F Flux vector
Friction velocity, u
=
_
wall
/, where
wall
is the
viscous stress at wall
u Fluid velocity
V Volume
v Fluid velocity component in the ydirection
v Grid velocity
V
g
Normal grid velocity
w Fluid velocity component in the zdirection
y
+
Nondimensional number, y
+
= u
y
1
/, where y
1
is the
height of the element adjacent to the wall
parameter of k turbulence model or limiter function
parameter of k turbulence model
ij
Dirac delta function
Thermal conductivity
State vector of turbulence model
Generic variable
Viscosity
Gradient
Source term of turbulence model
Density
Viscous stress
4
parameter of k turbulence model
t
_
V
QdV +
_
S
F ndS =
_
V
EdV, (1)
where t denotes time, V is the volume of an arbitrary control volume, n is the outward unit
normal vector of the surface area S, Q is the state vector,
F is the ux vector and E is the
source term. The state vector Q of conservative variables per unit volume is:
Q = [ u v w e]
T
. (2)
Here e is the total internal energy per unit volume. The ux vector
F can be written as
F = Q(u v) +
G, (3)
where u is the uid velocity and v is the grid velocity. Consequently, the rst term of the
righthandside is the convection of Q relative to the surface element. The
G term represents
the nonconvective part of the ux. If
denotes the angular velocity of the frame of reference,
8
then v =
r. The right hand side term E in equation (1) is the source term
E =
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0
(u
i
(u
j
(u
k
0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
. (4)
The ux
F is divided into an inviscid part
F
inv
and a viscous part
F
vis
F = Q(u v) +
G =
F
inv
F
vis
. (5)
The component of
F
inv
normal to the surface element is
F
inv
= n
F
inv
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
U
Uu + pn
x
Uv + pn
y
Uw + pn
z
UH + pV
g
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
. (6)
9
In equation (6), H is the total enthalpy per unit mass H = (e + p)/, V
g
is the velocity
normal to the grid V
g
= v n and U is the relative velocity normal to the grid U = (u v) n.
The uid is considered to be a calorically perfect gas.
The component of
F
vis
normal to the surface element is
F
vis
= n
F
vis
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0
f
x
f
y
f
z
uf
x
+ vf
y
+ wf
z
q
n
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
=
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0
xx
n
x
+
xy
n
y
+
xz
n
z
xy
n
x
+
yy
n
y
+
yz
n
z
xz
n
x
+
yz
n
y
+
zz
n
z
uf
x
+ vf
y
+ wf
z
q
n
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
,
(7)
where
xx
,
xy
,
xz
, ...,
zz
are viscous stresses. With the assumption of Newtonian uid
and Stokes hypothesis, the viscous stresses can be written as
ij
= p
ij
+ (v
i,j
+ v
j,i
10
2/3
ij
v
k,k
), (i, j, k = 1, 2, 3) using Einsteins summation convention [18]. The viscosity
is calculated using Sutherland formula /
0
= (T/T
0
)
3/2
(T
0
+ S)/(T + S) where S is the
Sutherland constant that is a characteristic of the gas. For air within temperature range from
170K to 1900K, the constant values are: T
0
= 273K, S = 111.0K,
0
= 1.71610
5
Ns/m
2
.
The heat ux normal to the surface element is q
n
= q n. Using Fouriers law, the heat ux
vector is q = T where T is the temperature gradient and is the thermal conductivity.
Using the denition of Prandtl number, can be expressed as = (c
p
)/Pr.
Turbulence Model
The turbulence model used in this paper is a linear k model developed by Wilcox [22].
This turbulence model also includes a transition model. The two equations that must be
solved to determine the turbulent viscosity can be written in integral form as
t
_
V
dV +
_
S
[
inv
vis
] ndS =
_
V
dV (8)
11
with
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
k
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
inv
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
k (u v)
(u v)
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
vis
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
( +
T
)k
( +
T
)
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
(9)
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
P
k
P/k
2
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
P =
T
_
_
u
y
+
v
x
_
2
+
_
u
z
+
w
x
_
2
+
_
v
z
+
w
y
_
2
+
+ 2
_
_
u
x
_
2
+
_
v
y
_
2
+
_
w
z
_
2
__
.
