266 hariharan

271 views
154 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
271
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
14
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

266 hariharan

  1. 1. C.Hariharan and M.Govardhan Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Loss in Input Power due to Increase in Clearance between Inlet Duct and Impeller in an Industrial Centrifugal Blower Thermal Turbomachines Laboratory Department of Mechanical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Madras 1
  2. 2. Introduction • Lee [3] • C Hariharan et al [5] Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras • Aayder et al. [1] 2
  3. 3. • In most of the time while design we omit the clearance gap in between suction duct and impeller. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Problem definition • The area of clearance is only 0.5 to 2% of inlet area. 3
  4. 4. Design Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Specification: specific work Design mass flow rate operating range Speed - 24000 m2/s2 - 28.5 kg/s - 20 kg/s to 31.5 kg/s - 3000rpm 4
  5. 5. Dimension Blades Inlet Diameter Inlet Blade angle Exit Blade angle - 15 - 0.7 m - 32o - 48o Clearance gap Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Impeller: - 1mm, 3mm and 5mm - 0.6 %, 1.8% and 3% clearance area 5
  6. 6. - constant angular momentum - tongue clearance 5% of impeller exit diameter Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Volute : - Ratio between volute width and impeller exit width 5. 6
  7. 7. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Fan Assembly with Ratio 5 volute 7
  8. 8. Numerical simulation simplification -Steady state -Compressible (air ideal gas) Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras - commercial CFD code CFX 14 - (3-D) Full fan 8
  9. 9. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras - (3-D) -Mass -Momentum -Energy - turbulence model (K-Ɛ) 9
  10. 10. -Rotating domain - impeller Interface Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras - Stationary domain - suction duct - volute Frozen Rotor Technique 10
  11. 11. -Suction duct 0.8 million -Impeller 4.5 million -Volute 5.5 million Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Meshing Y+ < 50 volume expansion factor < 25 Number of nodes in interfaces maintained almost same 11
  12. 12. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Suction duct mesh 12
  13. 13. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Impeller mesh 13
  14. 14. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Impeller pasage 14
  15. 15. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Volute mesh 15
  16. 16. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Impeller inlet duct mesh 16
  17. 17. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Clearance between impeller and inlet duct 17
  18. 18. circumferential radial 10 1100 Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Number of nodes in clearance 18
  19. 19. -Stage performance -Component performance Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Results 19
  20. 20. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Stage Pressure raise 20
  21. 21. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in Stage Pressure raise 21
  22. 22. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Stage Efficiency 22
  23. 23. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in Stage Efficiency 23
  24. 24. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in Total pressure at impeller exit 24
  25. 25. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in static pressure at impeller exit 25
  26. 26. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Increase in input power 26
  27. 27. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Return mass flow rate 27
  28. 28. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Flow angle at inlet to impeller for design mass flow rate 28
  29. 29. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Flow angle at inlet to impeller for lowest mass flow rate 29
  30. 30. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Static pressure at impeller exit for design mass flow rate 30
  31. 31. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Static pressure at impeller exit for lowest mass flow rate 31
  32. 32. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Total pressure at impeller exit for design mass flow rate 32
  33. 33. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Total pressure at impeller exit for lowest mass flow rate 33
  34. 34. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Flow angle at Exit of impeller for design mass flow rate 34
  35. 35. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Flow angle at Exit of impeller for lowest mass flow rate 35
  36. 36. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Stream lines in impeller for clearance of (a) 0mm 36
  37. 37. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Stream lines in impeller for clearance of (a) 1mm 37
  38. 38. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Stream lines in impeller for clearance of (a) 3mm 38
  39. 39. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Stream lines in impeller for clearance of (a) 5mm 39
  40. 40. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Volute Pressure recovery coefficient 40
  41. 41. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in volute Pressure recovery coefficient 41
  42. 42. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Volute loss coefficient 42
  43. 43. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Volute loss coefficient 43
  44. 44. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in Total pressure at volute exit 44
  45. 45. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Change in static pressure at volute exit 45
  46. 46. -The overall stage performance at design and off design conditions, especially at higher mass flow rate is not favorable Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras conclusion -Stage efficiency drops considerably as the mass flow is increased and also there is an increase in input power up to 32 kW -There is a noticeable drop in total and static pressure at exit of impeller 46
  47. 47. As the clearance increases, the flow is found to be more uniform at the exit of the impeller and also the possibility of flow separation gets reduced at lower mass flow rates especially near the trailing edge of impeller. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras conclusion The increased pressure recovery and reduced loss at higher clearance has positive effect on volute at all mass flow rates. 47
  48. 48. Chennai – 36 Indian Institute of Technology Madras Thank you 48

×