Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Gas Turbine India Conference
GTINDIA2013
EXIT BLADE ANGLE AND ROUGHNESS EFFECT ON CENTRIFUGAL
PUMP PERFORMANCE
Sayed Ahmed Imran Bellary
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Chennai-600036, India
Email: ibellary@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Exit blade angle and impeller surface roughness has a
significant effect on the performance of a centrifugal pump
impeller handling different viscosity fluids. In this paper, a
three-dimensional flow simulation using Reynolds averaged
Navier Stokes (RANS) equations for the performance analysis
of the impeller is reported. The analysis using water and
viscous liquids has been accomplished for different flow
conditions, exit blade angle and roughness values. Standard k-ε
two equation model is used for the turbulent closure of steady
incompressible flow. The investigation shows that the blade
exit angle has influence on the head, shaft power and efficiency
of the impeller for different liquids. Rise in head, increase in
shaft power and decrease in hydraulic efficiency have been
observed with increasing roughness.
Keywords: Centrifugal impeller, Exit blade angle, Viscosity,
Roughness, Slip factor.
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays centrifugal pump either as single stage or
multistage is extensively used in almost all industries like
agriculture, chemical, mining etc. and as an artificial lift in
petroleum industry. Performance characteristics of pump
greatly depend on geometry of impeller. For better performance
of pump, design parameters like impeller blade width, exit
blade angle, blade height, number of blades, impeller diameter
and curvature of blade plays key role and must be determined
accurately.
From literature, it was found that the researchers like
Kamimoto and Matsuoka [1] experimentally investigated with
the constant angles of 30o, 50o, 70o and 90o for different model
centrifugal impellers. Varley [2] investigated the effect of blade
exit angle on performance of double suction centrifugal pump.
Kamimoto and Matsuoka [1] presented 40% improvement in
hydraulic efficiency whereas the experiments by Varley [2]
shows an improvement of 1.6% for variable exit blade angle.
*Assistant Professor and author of correspondence; e -mail: samad@iitm.ac.in
1 Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
December 5-6, 2013, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GTINDIA2013-3531
Abdus Samad*
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Chennai-600036, India
Email: samad@iitm.ac.in
Stepanoff [3], Telow [4], Ippen [5] and Itaya and Nishikawa
[6] experimentally studied the influence of viscosity on
performance of pump. Aoki et al.[7], Ohta and Aoki [8] and Li
[9] conducted experiments for handling water and viscous oils.
For pump handling both water and viscous oil the blade exit
angle has substantial effect on both head and efficiency of the
impeller. The results show that the large discharge angle exhibit
an improvement in both head and efficiency for a liquid with
higher viscosity and water [9].
Experiments with impeller for two different surface
roughness values were conducted by Varley [2] but did not
report the interdependency of exit blade angle with surface
roughness. Fard and Boyaghchi [10] studied the influence of
various blade outlet angles in a centrifugal pump when
handling viscous fluids by computational and experimental
methods. These investigations did not include roughness of wet
wall. Although, Li [11] reported computations on effect of exit
blade angle, viscosity and roughness in centrifugal pumps by
CFD simulations, but the results do not reveal the effect of
discharge angle on roughness.
Johnston and Rothe [12], Johnston et al.[13] and Bayly and
Orszag [14] observed a low energy separated region i.e. a
boundary layer on pressure side which is unstable and tends to
propagate from the hub and shroud surfaces to the suction side
in the impeller. This kind of flow pattern develops jet wake
flow.
Dean and Senoo [15] and Tuzson [16] have reported from
their analytical and experimental results that a separated region,
due to acceleration and corresponding pressure increase from
suction side to pressure side forming a separated region has its