Here k is the kinetic energy of turbulent uctuations per unit mass, is the specic dis
sipation rate,
inv
and
vis
are the turbulent inviscid ux and viscous ux, respectively.
P is the turbulent production, and
T
is the turbulent viscosity given as
T
=
k/.
Turbulent heat conductivity,
T
, is given by the relation
T
=
T
c
p
/Pr
T
, where Pr
T
is the
turbulent Prandtl number. To take into account turbulence, the values of viscosity and
12
heat conductivity are replaced by +
T
and +
T
, respectively. The values of the model
parameters used in this paper are given in [22]. Note that the turbulence model equations
(8) have the same form as the NavierStokes equations (1). This similarity will be used in
the development of the numerical algorithm for solving the k equations.
NUMERICAL METHOD
The governing equations are solved using a nite volume method. The computational
domain is discretized using an unstructured mixed mesh. Timemarching is used to calcu
late the steady solution. This section presents the spatial discretization of the governing
equations, the numerical implementation of the vector uxes, the high order upwind scheme
and the implementation of the boundary conditions.
Spatial Discretization
The computational domain is divided into a set of nonoverlapping cells. These cells may
be hexahedra, prisms and pyramids or an arbitrary combination of them. The cellaveraged
variables are stored at the nodes of the grid, which are the vertices of the cells. The governing
equations are discretized using mesh duals as control volumes. Figure 1 shows a subset of
tetrahedra adjacent to node i. Let us consider the collection of all cells incident to vertex i.
The dualmesh at vertex i is formed by connecting the cell centroids, face centroids and edge
midpoints, and looping through the faces of all cells incident to this vertex i and collecting
the subtetrahedra associated to the vertex. This results in a polyhedron hull centered at
the grid node. This type of dual mesh is called the mediandual [1].
The median dualmesh is adopted in this paper because of its exibility to handle un
structured mixed meshes. The volume of a dual mesh i is associated with the grid node
13
i and can be obtained by adding the volumes of all subtetrahedra adjacent to this node.
The surfaces of a dual mesh are associated with edges that are the connections of two cell
centroids, i.e., two grid nodes. The area vector of a surface element associated with an
edge is obtained by adding the area vectors of all subtriangle surfaces that are sharing the
midpoint of the edge during subtetrahedra collection procedure.
Figure 2 shows the face associated with dual mesh edge (i, j) connecting nodes i and j.
The normal and area of the dualmesh in Figure 2 can be found as [21]
S
ij
=
k=
S
(i,j)
(r
a
r
b
)
k
2
(10)
S
ij
=
_
_
S
ij
i
_
2
+
_
S
ij
j
_
2
+
_
S
ij
k
_
2
(11)
n
ij
=
S
ij
S
ij
, (12)
where
(i, j) denotes the collection of the faces of the subtetrahedra surrounding edge (i, j).
An edgebased data structure is utilized for the discretization of the governing equations
(1) and (8) due to its exibility and eciency in handling dierent element types. The
numerical scheme, however, is a nodebased style because the solution is obtained at the
nodes of the mesh. The surface integral of the inviscid and viscous uxes is approximated
by a sum over the faces of each control volume. The source terms are calculated using the
control volumeaveraged solution and the derivatives of ow variables at cell centroid.
If Q
i
denotes the volumeaveraged ow variable Q over the volume V
i
, equation (1) can
be rewritten in a semidiscrete form as
Q
i
t
V
i
=
_
S
i
F ndS + E
i
V
i
. (13)
14
The surface integral term on right hand side of this equation can be approximated as
_
S
F ndS =
j=k(i)
(F
inv
F
vis
)
ij
S
ij
, (14)
where k(i) is the set of vertices adjacent to node i, (F
inv
F
vis
)
ij
is the ux normal to the
dualmesh cell face and S
ij
is the cell face surface area. Both the surface area and the ux
are associated with the dual mesh face that is associated with the edge (i, j).
The turbulence model equations (8) have the same form as the NavierStokes equations
(1). Consequently, the spatial discretization of the turbulence model equations is similar to
the discretization of the NavierStokes equations, shown in equations (13) and (14).
