Cent. Eur. J. Eng.

• 1(4) • 2011 • 361-368

DOI: 10.2478/s13531-011-0013-x

Central European Journal of Engineering

Unsteady Flow in a Viscous Oil Transporting

Centrifugal Pump
Research Article

Wen-Guang Li∗

Lanzhou University of Technology, 287 Langongping Road Lanzhou 730050, Gansu, China

Received 19 January 2011; accepted 04 March 2011

Abstract: Acoustic resonances are frequently fatal problems in centrifugal pump operations. Low pressure pulsation of fluid
in the blade pass frequency is helpful to prevent from such problems. In addition, for a high quality centrifugal
pump, a lower broadband noise level is also on demand. The acoustic resonance and broadband noise are asso-
ciated with unsteadiness of flow in the pump. Even there exist extensive analyses of unsteady flow in centrifugal
pumps by means of CFD so far, the effect of high viscosity of fluid pumped on the unsteadiness of flow feature
remains unclear. Thus, the unsteady flow in an experimental centrifugal pump was exploited numerically when
it transported the liquids with different viscosities. The velocity profiles at the impeller discharge were validated
with the results of LDV measurement for water. The viscosity effect on the fluctuation of flow in the volute was
clarified quantitatively. It was shown the increasing viscosity of fluid makes the fluctuation in flow variables less
substantial and results into a less noticed tendency of separation of flow from the blade pressure side.
Keywords: Centrifugal pump • Impeller • Volute • Performance • Unsteady flow • Fluctuation of flow • Viscosity • CFD
© Versita sp. z o.o.

1. Introduction quency is very helpful to prevent centrifugal pumps from

acoustic resonance problem. The wake behind impeller
blades is full of vortices, shows remarked fluctuation in
velocity and eventually induces broadband noise [5]. For
Mechanical and acoustic resonances are responsible for
an environment-friendly centrifugal pump, a relatively low
centrifugal pump vibration problems, which are fatal to
broadband noise level is essential. The propagation of
pump operations [1]. The mechanical resonance has been
acoustic wave in centrifugal pumps has been analyzed by
well treated and significantly documented for centrifugal
using one-dimensional inviscid flow model, causing the
pumps [2, 3]. The mechanical resonance frequency usu-
equation for determining resonance frequency [6] and it
ally is 2 times below the pump running speed [3]. How-
was shown the exit blade angle did not seem to change
ever, the acoustic resonance occurs in blade pass fre-
the resonance frequency [7]. The acoustic field was in-
quency. For a centrifugal pump with a volute having one
vestigated respectively in a centrifugal diffuser pump in
tongue/cutwater, this frequency is the product of number
[8] and in a centrifugal volute pump in [9] by employing
of blades multiplying the pump rotating speed [4]. Re-
two-dimensional ideal flow model and a vortex method for
ducing pressure pulsation of fluid in the blade pass fre-
numerically solving the wave propagation equation. The
two-dimensional point sound source in the volute of a cen-
∗ trifugal pump was established according to the pressure
E-mail: Liwg40@sina.com

361
 Unsteady Flow in a Viscous Oil Transporting Centrifugal Pump

fluctuation measured in blade pass frequency, causing a

good understanding on the acoustic noise generation in
centrifugal pumps [10]. It was revealed the interaction be-
tween impeller blade and separated flow from the blade
suction side contributes the noise generation mechanism
in a centrifugal pump impeller [11]. In those studies, obvi-
ously, effects of high viscosity of liquid on unsteadiness of
flow and subsequently acoustic field in centrifugal pumps
are unavailable presently.
In this paper, the unsteady, three-dimensional flow of wa-
ter and viscous oil in a centrifugal pump in [12] were stud-
ied theoretically at the best efficiency and part-loading
points as well as the shut-off condition. The decay fea-
ture of fluctuation in pressure and velocity head behind
the impeller was quantitatively clarified. Comparisons of
calculated head curves and flow velocity have been made
with those measured and LDV observations. The objective
of this work is to establish basic knowledge about the un- Figure 1. Pump fluid domain (a), LDV probe positions (b), survey
surfaces and observation points (c).
steadiness of viscous oil flow in the pump so as to develop
an acoustic noise model and optimize centrifugal oil pump
geometry for a low acoustic level with assistance of CFD
in subsequent studies. Table 1. Primary parameters of pump, impeller, volute and working
liquids.