limitations. This kind of jet wake flow pattern is exhibited only
under certain conditions.
In this paper an attempt has been made to understand the
combined effect of exit blade angle and surface roughness on
head and efficiency by numerical simulation for different iquids
at different flow rates. The flow mechanism inside impeller by
varying the exit blade angle is reported.
 NOMENCLATURE b bulk
Abbreviations h hub
RANS Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes o eye
CFD Computational fluid dynamics s shaft
PS Pressure side th theoretical
SS Suction side max maximum
LE Leading edge
TE Trailing edge NUMERICAL FORMULATION
Figure 1 shows exit velocity triangle, meridional
Symbols Description configuration, geometrical model and flow domain.
B Blade width, mm The detail geometry of radial flow impeller corresponds to
c Absolute fluid flow velocity, m/s the values obtained from the conventional design procedure of
ceq Equivalence factor impeller design as given in refs. [17-19]. Table 1 features
cm Meridional velocity component, m/s geometric parameters of impeller. Design procedures [18-19]
cu Peripheral velocity component, m/s and the input values such as head (H), discharge (Q), and
D Diameter, m impeller speed in rpm (N) were considered for the same
fi Body force, N reference. The rotation speed and other dimensions like outer
fR Roughness effect diameter of impeller (D2), outlet width of blade (b2), outlet and
g Acceleration due to gravity, m/s2 inlet blade angles (β2) and (β1) collectively determine the total
H Head generated, m head generated. The blades were having constant thickness (t)
∆H Hydraulic losses, m and width (b) with trailing edge chamfered. Backward curved
ks Sand roughness, µm vanes mounted on impeller, impart whirling motion to increase
ks + Roughness Reynolds number the pressure energy of fluid.
Mass flow rate, kg/s For investigating the influence of blade exit angle on the
N Impeller speed, rpm performance of centrifugal impeller three different blade outlet
P Power consumed by pump, kW angles 25o, 40o and 70o were selected. Calculations were
p Pressure, N/m2 performed on the impeller which is hydrodynamically smooth
Q Volume flow rate, m3/s as well as with sand roughness of 50 and 100 µm. Here
Re Reynolds number hydrodynamically smooth wall implies a roughness of 5 µm.
r Radius, m Table 2 represents the five different fluids with density and
t Blade thickness, mm dynamic viscosity used for analysis. All the simulations were
Uj Three dimensional velocity vector performed at 20o C fluid temperature.
U Peripheral velocity, m/s To understand and visualize the complex behavior of fluid
uτ Frictional velocity, m/s inside the impeller, CFD is the alternate option and preferred
w Relative fluid velocity, m/s over the experimental approach as the later one is expensive in
wu Peripheral component of w, m/s terms of time, cost, space and man-power. Within reasonable
ws Relative velocity on suction side, m/s time, the algorithms of advanced solvers perform reliable
z Blade number solutions of flow field.
Modeling and meshing of the flow domain were carried out
Greek Symbol by using Ansys-BladeGen and TurboGrid module. Ansys-CFX
β Blade angle, o 13.0 was used for the flow simulations. The total number of
δij Kronecker delta nodes, elements, convergence value and iteration steps have
ε Rate of kinetic energy dissipation, J/s been presented in Table 3. To capture flow behavior more
η Hydraulic efficiency, % accurately, meshing has been done with Ansys-Turbogrid which
k Turbulence kinetic energy, J generates structured hexahedral elements to define inlet, outlet
µ Dynamic viscosity, N-s/m2 and flow passage zones. The mesh in the flow passage is with
ν Kinematic viscosity, m2/s O-grid block and at the inlet and outlet it is with H-grid block.
ρ Density of fluid, kg/m3 These grid blocks, help to account the wall shear stress and
σ Slip factor boundary layer losses accurately [20]. This is the similar
τij Viscous stress tensor procedure which was followed by Samad and Kim [21] for
τw Shear stress at the wall, N/m2 other type of turbomachinery meshing and flow simulation. The
mesh has been shown in Fig. 1d.
Subscript
1 Inlet
2 outlet
a actual