Vector Fluxes Implementation
Dierent approaches are used in this paper to calculate the viscous and inviscid uxes.
To evaluate the viscous ux in equation (14), the velocity and temperature derivatives are
required at edge midpoints. For this edgebased data structure, the gradients of a generic
variable at edge midpoints could be simply computed by averaging the nodal values
()
ij
=
1
2
_
()
i
+ ()
j
_
. (15)
The disadvantage of this approach is that decoupling occurs, particularly for hexahedra and
prismatic cells. It is possible to prevent decoupling by taking into account the directional
derivatives along an edge [3]
()
ij
= ()
ij
_
()
ij
r
r
j
i
r
_
r
r
. (16)
15
The same approach as outlined above is also employed for the discretization of the viscous
term of the turbulence model equations (8). The algorithm utilized to calculate the gradients
at the grid node is presented in a following section.
The inviscid ux in equation (14) is calculated using Roes uxdierence splitting scheme [17].
The interface ux for the nite volume formulation is calculated in each of the three coordi
nate directions as the solution of a locally onedimensional Riemann problem normal to the
cell interface [15]
Q
t
+
F
n
= 0 (17)
Q = Q
L
n < 0
Q = Q
R
n > 0,
where Q
L
and Q
R
are the left and right uid states and n is the coordinate normal to the cell
interface. Roes procedure consists of constructing the solution to the approximate linearized
problem Q/t+AQ/n = 0, where the Jacobian matrix A = F/Q is evaluated at a Roe
averaged state such that the HugoniotRankine shock jump condition F
R
F
L
= A(Q
R
Q
L
)
is satised.
The interface inviscid ux can then be written as
(F
inv
)
ij
=
1
2
_
F(Q
R
) + F(Q
L
) A(Q
R
Q
L
)
, (18)
where the absolute value of the Roeaveraged matrix A indicates that the matrix is evaluated
16
using the absolute values of the eigenvalues. Note that the eigenmodes of A are [8]
1
=
2
=
3
=
U
= U
4
=
U+c
= U + c
5
=
Uc
= U c
(19)
and the Roeaveraged primitive variables are given by the formulae
=
L
u = (u
L
L
+ u
R
R
)/(
L
+
R
)
v = (v
L
L
+ v
R
R
)/(
L
+
R
)
w = (w
L
L
+ w
R
R
)/(
L
+
R
)
H = (H
L
L
+ H
R
R
)/(
L
+
R
)
U = un
x
+ vn
y
+ wn
z
V
g
.
(20)
It is computationally more ecient to write the ux F as [15], [21]:
(F
inv
)
ij
=
1
2
_
F(Q
R
) + F(Q
L
) F
U
 F
U+c
 F
Uc

, (21)
17
where
F
U
 = 
U

_
_
_
p
c
2
_
_
_
1
u
v
w
q
2
/2
_
_
+
+
_
_
0
u Un
x
v Un
y
w Un
z
uu + vv + ww UU
_
_
_
_
(22)
18
F
Uc
 = 
Uc

_
p cU
2c
2
_
_
_
1
u cn
x
v cn
x
w cn
x
H cU
_
_
(23)
F
U+c
 = 
U+c

_
p + cU
2c
2
_
_
_
1
u + cn
x
v + cn
x
w + cn
x
H + cU
_
_
. (24)
The operator () = ()
R
()
L
denes the jump over the discontinuity surface and q
2
is
calculated from q
2
= u
2
+ v
2
+ w
2
.
In this paper, the turbulence model equations (8) are solved separately from the Navier
Stokes equations (1). The inviscid, or better said convective, uxes in equation (8) are given
19
in the same manner as above and have the following expression
(
inv
)
ij
=
1
2
[(Q
R
,
R
) + F(Q
L
,
L
)

U
 
U+c
 
Uc

,
(25)
where

U
 = 
U

_
_
_
p
c
2
_
_
_
k
_
+
_
_
k
_
_
_
(26)

Uc
 = 
Uc

_
p cU
2c
2
_
_
_
k
_
(27)

U+c
 = 
U+c

_
p + cU
2c
2
_
_
_
k
_
. (28)
Highorder Upwind Scheme
Assuming that the ow variables are piecewise constant in each cell, the numerical method
outlined above is rstorder accurate. With the assumption of piecewise constant variables,
the left and right uid states used in the equations (18) to (25) are Q
L
= Q
i
and Q
R
= Q
j
.
