3,130
Views
10
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

The effect of impeller–diffuser interactions on diffuser performance in a centrifugal compressor

, , , &
Pages 565-577 | Received 12 Oct 2015, Accepted 30 Jun 2016, Published online: 07 Oct 2016

Figures & data

Figure 1. Centrifugal compressor test facility (test section).

Figure 1. Centrifugal compressor test facility (test section).

Figure 2. Measuring positions at the outlet of the return channel.

Figure 2. Measuring positions at the outlet of the return channel.

Figure 3. Test probes: (a) total pressure probe, (b) thermocouple probe, and (c) comb probe.

Figure 3. Test probes: (a) total pressure probe, (b) thermocouple probe, and (c) comb probe.

Table 1. Primary geometric information of the centrifugal compressor.

Figure 4. Sketch of the meridional channel.

Figure 4. Sketch of the meridional channel.

Figure 5. Grid maps for (a) the impeller and (b) the diffuser.

Figure 5. Grid maps for (a) the impeller and (b) the diffuser.

Table 2. Domain grid node numbers.

Figure 6. Comparison of the steady and unsteady results with the experimental data.

Figure 6. Comparison of the steady and unsteady results with the experimental data.

Table 3. Relative errors of efficiency and head coefficient.

Figure 7. Frequency spectrum of the pressure fluctuations at the inlet of the diffuser.

Figure 7. Frequency spectrum of the pressure fluctuations at the inlet of the diffuser.

Figure 8. Frequency spectrum of the pressure fluctuations at the outlet of the diffuser.

Figure 8. Frequency spectrum of the pressure fluctuations at the outlet of the diffuser.

Figure 9. Pressure fluctuations with time for (a) Point A and (b) Point B.

Figure 9. Pressure fluctuations with time for (a) Point A and (b) Point B.

Figure 10. Distributions of PsN at 0/19T: (a) 95% span for Case 1, (b) 50% span for Case 1, (c) 5% span for Case 1, (d) 95% span for Case 3, (e) 50% span for Case 3, and (f) 5% span for Case 3.

Figure 10. Distributions of PsN at 0/19T: (a) 95% span for Case 1, (b) 50% span for Case 1, (c) 5% span for Case 1, (d) 95% span for Case 3, (e) 50% span for Case 3, and (f) 5% span for Case 3.

Figure 11. Entropy distribution at 95% span for Case 1 and Case 3.

Figure 11. Entropy distribution at 95% span for Case 1 and Case 3.

Figure 12. Distributions of flow angles at 95% span for Case 1 and Case 3.

Figure 12. Distributions of flow angles at 95% span for Case 1 and Case 3.

Figure 13. Distributions of streamline at 95% span at 13/19T for: (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 3.

Figure 13. Distributions of streamline at 95% span at 13/19T for: (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 3.

Figure 14. Vortex core regions within the diffuser passage for: (a) Case 1, (b) Case 2, and (c) Case 3.

Figure 14. Vortex core regions within the diffuser passage for: (a) Case 1, (b) Case 2, and (c) Case 3.

Figure 15. Case 3 at 95% span of diffuser inlet (R/R2 = 1.04): (a) pressure distribution and (b) flow angle distributions.

Figure 15. Case 3 at 95% span of diffuser inlet (R/R2 = 1.04): (a) pressure distribution and (b) flow angle distributions.

Figure 16. (a) total pressure loss coefficient Cpt of diffuser and (b) static pressure recovery coefficient Cps of diffuser.

Note: A = the results without considering the mixing loss induced by the mixing plane method, meaning that the diffuser inlet parameters are taken from one plane after the interface between the impeller and the diffuser; B = the results considering the mixing loss caused by the mixing plane method, so the diffuser inlet parameters are taken from one plane before the impeller and diffuser interface; C = the time-averaged result of the unsteady calculations.
Figure 16. (a) total pressure loss coefficient Cpt of diffuser and (b) static pressure recovery coefficient Cps of diffuser.

Figure 17. Loading distributions of the diffuser vane for Case 3 at: (a) 10% span, (b) 50% span, and (c) 90% span.

Figure 17. Loading distributions of the diffuser vane for Case 3 at: (a) 10% span, (b) 50% span, and (c) 90% span.