2 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Periodic
u2
cu2 wu2 Blade
B C A
α2 Shroud Inlet
β2
cm2
w2 Hub
c2

Outlet

(a) Outlet velocity triangle

(d) Flow domain and mesh
Fig.1 Computational domain
b2
The flow parameters associated with centrifugal impeller
Trailing edge are governed by mass and momentum conservation equations.
Those are given below.
Leading edge Mass conservation equation,

∂ρ ∂
+ ( ρU i ) = 0 (1)
b1 r2 ∂t ∂xi

Momentum conservation equation,

ro r1
∂ ∂τ
rh (ρU i ) + ∂ (ρU iU j ) = − ∂p − ij + ρf i (2)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j ∂x j

(b) Meridional configuration for impeller and

 ∂Ui ∂U j ∂U k   ∂Ui ∂U j  2
τ ij = −µbδ ij  + + −µ + πr (3)
 ∂xi ∂x j ∂xk   ∂x j ∂xi 
Hub
Inlet
The steady, incompressible conditions were applied and RANS
equations were solved for the flow analysis. At all working
conditions, the flow was three-dimensional, turbulent and
steady time-averaged.
To account for Reynolds number (Re>105) standard k-ε
turbulence model was employed. The k-ε turbulence model is a
class of RANS models to which two partial differential
equations are solved, one for turbulence kinetic energy, k, and
another for turbulence kinetic energy dissipation rate, ε, to get
length and time scale information needed to form local eddy
Blade viscosities [22]. CFD being a numerical technique replaces
these partial differential fluid flow equations into the algebraic
(c) Impeller equations by numbers and discretizing them into space and
time domain.

3 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 1: Features of impeller
To achieve linear velocity distribution in the viscous
Parameter Dimension sublayer, high number of cells are employed which is termed as
Shaft diameter, Ds 40 mm linear or scalable wall function. Within Ansys-CFX, the k-ε
Eye diameter, Do 182 mm turbulence model uses the scalable wall-function approach to
Hub diameter, Dh 55 mm improve robustness and accuracy when the near-wall mesh is
Inlet diameter, D1 160 mm very fine. The scalable wall functions allow solution on
Inlet blade width, b1 54 mm arbitrarily fine near wall grids, which is a significant
Outlet blade width, b2 30 mm improvement over standard wall functions [23]. To avoid all
Inlet blade angle, β1 23 degree fine mesh inconsistencies and to fully resolve the boundary
Outlet blade angle, β2 25o, 40o and 70o layer at least 10 nodes have to be included into the boundary
Blade number, z 7 layer [23-24]. With the approach of scalable wall-function it is
Blade thickness, t 5 mm possible to achieve this value. In all simulations performed the
Outlet diameter, D2 365 mm size of elements used next to wall was 11.13, within the
recommended value. Figure 2 shows head variation with the
Table 2: Viscosity and density of different fluids number of nodes of the flow domain.
The blades are swept backwards (β2 < 90o) and used for
Fluid Viscosity Density pumps and blowers [25]. The blade exit angle exerts a decisive
[N-s/m2] [kg/m3] influence on the total head and efficiency of pump. As per
Water 1.002E-3 997 Euler's equation head generated by impeller blade is given by:
Saline-water 1.080E-3 1031
Crude-oil 5.000E-3 835 cu 2u2 − cu1u1
H = (4)
Gasoline 5.000E-4 720 g
Kerosene 2.100E-3 810
Normal entry at impeller inlet implies cu1=0 and from velocity
Table 3: Meshing and boundary conditions triangle shown in Fig. 1(a) cu2 can be given as