Here Q
i
and Q
j
are cellaveraged uid states associated with cells V
i
and V
j
, respectively.
Assuming that the ow variables have a piecewise linear distribution over all cells, the
numerical method becomes secondorder accurate in space. The piecewise linear function in
each cell is reconstructed using the cellaveraged values of Q. The left and right uid states
20
are determined using linear reconstruction. To produce a monotone solution, a limiter is
applied to the linearly reconstructed uid states.
As shown in [2], a piecewise linear redistribution of the cellaveraged ow variables can
be represented by
Q(x, y, z) = Q(x
0
, y
0
, z
0
) +Q
0
r, (29)
where r is the vector from point 0 to any point (x, y, z) in the cell, and Q
0
represents
the solution gradient in the cell. Note that this equation is simply the rstorder accuracy
Taylor approximation plus a higherorder correction.
Using the piecewise linear redistribution (29), the left and right uid states Q
R
and Q
L
are found to be:
Q
L
= Q
i
+
1
2
Q
i
r
Q
R
= Q
j
1
2
Q
j
r,
(30)
where r = r
j
r
i
, Q
i
and Q
j
are gradients of Q at the end nodes i and j of an edge
(i, j), respectively. The methodology of computing the gradients of Q at nodes is presented
in the following section.
To ensure that the linearly reconstructed uid states produce a monotone solution, a
limiter function is introduced into equation (30) [5]
Q
L
= Q
i
+
1
2
[(1 )Q
i
r, (Q
j
Q
i
)]
Q
R
= Q
j
1
2
[(1 )Q
j
r, (Q
j
Q
i
)] ,
(31)
21
where =
1
3
and [, ] is the limiter function
[a, b] =
[1 +sign(1, ab)] [(a
2
+ )b
2
+ (b
2
+ )a
2
]
2(a
2
+ b
2
+ 2)
. (32)
is a very small number to prevent division by zero in smooth regions of the ow. The
limiter may reduce the solution accuracy in regions of large gradients, in order to avoid the
generation of new extrema.
The convective ux of the turbulence equations (8) is approximated by a rstorder
upwind discretization, which produces a robust and ecient numerical scheme.
Vertex Gradients Calculation
Several techniques are available for calculating solution gradients at vertices of the mesh.
Two simple and easy to implement approaches are GreenGauss and Leastsquares methods.
The Leastsquares method is more complex than GreenGauss method, but it possesses
desirable properties for general unstructured meshes [1]. The Leastsquares method is used
in this paper.
Time Integration
The semidiscrete form (13) of the NavierStokes equations (1) and of the turbulence
model equations (8) can be written for a grid node i as
Q
i
t
V
i
= R
i
(33)
with
R
i
=
_
S
i
F ndS + E
i
V
i
, (34)
22
where R
i
is the residual.
To obtain a steadystate solution, this equation must be integrated in time. In this
paper, the turbulence model equations are uncoupled from the NavierStokes equations.
The NavierStokes equations are solved rst, assuming the turbulent viscosity
T
locally
constant and equal to the value from the previous time step. Subsequently, the turbulence
model equations are solved, k and are advanced in time, and
T
is updated. Both sets of
equations are integrated in time using the same explicit, fourstage RungeKutta scheme
Q
(0)
i
= Q
n
i
Q
(1)
i
= Q
(0)
i
+
1
t
i
V
i
R(Q
(0)
i
)
Q
(2)
i
= Q
(0)
i
+
2
t
i
V
i
R(Q
(1)
i
)
Q
(3)
i
= Q
(0)
i
+
3
t
i
V
i
R(Q
(2)
i
)
Q
(4)
i
= Q
(0)
i
+
4
t
i
V
i
R(Q
(3)
i
)
Q
n+1
i
= Q
(4)
i
,
(35)
where t
i
is the time step at node i, superscript n is timestepping level,
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
23
are stage coecients
1
= 0.1668
2
= 0.3028
3
= 0.5276
4
= 1.0.
