leads to unquantifiable errors. These errors could become significant
relative to the performance increments now being sought. There is a trade off to ensure
mesh quality, near wall modelling, and the computational cost of the mesh. MRF may be
difficult to solve because of large flow gradients resulting from the rotation of the fluid
108 domain. MRF grid interfaces introduce some error due to the nature of the MRF
approximation (i.e. local transfer of flow properties across the interface with no account
for grid motion). Steady-state simulation changes in relative position between stationary
and rotating meshes (e.g. interaction and interference) are not accounted for in the MRF
model. It is not accurate if recirculation exists at the interfaces. This is known to
under-predict the flow rate (1-3 per cent) due to losses (FLUENT, 2006a, b).
Accuracy and repeatability are major and inescapable issues in testing and have
been considered in the experimental section of this paper. Pump efficiency error for the
indicated case can be of the order of 6.6 per cent. Whilst accuracy is an issue in CFD
repeatability should not be, given the same solution starting conditions. The mesh
definition and quality (clustering, orthogonality, cell aspect ratio, etc.) have a
considerable influence on accuracy, with highly skewed cells in particular have a large
impact (Hirsch, 1994).
Geometric features of the impeller blade were modified after an analysis of flow
alignment carried out by the author in Quail et al. (2009; Figures 20 and 21).
CPD / Expt. comparision

7
Radial CFD
6
5
4
3
2
1
Figure 18.
0
Head coefficient vs flow 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
coefficient
CPD / Expt. comparision

Radial CFD
50
Pump efficiency (%)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
Figure 19. 5
Pump efficiency vs flow 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
coefficient
1.34e+01 Design of a
1.28e+01
1.21e+01 regenerative
1.14e+01
1.07e+01 pump
1.01e+01
9.41e+00
8.74e+00
8.07e+00
7.40e+00
6.73e+00 109
6.06e+00
5.39e+00
4.72e+00
4.05e+00
3.38e+00
2.71e+00
2.04e+00
Z
1.37e+00
7.00e-01 X
3.04e-02 Y Figure 20.
Vector alignment plot

Velocity vectors colored by velocity magnitude (m/s) Feb 15, 2009 inlet port
FLUENT 6.3 (3d, pbns, rke)
2.60e+01
2.47e+01
2.34e+01
2.21e+01
2.08e+01
1.95e+01
1.82e+01
1.69e+01
1.56e+01
1.43e+01
1.30e+01
1.17e+01
1.05e+01
9.15e+00
7.86e+00
6.56e+00
5.27e+00
3.97e+00
2.67e+00 Z
1.38e+00 X
7.88e-02 Y Figure 21.
Regenerative pump vector
Velocity vectors colored by velocity magnitude (m/s) Jul 07, 2008 alignment
FLUENT 6.3 (3d, pbns, rke)
Conclusions
There are a number of conclusions which may be drawn with regard to effectively
matching the regenerative pump CFD model with the experimental data. CFD results
produced a reasonable representation of the flow in a regenerative pump and are being
utilised to focus investigation for unit performance improvement. As the capabilities of
CFD continue to develop, it is to be expected that the uncertainties associated with CFD
prediction should also reduce. At the very least, it is to be expected that there will be a
continuing growth in processing power for the foreseeable future, which will reduce
and perhaps remove the geometric simplifications which have to be made currently.
There is a need for significant developments in instrumentation technology and novel
approaches which enable detailed data to be acquired over large regions at higher
accuracy (particularly for flow in the current study) but at a reasonable cost.
HFF This work has been useful to not only benchmark current regenerative pump design
21,1 but also gives confidence in the ability of CFD optimisation for the design to increase
the performance of the pump in the future. The ability of the CFD to establish a
reasonably good representation of the pump under steady-state incompressible
conditions is the starting point to investigate the design modifications that are making
the pump more efficient. An optimised blade profile has matched the highest ever
110 reported regenerative pump efficiency of Crewdson (1956).
References
Badami, M. (1997), “Theoretical and experimental analysis of traditional and new peripheral
pumps”, SAE Technical Papers Series, No. 971074, available at: www.sae.org
Bartels, J. (1947), Performance of Peripheral Pump, Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY.
Crewdson, E. (1956), “Water-ring self priming pumps”, Proceedings of the Institution of

Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 170 No. 13, pp. 407-15.
Engeda, A. (2003), “Flow analysis and design suggestions for regenerative flow pumps”,
ASME FEDSM2003-45681, ASME, Honolulu, HI.
Engels, H. (1940), “Investigations of ring pumps”, Tech Hoch Hannover.
European Parliament (2005), “Establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign
requirements for energy-using products”, EU Directive 2005/32/EC, European Parliament.
FLUENT (2001), “Backward inclined centrifugal fan”, Ex143 application briefs from FLUENT.
FLUENT (2005), “Mixed flow pump”, Ex232 Application briefs from FLUENT.
FLUENT (2006a), Best Practices for Rotating Machinery, ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
FLUENT (2006b), Version 6.3.26, ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
Hirsch, C.H. (1994), “CFD methodology and validation for turbomachinery flows”, Paper 4 in:
AGARD-LS-195, Turbomachinery Design using CFD.
Hollenberg, J.W. and Potter, J.H. (1979), “An investigation of regenerative blowers and pumps”,
Trans ASME, Vol. 101, pp. 147-52.
IMechE (2007), “Energy saving in pumps and pumping”, paper presented at Fluid Machinery
Group Symposium, IMechE, London.
Kirkup, L. (1994), Experimental Methods: An Introduction to the Analysis of Presentation of Data,
Wiley, New York, NY.
Lazo, L. and Hopkins, T. (1953), Theoretical and Experimental Analysis of a Regenerative Turbine
Pump, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Lutz, G.F. (1953), Experimental Investigation of the Pressure Distribution in a Regenerative
Turbine Pump, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Muller, S. (2004), “Consider regenerative pumps for low flow/low NPSH applications”,
Hydrocarbon Processing, August, pp. 55-7.
Pfleiderer, G. (1961), Pumps for Liquids and Gases, 5th ed., Springer, Berlin.
Quail, F.J., Scanlon, T. and Stickland, M. (2009), “Rapid manufacturing technique used in the
development of a regenerative pump impeller”, Proceedings of World Congress on
Engineering, London.
Raheel, M. and Engeda, A. (2005), “Systematic design approach for radial blade regenerative
turbomachines”, Journal for Propulsion and Power, Vol. 21, pp. 884-92.
Shih, T.H., Liou, W.W., Shabbir, A., Yang, Z. and Zhu, J. (1995), “A new k-1 eddy-viscosity Design of a
models for high Reynolds number turbulent flows-model development and validation”,
Computers Fluids, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 227-38. regenerative
Sixsmith, H. and Altmann, H. (1977), “A regenerative compressor”, Trans ASME, Vol. 99, pump
pp. 637-47.
Song, J.W., Engeda, A. and Chung, M.K. (2003), “Modified theory for the flow mechanism in a
regenerative flow pump”, Proceedings of the IMECHE, Part A: Journal of Power and 111
Energy, Vol. 217.
Spalart, P. (2000), “Trends in turbulence treatments”, AIAA paper (AIAA 2000-2306), AIAA,
Reston, VA.
Wilson, W.A., Santalo, M.A. and Oelrich, J.A. (1955), “A theory of the fluid dynamic mechanism
of regenerative pumps”, Trans ASME, Vol. 77, pp. 1303-16.
Woollatt, G., Lippett, D., Ivey, P.C., Timmis, P. and Charnley, B.A. (2005), “The design,
development and evaluation of 3d aerofoils for high speed axial compressors, part 2:
simulation and comparison with experiment”, ASME Paper GT-2005, TURBO EXPO,
Reno, NV.
Further reading
FLUENT (2001), “Automotive water pump”, EX164 Application briefs from FLUENT courtesy
of TESMA Engine Technologies.
Iverson, H.W. (1955), “Performance of the periphery pump”, Trans ASME, Vol. 77, pp. 19-28.
Quail, F.J. (2009), “Design optimisation of a regenerative pump using numerical and experimental
techniques”, PhD thesis, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Senoo, Y. (1948), “Theoretical research on friction pump”, Institute of Fluid Engineering, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 23-48.
Corresponding author
Francis Quail can be contacted at: francis.quail@eee.strath.ac.uk
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
This article has been cited by:
1. NejadJafar, Jafar Nejad, RiasiAlireza, Alireza Riasi, NourbakhshAhmad, Ahmad Nourbakhsh. 2017.
Parametric study and performance improvement of regenerative flow pump considering the modification
in blade and casing geometry. International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow 27:8,
1887-1906. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. Desmond Appiah, Fan Zhang, Shouqi Yuan, Majeed Koranteng Osman. 2017. Effects of the geometrical
conditions on the performance of a side channel pump: A review. International Journal of Energy Research
33. . [Crossref]
3. M. Baris Dogruoz, Gokul Shankaran. 2017. Computations with the multiple reference frame technique:
Flow and temperature fields downstream of an axial fan. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A: Applications
71:5, 488-510. [Crossref]
4. J F Wang, H H Feng, X L Mou, Y X Huang. 2017. Noise optimization of a regenerative automotive fuel
pump. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 187, 012035. [Crossref]
5. Philipp Mattern, Martin Gabi, Jochen Kriegseis. 2017. A plane-to-plane comparison of Common
Averaged vs. POD patterns of Time-Resolved Stereo-PIV data within a pump. European Journal of
Mechanics - B/Fluids 61, 321-329. [Crossref]
6. N.D. Karlsen-Davies, G.A. Aggidis. 2016. Regenerative liquid ring pumps review and advances on design
and performance. Applied Energy 164, 815-825. [Crossref]
7. J. Nejadrajabali, A. Riasi, S. A. Nourbakhsh. 2016. Flow Pattern Analysis and Performance Improvement
of Regenerative Flow Pump Using Blade Geometry Modification. International Journal of Rotating
Machinery 2016, 1-16. [Crossref]
8. N. Karlsen, G. Aggidis. Review and state of the art of regenerative liquid ring pumps 125-134. [Crossref]
9. Francis J. Quail, Thomas Scanlon, Armin Baumgartner. 2012. Design study of a regenerative pump using
one-dimensional and three-dimensional numerical techniques. European Journal of Mechanics - B/Fluids
31, 181-187. [Crossref]

Design of Regenerative Pump

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Design of Regenerative Pump

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow

Design optimisation of a regenerative pump using numerical and experimental

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The regenerative pump

Inlet Acceleration Linear Deceleration

CPD / Expt. comparision

CPD / Expt. comparision

Vector alignment plot

Crewdson, E. (1956), “Water-ring self priming pumps”, Proceedings of the Institution of

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

S-ar putea să vă placă și