Parameter Description Q cot β 2

Flow domain Single impeller cu 2 = u2 − (5)
πDb2
Interface Periodic
Mesh/Nature Structural/Hexahedral
Nodes 634,161 From Fig. 1 (a) it is clear that as β2 increases, the absolute exit
Elements 568,620 velocity c2 also increases. Increase in c2 causes cu2 to increase
Fluid nature Water, Saline-water, Crude which results in increase in head.
oil, Gasoline and Kerosene Slip factor is generally used to express the flow slip effect
Turbulence model k-ε at the exit of a centrifugal pump impeller and this parameter is
Inlet Pressure used to specify theoretical head developed by the impeller [25].
Outlet Mass flow rate
Residual convergence value 1x10-5 According to Stodola slip factor is estimated by the relation,
Time taken for simulation 15 hrs
Iteration steps 2000 π sin β 2
σ = 1− (6)
Mass imbalance 0.0003 m3/s z
46 Input shaft power in terms of cu2 is given by,

ρgQu2cu2
P= (7)
H

44
g

Equations (5) and (7) clearly indicate that increase in exit

42 blade angle results in increase in cu2 which in turn will increase
2 3 4 5 6 input shaft power.
Hydraulic efficiency is given by,
Number of nodes (X105)
Fig.2 Head variation with number of nodes at design flow
rate (Q=0.1003 m3/s)

4 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 H a H th − ∆H value. The wall is considered to be hydraulically rough if
η = = (8)
roughness peaks are significantly greater than the thickness of
H th H th
the laminar sub-layer. To express the roughness of surface
structure a term sand roughness (ks) is used. Sand roughness
Since the hydraulic losses and theoretical head at design has a uniform surface structure while in actual scenario the
point differ to small extent from off design conditions, a surfaces have an irregular roughness which is accounted by
measure of hydraulic efficiency is directly linked with head considering maximum roughness depth ksmax [24]. The
generated. As the head measurement is high for large exit blade relationship between sand roughness ks and maximum
angle, the corresponding hydraulic efficiency will be more for roughness depth ksmax is given by,
the liquid with large discharge angle [25].
As fluid flows through the impeller its acceleration and
ks max
corresponding pressure increases from inlet to outlet. This ceq = (11)
creates a shear layer or seperation streamline between two flow ks
regions of different fluid energy from low energy region
towards high energy region. This seperation between suction The roughness Reynolds number ks+ is defined as,
side and pressure side of impeller forms two flow regions of
different energy: the seperated region and main stream region. uτ ks
On either side of the streamline seperating the two regions the ks+ = (12)
ν
relative velocity w is constant with different magnitude. Figure
3 [26] shows combined flow pattern comprising of a stable τw
uτ = (13)
seperated region or wake on suction side and main stream or jet ρ
near the pressure side of the blade is known as jet wake flow
pattern. The disc friction losses of impeller are significant due to
As per Tuzson [26] impellers jet wake flow pattern will surface roughness. This leads to hydraulic losses and decrease
appears only when; in hydraulic efficiency (Eq.8). Equation (14) represents the
roughness effect fR on disc friction.
β=0 (9)
2.15
and  12.5 
 log 
 Re  (14)
fR =  
w + ws
≥ sin β (10)  log 0.2 k s + 12.5  
2U   r2 Re  
 
Surface roughness
Roughness increases the flow resistance in turbulent flow
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
whereas in laminar flow roughness has no effect on the
Grid independency
resistance due to no exchange of momentum across the flow.
It is necessary to conduct independency verification of the grid
The wall experiencing the flow is termed as hydraulically
system before performing CFD simulations for different
smooth when all roughness peaks remain within the laminar
viscosity fluids at different flow rates. Initially the simulations
sub-layer. Increase in Reynolds number (Re) results into
were performed at design flow rate to find grid independency
decrease in boundary layer thickness and drop in roughness
verification (Fig. 2). As the variation of head developed with
the increase in number of nodes is not significant, 550,000
Suction side Pressure side nodes have been selected for all the simulations.