In this scheme, the inviscid operator is evaluated at each stage and, for computational
eciency, the dissipative operator is evaluated only on the rst stage and third stage.
For steadystate computations, convergence is accelerated using a local timestep and
implicit residual smoothing [14]. The timestep calculation is based strictly on inviscid
stability considerations for each node [6]
t
i
CFL
V
i
j=k(i)
(U+c)
i
+(U+c)
j
2
S
ij
, (36)
where U is the normal relative velocity, c is the speed of sound, and CFL is the Courant
number.
The time step can be further increased by residual smoothing, which increases the support
of the scheme [10]. Residual smoothing is essentially a Laplacian ltering of the numerical
values of the residuals. The following equation is solved for the new value of the residual:
R
i
= R
i
+
2
R
i
, (37)
where R
i
is the Laplacian ltered value of R
i
. The undivided Laplacian,
2
R
i
, can be
24
represented on an unstructured mesh as:
2
R
i
=
j=k(i)
(R
j
R
i
). (38)
The resulting implicit equation for R
i
is solved by Jacobian iteration:
R
(m)
i
=
R
i
+
j=k(i)
R
(m1)
j
1 +
j=k(i)
1
. (39)
Typically, two Jacobian iterations are performed with = 0.5.
Boundary Conditions
Boundary conditions are applied as conditions on the ux at boundary surfaces as opposed
to being applied directly to state variables. This approach, called weak condition [21],
avoids singularities at mesh points located at corners. To close the dualmeshes at boundary
points a facebased, as opposed to an edgebased, data structure is utilized. The boundary
facebased data structure and the adjacent edgebased data structure are used to evaluate
the uxes and gradients of the ow eld. The boundary surface elements are discretized
in the same manner as the elements of interior grid. The vector normal to the boundary
dualmesh face is found in the same manner as the normal to a dual mesh face in the interior
of the grid.
The tangency ow condition is imposed by requiring that the ux through the wall is
zero, so that u n = 0, where n is the normal to the boundary dual mesh. The ux normal
25
to the boundary face is
F
B
i
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0
p
i
n
B
i
i
p
i
n
B
i
j
p
i
n
B
i
k
pV
g
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
The expression of the normal ux is valid for both viscous and inviscid ow. In the viscous
ow case, the noslip boundary condition is applied after each time step, such that u = v for
moving walls and u = 0 for stationary walls.
The inow/outow boundary ux is dened in terms of the uid state at the boundary
node i and is specied as [21]:
F
B
i
=
_
F(Q
) n
B
i
if
U
i
n
B
i
< c
i
F(Q
i
, Q
) n
B
i
if
U
i
n
B
i
[c
i
, c
i
]
F(Q
i
) n
B
i
if
U
i
n
B
i
> c
i
.
The ux normal to the boundary face imposed for supersonic inow (i.e.,
U
i
n
B
i
< c
i
)
is computed using the state vector at upstream innity. The ux normal to the boundary
face imposed for subsonic inow and outow (i.e.,
U
i
n
B
i
[c
i
, c
i
]) is computed using
26
an intermediate state calculated from the conditions at cell i and upstream innity. The
intermediate state is calculated using Riemann invariants. The ux imposed for supersonic
outow (i.e.,
U
i
n
B
i
> c
i
) is computed using the state vector at cell i.
The exit boundary conditions for the leakage ow are specied similarly to the exit
boundary conditions for the impeller ow. A constant static pressure is specied at the
inner diameter of the back plate, at the exit of the leakage ow. The pressure distribution
in the radial direction is obtained by integrating the radial equilibrium equation.
At periodic boundaries, the scalar state variables and velocity vectors, eventually rotated,
of each periodic node pair are set equal after each time stepping. The turbulent ow variables,
k and , are specied at the inlet boundary and extrapolated at the outlet boundary. The
value of k and the gradient of are set to zero at walls.
NUMERICAL RESULTS
This section presents the results of the ow simulation necessary to calculate the axial
thrust in a centrifugal compressor. To calculate the axial thrust on the compressor wheel,
the computational domain includes not only the impeller but also the back side of the wheel.
