The inlet flow conditions will directly affect impeller performance, which is of great concern to pump designers. In this study, based on two axial-flow pump devices, the influence of the evaluation criteria of inlet flow conditions and numerical grid scales on the accuracy of the simulation are investigated, the correctness of the numerical simulation are verified by experiments. The axial velocity distribution uniformity, axial velocity weighted average angle and hydraulic loss are calculated with three grid scales commonly used in engineering. The applicability of three turbulence models in engineering is verified. The influence of the uniformity of the axial velocity distribution on the impeller is quantitatively explored by installing a group of vortex generators. The results show that the simulation errors of the common formula of the axial velocity distribution uniformity for the elbow inlet passage and front-shaft tubular inlet passage are 16.3% and 14.6%, respectively; the modified formula limited the computational error to 0.2%, which reduced the axial velocity distribution uniformity dependence on the grid. The quantitative relationship between inlet flow conditions and pump performance was established, as the impeller efficiency decreased linearly with decreasing axial velocity distribution uniformity.
LuoXYeWHuangR, et al..
Numerical investigations of the energy performance and pressure fluctuations for a waterjet pump in a non-uniform inflow. Renew Energy2020;
153: 1042–1052.
2.
OhHW.
Design parameter to improve the suction performance of mixed-flow pump impeller. Proc IMechE Part A: J Power and Energy2010;
224: 881–887.
3.
ShenXZhangDXuB, et al..
Numerical and experimental investigation of the pressure fluctuation in a mixed-flow pump under low flow conditions. Proc IMechE Part A: J Power and Energy2020;
234: 46–57.
4.
ZhaoZGuoZQianZ, et al..
Performance improvement of an axial-flow pump with inlet guide vanes in the turbine mode. Proc IMechE Part A: J Power and Energy2020; 234: 323–331.
5.
SunHXiaoRLiuW, et al..
Analysis of S characteristics and pressure pulsations in a pump-turbine with misaligned guide vanes. J Fluids Eng2013;
135: 1–6.
6.
ZhangR.
Optimum hydraulic design and experiment for dual-directional inlet passage in pumping station. Trans Chin Soc Agric Mach2003;
34: 73–76.
7.
ConstantinescuGSPatelVC.
Numerical model for simulation of pump-intake flow and vortices. J Hydraul Eng1998;
124: 123–134.
8.
HyungJKSungWPDongSR.
Numerical analysis of the effects of anti-vortex device height on hydraulic performance of pump sump. KSCE J Civil Eng2017;
21: 1484–1492.
9.
WangYLuLTanJ.
Research on the system for visualization and simulation of flow fields of elbow draft tube for a pumping station. Trans Chin Soc Agric Mach2002;
33: 56–59 (in Chinese).
10.
YangFXieCLiuC, et al..
Influence of axial-flow pumping system operating conditions on hydraulic performance of elbow inlet conduit. Trans Chin Soc Agric Mach2016;
47: 15–21 (in Chinese).
11.
ShiFChenHZhangJ.
Analysis of interior turbulent flow within bidirectional tubular pump arrangement with silo. J Eng Thermophys2006;
27: 598–600 (in Chinese).
12.
XuLLuLChenW, et al..
Flow pattern analysis on inlet and outlet conduit of shaft tubular pump system of Pizhou pumping station in South-to-North Water Diversion Project. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng2012;
28: 50–56 (in Chinese).
13.
ZiDWangFTaoR, et al..
Research for impacts of boundary layer grid scale on flow field simulation results in pumping station. Shui Li Xue Bao2016;
47: 139–149 (in Chinese).
14.
Taylor HD. The elimination of diffuser separation by vortex generators. United Aircraft Corporation Report no. R-4012-3, June 1947. East Hartford: United Aircraft Corporation.
15.
GodardGStanislasM.
Control of a decelerating boundary layer. Part 1: optimization of passive vortex generators. Aerosp Sci Technol2006;
10: 181–191.
16.
OmidNMahdiNHyundukS, et al..
Effect of acicular vortex generators on the aerodynamic features of a slender delta wing. Aerosp Sci Technol2019;
86: 327–340.
17.
LinJ.
Review of research on low-profile vortex generators to control boundary-layer separation. Progr Aerosp Sci2002;
38: 389–420.
18.
ZhangLYangKXuJ, et al..
Modeling of delta-wing type vortex generators. Sci China Technol Sci2011;
54: 277–285.
19.
Mueller V H, Pechlivanoglou G, Nayeri C, et al. Vortex generators for wind turbine blades: a combined wind tunnel and wind turbine parametric study. In Turbine technical conference and exposition, Copenhagen, Denmark, 11-15 June 2012, vol. 6, pp. 899–914. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
20.
MaheshRIVadirajVK.
Flow characteristics of air in square duct using delta wing vortex generators. Perspect Sci2016;
8: 298–300.
21.
ShiLZhuJTangF, et al..
Multi-disciplinary optimization design of axial-flow pump impellers based on the approximation model. Energies2020;
13: 779.
22.
ShiLTangFXieR, et al..
Numerical and experimental investigation of tank−type axial-flow pump device. Adv Mech Eng2017;
9: 1–13.
23.
LiuCLiangHJinY, et al..
PIV measurements of intake flow field in axial-flow pump. Trans Chin Soc Agric Mach2015;
46: 33–41 (in Chinese).
24.
XieCTangFZhangR, et al..
Numerical simulation of axial-flow pump’s pressure fluctuation and model test analysis. Adv Mech Eng2018;
10: 1–13.
25.
LiYWangF.
Numerical investigation of performance of an axial-flow pump with inducer. J Hydrodyn2007;
19: 705–711.
26.
FengJLuoXGuoP, et al..
Influence of tip clearance on pressure fluctuations in an axial-flow pump. J Mech Sci Technol2016;
30: 1603–1610.
27.
ChitrakarSThapaBSDahlhaugOG, et al..
Numerical and experimental study of the leakage flow in guide vanes with different hydrofoils. J Comput Des Eng2017;
4: 218–230.
28.
LiuYZhongLLuL.
Comparison of DDES and URANS for unsteady tip leakage flow in an axial compressor rotor. J Fluids Eng2019;
141: 121405.
29.
ShiLZhangWJiaoH, et al..
Numerical simulation and experimental study on the comparison of the hydraulic characteristics of an axial-flow pump and a full tubular pump. Renew Energy2020;
153: 1455–1464.
30.
SalimMSCheahSC.
Wally+ strategy for dealing with wall-bounded turbulent flows. Lecture Notes Eng Comput Sci2009;
2175: 2165–2170.
31.
WangF. Computational fluid dynamics analysis–CFD principles and application.
Beijing:
Tsinghua University Press, 2004.
ChengTYangW.
Numerical simulation of three-dimensional turbulent separated and reattaching flows using a modified turbulence model. Comput Fluids2008;
37: 194–206.
35.
AhnSHXiaoYWangZ, et al..
Unsteady prediction of cavitating flow around a three dimensional hydrofoil by using a modified RNG k−ε model. Ocean Eng2018;
158: 275–285.