Effect of exit blade angle

Wake Jet The computations were carried out at different mass flow
ws
w rates. The blade exit angle was varied from 25o to 70o. The
head, shaft power and hydraulic efficiency in terms of
discharge angle at different flow rate for different viscous fluids
are demonstrated in Fig. 4. Large discharge angle results in an
increase in head generation. This is due to increase in absolute
ω flow velocity ar exit (c2) and corresponding periperal velocity
(cu2) i.e. dynamic part of head increases more rapidly.

Fig.3 Jet-wake flow pattern in impeller

5 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 25° H 40° H 70° H 85 95
25° P 40° P 70° P
25° η 40° η 70° η 70
85 95 85

H, P
55

η
70
85

η
75
H, P

55 40
75
40 25 65
0.085 0.105 Q 0.125 0.145
25 65
e) Kerosene
0.085 0.105 0.125 0.145
Q
a) Normal water Fig.4 Performance curves for different fluids

85 95 From Eq. (4) it is obvious that the head developed by the

impeller increases with increase in cu2. Equation (5) represents
70 a drooping down straight line and facilitates the information
85 that a larger discharge angle produces a higher head than a
H, P

smaller exit angle. The maximum change of the head curve due
55
η

to the variation in discharge angle is almost same for different

75 fluids of different viscosity. This implies that effect of
40 discharge angle on head curve is independent of fluid viscosity
for a dynamic viscosity range from 5E-4 to5E-3 N-s/m2 [27].
25 65 Independent of viscous fluid used, the maximum change of
0.085 0.105 0.125 0.145 the head due to change in exit blade angle maintains almost the
Q
same amount (Fig. 4). Thus effect of discharge angle on head
b) Saline-water generation is independent on the viscosity of fluid being used.
For same flow rate and discharge angle power consumed is
85 95 more for denser fluid shown in Fig. 4 (b) and this is explained
by Eq. (7). The increase in flow rate results in greater
70 consumption of power by the impeller. The density of crude oil,
85 gasoline and kerosene is lesser than water or saline-water,
H, P

55 which causes the least consumption of impeller power [24].

η

Because the increase in exit blade angle increases cu2 hence

75 power consumption by input shaft to the impeller is more. This
40
is evident from Eq. (7).
Large discharge angle favours a rise in hydraulic efficiency
25 65 upto design point and on the right side of the design point it
0.085 0.105 Q 0.125 0.145 slightly decreases as depicted in Fig. 4. The efficiency is
c) Crude oil maximum at best efficiency point and retards uniformly to the
right of best efficiency point. The reason is at this point
85 95 secondary and profile losses are minimum and at off design
points secondary and shock losses increases which increases
total hydraulic losses resulting into reduce in hydraulic
70 efficiency [25]. The hydraulic efficiency for handling crude-oil,
85
saline-water, gasoline and kerosene is lower than that for
H,P

55 handling water. The decrease in efficiency, while pumping the

η

crude oil and saline-water is due to the disc friction losses over
75 the outsides of the impeller shroud and hub generated due to
40
viscosity. These results agree with the results of Gulich [24]
and Li [28].
25 65 Figures 5 and 6 demonstrate the contours of static pressure
0.085 0.105 Q 0.125 0.145 and liquid flow velocity for design point ( Q=0.1003 m3/s) at
50% span. It is clear from these figures that static pressure
d) Gasoline

6 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 PS
SS
SS PS

Rotational
direction
a) Normal water a) Normal water

b) Saline-water b) Saline-water

c) Crude oil c) Crude oil

d) Gasoline d) Gasoline

e) Kerosene e) Kerosene

β2=25o β2=40o β2=70o β2=25o β2=40o β2=70o

Fig.5 Static pressure contours at 50% (Q=0.1003 m3/s) Fig.6 Flow velocity contours at 50% span (Q=0.1003 m3/s)