The simulation of the ow between the back side of the wheel and the backplate is necessary
to calculate the leakage ow. Because of the periodicity, the ow is calculated in only one
passage of the impeller and the corresponding back side of the wheel. A detail of the impeller
is shown in Fig. 3 while the entire computational domain is shown in Fig. 4.
The impeller has 12 blades, an exterior diameter of 94 mm, a tip clearance of 0.75 mm
and an angular velocity of 100,000 rpm. The inlet ow is axial. The inlet temperature is 20
deg Celsius and the inlet total pressure is 101,325 Pa.
27
Computational Grid
The computational grid of the impeller, shown in Fig. 5, reveals that this is a multi
block, structured mesh. An Hgrid block discretizes the computational domain upstream
of the blade, a Cgrid is utilized around the airfoil, an Hgrid discretizes the blade wake
region and an Ogrid discretizes the blade tip region. The computational domain on the
back side of the wheel is discretized by an unstructured grid. The unstructured grid has
been used because of irregular shape of the computational domain on the back side of the
wheel. An advancingfront/localreconnection unstructured grid generation algorithm is used
to generate a twodimensional trianglequadrilateral mixed mesh in the meridional plane of
the leakage ow channel, as shown in Fig. 6. The twodimensional grid is then stacked in
the tangential direction and generates a threedimensional prismhexahedron mixed mesh for
the leakage ow channel. The structured mesh of the impeller and the unstructured mesh
of the leakage ow are merged into an unstructured grid.
Accuracy of Numerical Results
The numerical algorithm has been validated against experimental data and the results
of these comparisons are presented in [7]. Since experimental data are not yet available for
this compressor, to validate the accuracy of numerical results it is necessary to show that
the results are independent of the grid that discretizes the computational domain. Four
meshes have been used to assess that the results are grid independent. The coarsest grid has
approximately 183k nodes in the impeller mesh and 3,100 30 nodes in the leakage ow
mesh. The number of meridional planes has been kept constant and equal to 30 for all four
grids. The y
+
number for the coarsest grid is less than 3.5. The number of nodes of the ner
meshes is shown in Table 1.
28
To verify that the solution is grid independent, the mass ow rates of the leakage ow
and the axial thrust loads of the impeller are compared using the four meshes. The mass
ow rate of the leakage ow and the axial thrust have been chosen as indicators of the grid
convergence because these two variables depend on both the ow through the impeller and
the ow on the back side of the wheel. The variation of the leakage mass ow rate as a
function of the grid size is shown in Fig. 7. The mass ow rate is nondimensionalized by
the mass ow rate corresponding to the coarsest grid.
The axial thrust of the impeller is calculated by integrating the pressure variation on
both sides of the wheel. The variation of the axial thrust as a function of the grid size is
shown in Fig. 7. Both the leakage ow and the axial thrust indicate that the grid must
exceed 600,000 nodes in order to obtain grid independent results.
The computation has been done on an Linux workstation with an Alpha 21164 processor.
The computational time required for this simulation is approximately 1.210
4
sec/iteration/grid
point. Convergence is reached in approximately 2,000 to 5,000 iterations, depending on the
ow conditions.
Leakage Flow
One goal of this paper is to calculate the axial thrust load on a centrifugal compressor.
This task requires not only the calculation of the ow through the impeller but also the
calculation of ow on the back side of the wheel. At a pressure ratio, p
exit static
/p
inlet total
, of
2.22 and an exit static pressure of the leakage ow of 101,325 Pa, the numerical simulation
predicts a totaltototal pressure ratio of 3.44 and a totaltototal eciency of the impeller
of 78%. The predicted mass ow rate is 0.49 kg/s, the leakage ow is 2.8% of the total ow
and the axial thrust load is 249 N.
29
The rest of this section presents the ow features of the back side of the wheel. Figure 8
shows the pressure on the back surface of the wheel. Note that although the geometry of
the leakage channel is symmetric, the ow eld is not axisymmetric, due to the blade wakes.
The relative Mach number distribution is shown in a meridional plane that intersects the
leakage ow channel at two dierent circumferential locations. For the rst circumferential
location, the meridional plane divides equally the channel between two adjacent blades.
Figure 9 shows the Mach number distribution and Fig. 11 shows the velocity vectors. For
the second circumferential location, the meridional plane intersects the blade trailing edge.