2. Model Pump and Method

Item Parameter Value
Flow rate, Q, (m3 /h) 25
Head, H (m) 8
Rotating speed, n (r/min)
The single-stage, end-suction, overhung centrifugal volute Pump
1485
pump with a specific speed of 93 in [12] for experiment Specific speed, nS (r/min, m3 /s, m)
p 93
serves as the computational model here. The impeller was nS = 3.65n Q/H 0.75
design by using the existing mean-line one-dimensional Inlet diameter, d1 (mm) 62
theory in [13]. The volute was established by means of
Impeller Outlet diameter, d2 (mm) 180
the constant velocity approach with rectangular section. Number of blades, Z 4
Table 1 summarizes the primary parameters of the pump, Exit blade angle, β2b (o ) 20
impeller, volute and the working liquids in the experiments Width, B (mm) 40
Volute
in [12]. Figure 1(a) illustrates the geometrical model of the Throat area, F8 (mm2 ) 1440
pump generated in Gambit of Fluent. Density, ρ(kg/m3 ) 1000
Water
In the experiments, the water and viscous oil head-flow Liquid Kinematic viscosity, ν (mm2 /s) 1
rate curves of the pump were measured. Subsequently, Density, ρ(kg/m3 ) 851
Oil
the unsteady flow velocities of water at 187 points in Kinematic viscosity, ν (mm2 /s) 48.5
θ = 180°, 270°, and 360° sections shown in Fig. 1(b)
were surveyed by applying LDV at the best efficiency
point (QBEP =5.79L/s) and part-loading point (0.58 QBEP ). rotating angle. After the ensemble average for the data
The impeller Reynolds number is Re = d2 u2 /v = 2.5×106 sampled was preformed by the data processing software
(water), 3.1 × 105 (oil). In the experiments, the uncertainty PHASE provided by TSI, the unsteady flow velocity in the
for pump efficiency was in a range of 0.76% ∼ 1.15% and volute would be available. The LDV probe was moved by
the total uncertain of LDV measurement was 5.3% [12]. means of a three-dimensional coordinate traverser. The
The LDV equipment is a four-beam, two-colour (blue data sampling and processing etc can be conducted by
and green), back-scattered mode and two-dimensional ve- applying the PC. The unsteady velocity measurements
locimeter produced by TSI. A shaft encoder was installed were taken place in θ=180°, 270° and 360° sections. The
on the end of motor shaft to record the impeller rotating impeller rotating angle φ past each measurement point
angle past the measuring volume so as to establish exact was determined automatically by the turbomachinery re-
one to one relation between data sampled and the impeller solver based on its working mode selected, impulse num-

362
Wen-Guang Li

ber of per revolution for sampling, number of sectors and

windows opened. The data files in ASCII format, which
included the absolute velocity and other information of
flow at each measurement point, were calculated by using
PHASE. The velocity and other useful information could
be extracted from the data files by means of a program
developed in-house.
During the numerical computations proceeding, the aver-
aged total pressure of fluid on the survey surfaces S1, S2
and S3, the torque applied on the blades and shroud and
hub by the fluid were acquired at each time step. Mean-
while, the static pressures of fluid at point P1 and P2
were monitored too. Flow parameters are uneven across
the volute span, however, a maximum fluctuation in the pa-
rameters has been observed in the mid-span [14]. There-
fore, the pressure and velocity just in the mid-span were
recorded in terms of time. The observation points are lo-
cated at 2mm, 5mm and 10mm from the impeller discharge
in θ=180°, 270° and 360° sections. Figure 2. Comparison of CFD predicted pump head curve with mea-
surement.
The computational model consists of three parts, namely
inlet suction pipe, impeller and volute. Since the unsteady
flow simulations in the pump is extremely time-consuming,
the unstructured mesh size can not be too small. As a re- governing equations of flow. The convergence criterion
sult of this, the numbers of tetrahedral cells are 135166, (RMS) was kept to be 1×10−4 for all flow parameters.
174097 and 160550 respectively in the suction pipe, im-
peller and volute. Such a number of cells is comparable
with that used in [14] in the analyses of unsteady flow 3. Flow Model Validations
through an end-suction and single-stage centrifugal pump.