7 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Water25° Water 40° difference between impeller inlet and outlet increases with large
Water 70° Saline-water 25° exit blade angle. The factor responsible for this is fluid flow
Saline-water 40° Saline-water 70° velocity at impeller outlet which decreases with increase in
Crude-oil 25° Crude-oil 40° discharge angle.
Crude oil 70° Gasoline 25° The pressure contours represents a smooth flow between
Gasoline 40° Gasoline-70° the blades and its value increases continuously towards the exit
Kerosene 25° Kerosene 40° of the computational domain. The Fig. 5 depict that the lowest
Kerosene 70° static pressure was observed at the impeller inlet on suction
55 side. At this location in centrifugal impeller cavitation usually
appears. Here it is above saturation pressure of liquid and the
occurrence of cavitation is ruled out [29].
50 The highest static pressure occurs at the impeller outlet and
the kinetic energy of flow reaches to its maximum extent. This
is due to the pressure which increases continuously as the
H

45
mechanical energy given in the form of impeller rotation is
converted into the pressure energy. Minimum pressure exists at
40 the suction side and near the leading edge of the blade. The
difference in pressure between outlet and inlet increases with
increase in blade angle. Liquids with large exit blade angle
35 have more difference in pressure between inlet and outlet. It is
0 50 100 due to a decrease in the velocity at the impeller outlet for large
ks discharge angle as depicted from Fig.4. It shows the relative
(a) Head vs sand roughness velocity of fluid between blade passages. The relative velocity
65 in blade channel has a smooth distribution and declines from
inlet to outlet. This agrees the analytical results; as fluid flows
from inlet to outlet of the impeller, the relative velocity
decreases [18].
55
Jet wake flow pattern
For radial blade impeller jet wake flow pattern is observed
P

45 if Eq. (9) and (10) are satisfied but with backward curved vanes
the blades lean strongly backwards making sin(β) relatively
large and these equations does not hold good. Hence jet wake
flow pattern shown in Fig. 3 is not observed in pumps [26].
35
0 50 100 Effect of surface roughness
ks To find the effect of roughness and viscosity with exit blade
(b) Power consumption vs sand roughness angle on the performance of pump, properties of water, saline-
water, crude oil, gasoline and kerosene were used.
95
Characteristic curves for different fluids at design point and
1470 rpm have been shown in Fig. 7 with sand roughness ks as
90 0, 50 and 100 µm at 25o, 40o and 70o as exit blade angle β2.
Increase in surface roughness increases the head (H), power
consumption (P) with decrease in hydraulic efficiency (η) [2,
85
η

30]. It is quite obvious that the pumping performance of the

roughened hub and shrouds is increased. This results in an
80 increase in head. A decrease in hydraulic efficiency has been
noticed when surface roughness was increased. This is due to
through flow losses in the impeller passages and also due to
75 external disc friction [2]. The computations were performed at
0 50 100 0.1003 m3/s volume flow rate.

ks Combined effect of exit blade angle and roughness

(c) Hydraulic efficiency vs sand roughness The results show that the combined effect of increase in
exit blade angle and surface roughness favors the increase in
Fig. 7 Effect of surface roughness (Q=0. 1003 m3/s) head generation. Surface roughness of impeller implies a

8 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 deceleration of relative velocity near solid walls with boundary
layer thickening as shown in Fig. 8. The lower relative velocity
is the cause for higher absolute velocity and consequently an TE
increase in slip factor and head. Also large exit blade angle
results in an increase in slip factor (Eq. 6). In a total combined
increase in exit blade angle and surface roughness increases the
head. This leads to increase in power consumption shown by LE
Eq. (7).
Hydraulic efficiency is affected by the combined action of
a) Normal water
increase in exit blade angle and surface roughness. Head loss
(∆H) due to increase in surface roughness is more due to
secondary losses, profile losses and shock losses [25]. Equation
8 clearly explains that these losses affect the hydraulic
efficiency [25]. Equation 14 illustrates the friction effect due to
surface roughness on impeller performance. The friction effect
also increases the hydraulic losses. In addition to this the
decrease in efficiency, while pumping the crude oil and saline-
water is due to the disc friction losses over the outsides of the
impeller shroud and hub. These results show a good agreement b) Saline-water
with the analytical results of Gulich [24] and Li [28].