Figure 10 shows the Mach number distribution in the meridional surface behind the blade
trailing edge. Velocity vectors behind the impeller blade at the inlet in the back ow are
shown in Fig. 12. Note that at this circumferential location, the leakage mass ow returns
into the impeller. The numerical results show that 22% of the leakage ow returns into the
impeller ow. Because of the reversal of the leakage ow, the impeller ow and the back
plate ow must be solved coupled to avoid the boundary condition problems at the junction
between the impeller and the leakage ow.
CONCLUSIONS
The development of a numerical algorithm for computation of axial thrust load on a
centrifugal compressor has been presented. To calculate the axial thrust load, both the ow
through the impeller and the leakage ow on the back side of the wheel have been simulated.
An unstructured ow solver has been developed for the computation of a hybrid, structured
and unstructured grid. The computational domain of the impeller has been discretized using
a structured mesh, while the computational domain on the back side of the wheel has been
discretized using an unstructured mesh. The two grids have been merged and the Navier
30
Stokes equations have been discretized using a median dualmesh. Eddy viscosity has been
calculated using a linear k turbulence model that also includes a transition model. The
discretization of the governing equations has been done using a nite volume method. Roes
uxdierence scheme has been used for inviscid uxes. Directional derivatives along edges
have been used for viscous uxes. The gradients at the mesh vertices have been calculated
using the Leastsquares method. An explicit scheme has been used for time integration.
Convergence has been accelerated using a local timestep and implicit residual smoothing.
The CFD method proposed herein for axial thrust prediction has two advantages compared
to the previous method [16]: an unstructured grid that better discretizes the leakage ow
region and a better turbulence model.
Since experimental results were not yet available for this compressor, the numerical sim
ulation has been validated by verifying that the solution is grid independent. The results
of the numerical simulation include the predicted axial thrust load and the details of the
leakage ow. The variation of the leakage mass ow rate as a function of the circumferential
location has been predicted. The numerical results have also shown that for certain circum
ferential locations, part of the leakage ow returns into the impeller ow. This requires that
the impeller ow and the backplate ow be solved coupled, to avoid boundary conditions
problems at the junction between the impeller and the leakage ow.
Further investigations are necessary to capture the variation of axial thrust load and
leakage ow with the operating point and the boundary conditions for the leakage ow. An
investigation of the inuence of turbulence modeling in the backplate region on the axial
thrust is also necessary.
31
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been funded by the Turbomachinery Research Consortium. The authors
would like to thank Mr. Gerald LaRue of Honeywell for his support during the project.
References
[1] T. J. Barth. A 3D upwind Euler solver for unstructured meshes. 1991. AIAA Paper
911548CP.
[2] T. J. Barth and D. C. Jesperson. The design and application of upwind schemes on
unstructured meshes. 1989. AIAA Paper 890366.
[3] J. Blazek, S. Irmisch, and A. Haselbacher. Unstructured Mixedgrid NavierStokes
Solver for Turbomachinery Applications. 1999. AIAA Paper 990664.
[4] C. L. Chen, W. J. McCrosky, and S. Obayashi. Numerical Solutions of ForwardFlight
Rotor Flow Using an Upwind Method. 1989. AIAA Paper 891846.
[5] A. Dervieux. Steady Euler Simulations Using Unstructured Meshes. In JA. Essers,
editor, Computational Fluid Dynamics, VKI Lecture Series 198504, volume 1. von
Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Rhode Saint Genese, Belgium, March 1985.
[6] N. T. Frink. Upwind scheme for solving the euler equations on unstructured tetrahedral
meshes. AIAA Journal, 30(1):7077, January 1992.
[7] Z. Han, B. Dennis, and G. S. Dulikravich. Simultaneous prediction of external ow
eld and temperature in internally cooled 3d turbine blade material. In Proceedings of
ASME TURBO EXPO 2000. ASME, 2000. ASME Paper 2000GT0253.
32
[8] C. Hirsch. Numerical Computation of Internal and External Flows. John Wiley & Sons,
Chichester, 1990.
[9] D. G. Holmes and S. S. Tong. A ThreeDimensional Euler Solver for Turbomachinery
Blade Rows. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 107:258264, 1985.