3.1. Head Curves

The unsteady, three-dimensional, incompressible and tur-
bulent flow in the pump was calculated numerically by
means of Fluent 6.2.16. The standard k − ε turbulence
model was adopted to account for the eddy viscosity
caused from turbulence. The non-equilibrium wall function
was chosen to take pressure gradient effect on the shear
stress along walls into account. The numerical schemes-
finite volume method and SIMPLE were applied to dis-
cretize the continuity, time-averaged Navier-Stoke, k and
ε equations. Two sliding meshes were prescribed respec-
tively on the interface between the suction pipe and im-
peller, and that between the impeller and volute. The ro-
tating speed of the fluid domain of impeller was 1485r/min.
Initially, the type of the fluid domain of impeller was cho-
sen to be „moving reference frame”, once the computation
was converged; the type of the fluid domain was switched
to ”moving mesh”. An axial inflow velocity was specified at
the inlet of the suction pipe according to a known flow rate,
and 1 atm was given at the volute outlet as a reference
pressure, the rest boundaries were subject to the no-slip
boundary condition. The roughness of the wet walls was
chosen to be Ra=50µm. In unsteady computations, the
time step was set to 1×10−4 s. A second-order implicit
difference scheme was used for the temporal term in the
Figure 2 illustrates a comparison of pump head curves
between CFD computation and measurement at the best
efficiency point, low flow rate and shut-off conditions, re-
spectively.
In the figure, the head curves in [15] is involved as well,
which are based on the steady flow model. The slope of
the head curves of steady flow model differs from that of
measured head curves. At low flow rates, the heads of
viscous oil show very good agreement with experimental
values for unsteady flow model. For water, the estimated
heads indicate slightly large error compared to the test
results at the best efficiency point and part-loading point.
At the shut-off condition, the predicted head by means of
the unsteady flow model is consistent very well with the
observations. In general, a very good agreement has been
achieved in the heads between estimation and measure-
ment by the unsteady flow model. Such an observation is
identical to [16]. At ν = 1mm2 /s, the estimated heads are
5%∼10% higher than the tests. At ν = 48mm2 /s, however,
the -1%∼5% error is found in head between computation
and measurement.

363
 Unsteady Flow in a Viscous Oil Transporting Centrifugal Pump

Figure 4. Comparison of CFD estimated unsteady circumferential

and radial velocity components of water at point 2mm be-
hind impeller with those observed by LDV at part-loading
Figure 3. Comparison of CFD estimated unsteady circumferential point.
and radial velocity components of water at point 2mm be-
hind impeller with those observed by LDV at best efficiency
point.

3.2. Comparison with LDV Measurements

Figure 3 and 4 present the estimated and LDV measured
circumferential and radial components of water velocity in
terms of impeller rotating angle φ at the points 2mm far
from the impeller discharge in θ =180°, 270° and 360° sec-
tions of the volute at the best efficiency and part-loading
points.
The LDV survey was made in [17] for the same pump. At
these three stationary points in the volute, since the fluid
flow variables vary periodically with the impeller rotating
angle, we just need to show the fluid velocity profile in one Figure 5. Torque on impeller in terms of its rotating angle at both
circle of the rotation. It can be seen that the circumferen- best efficiency and part-loading points.

tial velocity of CFD prediction agrees well with the LDV

measurement, but a slightly large error is identified for
the radial velocity. Further, such an error is enlarged at
the low flow rate. Compared to the best efficiency point, at
the low flow rate the CFD prediction tends to produce less
regular fluid velocity pattern in terms of impeller rotating
angle. Generally speaking, the CFD estimated fluid ve-
locities are consistent with the LDV observations.
According to above comparisons, it is confirm that the un-
steady flow model seems reasonable and applicable to
characterize the unsteady flow in the pump.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Torque and Total Pressure Fluctuation
Figure 5 indicates the predicted total torque applying on
the four blades, shroud and hub as a function of impeller
rotating angle at the best efficiency and part-loading
points for water and the viscous oil. It is clear that the
torque shows a periodic pattern against the rotating an-

364
Wen-Guang Li
Figure 6. Total and static pressures at entrance and exit to impeller
as well as pump outlet as a function impeller rotating angle
at both beast efficiency and part-loading points.
gle; moreover, the fluctuation (amplitude) in the torque of
viscous oil is less than that of water.
Figure 6 gives the estimated average total pressure in
terms of impeller rotating angle at the survey plane S1
near the impeller entrance, and the cylindrical surface S2
close to the impeller outlet as well as at the outlet of the
volute under the best efficiency and part-loading condi-
tions for water and the viscous oil.
The nearest distance is 30mm between the survey plane
S1 and the blade leading edge, whereas the cylindri-
cal survey surface S2 is behind the impeller outlet with
1.25mm. In the figures, the total pressure represents a
relative value since a reference pressure (1 atmospheric
pressure) has been subtracted from it. If a total pressure
is negative, the pressure will be less than the reference
pressure. Nevertheless, a relative value plus the reference
pressure can contribute to the absolute total pressure. It
is obvious that the fluctuation in the inlet total pressure
is comparable to that in the outlet total pressure. At the
inlet to impeller, when the flow rate is lowered to 0.58
QBEP from QBEP , the fluctuation of total pressure is re-
duced by half. At the outlet to impeller, the fluctuation in
total pressure is irrelevant to the change in flow rate. For
the viscous oil, the fluctuation of total pressure is reduced
by 30%∼40% compared with water. The reduction in total
pressure implies that the intensity of hydrodynamic noise
generated by the impeller is damped, causing a sound re-
leased with a lower level. It was found that the pump
was less noisy during the performance tests when the vis-
cous oil was a working liquid. Simultaneously, the random
movement of the pointers of vacuum and pressure gauges
was substantially reduced. Those effects suggest the fluc-
tuation of total pressure does have been suppressed by the
Figure 7. Pressure and velocity heads in terms of impeller rotating
angle at best efficiency point when delivering water (a)-(c)
and viscous oil (d)-(f).
viscous oil. The qualitative agreement with the observa-
tions was achieved with the unsteady flow model.
At the survey plane S3 of the pump outlet, the total pres-
sure is basically independent of the impeller rotational
angle and keeps to be a constant. The variation in flow
variables has been suppressed effectively in the volute
nozzle.
4.2. Pressure and Velocity Head Fluctuation
Figure 7 illustrates the static pressure and velocity head
of water and the viscous oil against the impeller rotat-
ing angle at the two points behind the impeller discharge
by 2mm and 10mm in the θ=180°, 270° and 360° sec-
tions at the best efficiency point. At ∆r=2mm point, the
averaged velocity head is around 33% of the mean static
pressure head. The pressure and velocity heads get a
more uniform pattern with increasing distance measured
from the impeller outlet. Particularly, the larger distance,
the smaller velocity head, but a slightly rising pressure
is observed with the increasing distance. Compared to
the velocity head, the profile of pressure head against the
impeller rotating angle is flat except at the blade trailing
edges where a sharp drop in the pressure head is found. A
wake behind the blade trailing edges manifests itself with
365
 Unsteady Flow in a Viscous Oil Transporting Centrifugal Pump