CONCLUSIONS
The Centrifugal pump impeller performance under the
influence of exit blade angle at different mass flow rate has
been evaluated by numerical simulations for five different
fluids. The conclusions are:
• The blade exit angle has substantial influence on the head,
shaft power and hydraulic efficiency of the impeller for
different liquids. c) Crude oil
• Increase in exit blade angle increases the hydraulic efficiency
till design point and it is maximum. At off design points,
increase in exit blade angle does not influence hydraulic
efficiency, instead decreases due to different losses.
• Higher viscosity liquids have lower head generation at same
exit blade angle. An increase in the density of fluid results in
increased power consumption at various blade exit angle.
• Hydraulic efficiency of impeller reduces with increase in
surface roughness. This is due to roughness effect, flow
losses in impeller passage and external disc friction. d) Kerosine
• Jet wake flow is absent in the impeller for all fluids due to.
Increase in surface roughness increases the head generated
and power consumption with decrease in hydraulic
efficiency.
• Combined effect of increase in exit blade angle and surface
roughness is an in increase in head generation with little
increase in hydraulic efficiency.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS e) Gasolene
The authors would like to acknowledge Indian Institute of Roughness= 50 µm Roughness= 100 µm
Technology Madras for the NFSC grant (Grant code: OEC/10-
11/529/NFSC/ABDU) to conduct this research.

REFERENCES
[1] Kamimoto, G. and Matsuoka, Y., 1956, “On the Flow in the
Impeller of Centrifugal Type Hydraulic Machinery (The 2nd Fig.8 Meridional velocity contours for different fluids at
design point