[10] A. Jameson and T. J. Baker. Solution of the Euler equations for complex congurations.
1983. AIAA Paper 831929.
[11] J. Kurokawa, K. Kamijo, and T. Shimura. Axial thrust behavior in loxpump of rocket
engine. Journal of Propulsion and Power, 10(2):244250, MarchApril 1994.
[12] V. S. Lobano and R. R. Ross. Centrifugal Pumps. Design & Application. Gulf Pub
lishing Company, Houston, 1985.
[13] L. C. Loewenstein and C. P. Crissey. Centrifugal Pumps. Their Design and Construc
tion. D. van Nostrand Company, New York, 1911.
[14] D. J. Mavriplis and A. Jameson. Mutigrid Solution of the NavierStokes Equations on
Triangular Meshes. AIAA Journal, 28:14151425, August 1990.
[15] J. H. Morrison. Flux dierence split scheme for turbulent transport equations. 1990.
AIAA Paper 905251.
[16] K. N. Oliphant and D. Japikse. Experimental and numerical results of the cou
pled seal cavity and main ow for a liquid hydrogen rocket turbopump. In 35th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, June 1999. AIAA
Paper 992825.
33
[17] P. L. Roe. Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and dierence schemes.
Journal of Computational Physics, 43:357372, 1981.
[18] Hermann Schlichting. BoundaryLayer Theory. McGrawHill, New York, seventh edi
tion, 1979.
[19] A. J. Stepano. Centrifugal and Axial Flow Pumps. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York, 1948.
[20] K. van Hooser, J. Bailey, and A. Majumdar. Numerical prediction of tran
sient axial thrust and internal ows in a rocket engine turbopump. In 35th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, June 1999. AIAA
Paper 992189.
[21] D. L. Whitaker. ThreeDimensional Unstructured Grid Euler Computations Using a
FullyImplicit, Upwind Method. 1993. AIAA Paper 933337CP.
[22] D. C. Wilcox. Simulation of Transition with a TwoEquation Turbulence Model. AIAA
Journal, 32:247255, 1994.
34
Table 1: Computational grid size.
Grid Nodes y
+
Impeller Grid Leakage Grid Total
1 183,471 3100 30 276,471 3.5
2 265,471 3890 30 382,171 3.5
3 396,483 4450 30 529,983 2.5
4 501,583 5950 30 680,083 2.5
35
k
m
n
p
l
j
i
Figure 1: Subset of tetrahedra adjacent to node i.
36
a
r
j
i
n
ij
r
b
Figure 2: Dualmesh surface element associated with edge ij.
37
Figure 3: Detail of the impeller.
38
Figure 4: Computational grid.
39
Figure 5: Computational grid of the impeller.
40
Figure 6: Meridional section through the grid on the back side of the wheel.
41
2e+05 3e+05 4e+05 5e+05 6e+05 7e+05
Grid Points
0.94
0.96
0.98
1.00
N
o
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
a
l
A
x
i
a
l
T
h
r
u
s
t
a
n
d
M
a
s
s
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
Axial Thrust
Mass Flow Rate
Figure 7: Variation of calculated axial thrust and leakage ow with grid size.
42
Figure 8: Pressure contours on back side of wheel.
43
Figure 9: Mach number in meridional plane
(midpassage).
Figure 10: Mach number in meridional plane
(blade plane).
Figure 11: Detail of leakage ow (mid
passage).
Figure 12: Detail of leakage ow (blade
plane).
44
Captions sheet
Table 1. Computational grid size.
Figure 1. Subset of tetrahedra adjacent to node i.
Figure 2. Dualmesh surface element associated with edge ij.
Figure 3. Detail of the impeller.
Figure 4. Computational grid.
Figure 5. Computational grid of the impeller.
Figure 6. Meridional section through the grid on the back side of the wheel.
Figure 7. Variation of calculated axial thrust and leakage ow with grid size.
Figure 8. Pressure contours on back side of wheel.
Figure 9. Mach number in meridional plane (midpassage).
Figure 10. Mach number in meridional plane (blade plane).
Figure 11. Detail of leakage ow (midpassage).
Figure 12. Detail of leakage ow (blade plane).