9 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Report),” Transactions of the JSME, Series 3, 22(113), pp.
55-59.
[2] Varley, F. A., 1961, “Effects of Impeller Design and
Surface Roughness on the Performance of Centrifugal
Pumps,” Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs, 175(21), pp. 955-969.
[3] Stepanoff, A. J., 1940, “Pumping Viscous Oils with
Centrifugal Pumps,” Oil and Gas Journal, 1(4).
[4] Telow, N., 1942, “A Survey of Modern Centrifugal Pump
Practice for oilfield and Oil Refinery Services,” The
Institution of Mechanical Engineering, 3(121).
[5] Ippen, A. T., 1946, “The Influence of Viscosity on
Centrifugal Performance,” Trans ASME, 68(8), pp. 823-830.
[6] Itaya, S. and Nishikawa, T., 1960, “Studies on the Volute
Pumps Handling Viscous Fluids,” Bulletin of JSME,
26(162), pp.202-212.
[7] Aoki, K., Ohta, H. and Nakayama, Y., 1987, “Study on
Centrifugal Pump for High Viscosity Liquids (The 1st
Report, Effect of Impeller Output Angle and Number of
Blades on the Pump Performance of Closed Type
Impellers),” Proceedings of the School of Engineering,
Tokai university, 27(2), pp. 151-158.
[8] Ohta, H. and Aoki, K., 1996, “Effect of Impeller Angle on
Performance and Internal Flow of Centrifugal Pump for
High Viscosity Liquids,” Proceedings of the School of
Engineering, Tokai University, 36(1), pp. 159-168.
[9] Li, W. G., 2002, “The Influence of Number of Blades on the
Performance of Centrifugal Oil Pumps,” World Pumps, 427,
pp. 32-35.
[10] Fard, M. H. S. and Boyaghchi, F. A., 2007, “Studies on the
Influence of Various Blade Outlet Angles in a Centrifugal
Pump When Handling Viscous Fluids,” American Journal
of Applied Sciences, 4(9), pp. 718-724.
[11] Li, W. G., 2011, “Effect of Exit Blade Angle, Viscosity and
Roughness in Centrifugal Pumps Investigated by CFD
Computations,” Task Quarterly, 15(1), pp. 21-41.
[12] Johnston, J. P. and Rothe, P. H., 1967, “Effect of System
Rotation on the Performance of Two-Dimensional
Diffusers,” ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering,
September, pp. 422-430.
[13] Johnston, P. J., Halleen, R. M. and Lezius, D. K., 1972,
“Effects of Spanwise Rotation on the Structure of Two-
Dimensional Fully Developed Channel Flow,” Journal of
Fluid Mechanics, 56(3), pp. 533-557.
[14] Bayly, B. J. and Orszag, S. A., 1988, “Instability
Mechanisms in Shear Flow Transition,” Annual Review of
Fluid Mechanics, 20(1), pp. 359-391.
10
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
[15] Dean, R. C. Jr. and Senoo, Y., 1960, “Rotating Wakes in
Vaneless Diffusers,” ASME Journal of Basic Engineering,
September, pp. 563-574.
[16] Tuzson, J., 1993, “Interpretation of Impeller Flow
Calculations,” ASME Journal of Fluid Engineering,
September, pp. 463-467.
[17] Stepanoff, A. J., 1964, “Centrifugal and Axial Flow
Pumps,” John Wiley and Sons inc., 2nd Edition, New York.
[18] Lazarkiewicz, S. and Troskolanski, A. T., 1965, “Impeller
Pumps,” Pergamon Press Ltd., 1st Edition, Oxford.
[19] Church, A. H., 1972, “Centrifugal Pump and Blowers,”
John Wiley and sons, Inc., 1st Edition, New York.
[20] Desai, J., Chauhan, V., Charnia, S. and Patel, K., 2011,
“Validation of Hydraulic Design of a Metallic Volute
Centrifugal Pump using CFD,” The 11th Asian International
Conference on Fluid Machinery and 3rd Fluid Power
Technology Exhibition, 21-23 Nov., IIT Madras, Chennai.
[21] Samad, A. and Kim, K. Y., 2008, “Shape Optimization of an
Axial Compressor Blade by Multi-Objective Genetic
Algorithm,” Proc. IMechE Part A: J. Power and Energy,
Vol. 222, pp. 599-611.
[22] Wilcox, D. C., 1994, “Turbulence Modeling for CFD,”
DCW Industries, Inc., 2nd Edition, La Canada, California.
[23] Ansys-CFX 13.0, 2010, Ansys Inc.
[24] Gulich, J. F., 2010, “Centrifugal Pumps,” Springer
Publications, 2nd Edition, Berlin.
[25] Srinivasan, K. M., 2008, “Rotodynamic Pumps,” New Age
International (P) Ltd., New Delhi.
[26] Tuzson, J., 2000, “Centrifugal Pump Design,” John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1st Edition, New York.
[27] Li, W. G., 2011, “Blade Exit Angle Effects on Performance
of a Standard Industrial Centrifugal Oil Pump,” Journal of
Applied Fluid Mechanics, 4(2), pp. 105-119.
[28] Li, W. G., 2008, “Numerical Study on Behavior of a
Centrifugal Pump When Delivering Viscous Oils-Part1:
Performance,” International Journal of Turbo and Jet
Engines, 25, pp. 61-79.
[29] Gupta, M., Kumar, S. and Kumar, A., 2011, “Numerical
Study of Pressure and Velocity Distribution Analysis of
Centrifugal Pump,” International Journal of Thermal
Technologies, 1(1), pp. 117-121.
[30] Zhang, Y., Zhou, X., Ji, Z. and Jiang, C., 2011, “Numerical
Design and Performance Prediction of Low Specific Speed
Centrifugal Pump Impeller,” International Journal of Fluid
Machinery and Systems, 4(1), pp. 133-139.
Copyright © 2013 by ASME