a higher velocity head. For the viscous oil, the fluctua-

tion in pressure head is slightly high, but the pulsation in
velocity head is considerably suppressed. Such a fluctua-
tion becomes even more uniform with increasing distance
to the impeller.

4.3. Pressure and Velocity Head Decay in Vo-

lute
Commonly, there exist two methods for quantitatively de-
scribing the fluctuation in a flow parameter at present.
One is to estimate the amplitude or RMS fluctuation in
blade pass frequency [18]. One is to calculate the ampli-
tude of fluctuation in every harmonic frequency [19]. In the
second approach, the pressure and velocity head curves
in terms of time have to be best fitted by using a Fourier
series to obtain the amplitude of fluctuation of every har-
monic frequency. It was shown that there were remarked
errors in such curve fitting processes with the Fourier se-
ries. As a result of this, the fitting curves showed an
unrealistic departure from the pressure and velocity head
curves given by CFD. Consequently, the second method
has to be abandoned and the first approach was adopted
instead. In this case, we simply estimate the amplitudes
(peak-to-peak) of pressure and velocity heads, Ap and Av
from their time history curves. Figure 8. Amplitude decay of pressure and velocity heads of water
and viscous oil behind impeller at best efficiency (a)-(c)
Figure 8 presents the amplitudes of static pressure and and part-loading (e)-(f) points, Ap and AV are peak-to-peak
velocity heads of water and the viscous oil versus the dis- amplitudes of static pressure and velocity head.

tance from the impeller outlet at the best efficiency and

part-loading points. It is shown that the amplitudes of
these flow parameters are declined substantially in a dis-
tance of 0mm∼10mm from the impeller; beyond 10mm, lit-
tle variation happens in the amplitudes. It suggests the
wake behind the impeller is decayed significantly in this
distance. Such a phenomenon is consistent with the LDV
measurements in [12], where the flow velocity becomes
more uniform as the fluid is further from the impeller out-
let. At the part-loading point, the amplitudes of pressure
and velocity heads are larger by one-fold than those at
the best efficiency point, especially for the velocity head.
Such an observation is much similar to the measurements
in [12] as well.
At the same working condition and at the same point in
the volute, the velocity head fluctuation amplitude of the
viscous oil is just around half of water, particularly in
the region more nearby the impeller discharge. At the
best efficiency point, the amplitude of pressure pulsation
appears to be unaffected by viscosity of the liquids. It
is the significant decay in the velocity head that may be
responsible for the low level noise generated in the viscous
oil performance test of the pump.
Compared to θ=180°, 270° sections, the amplitude of ve-
locity head of water shows a relative considerable in-
crease in vicinity of the impeller outlet at θ=360° section.
However, the amplitude of pressure head is comparable
in these three sections. The amplitude of pressure head
of the viscous oil doesn’t seem to demonstrate a noticed
difference from that of water in the three sections.
The decay of fluctuation in a plane wake or in a wake be-
hind an aerofoil conforms a power law in theory [20, 21].
Likewise, it is assumed that the amplitude Ap and Av
yield such a low as follows: Ap ∝ (2∆r/d2 )−mp and
Av ∝ (2∆ r/d2 )−mv . Those powers can be estimated
through the data obtained with CFD. The corresponding
results are tabulated Table 2. The last column in the ta-
ble presents the mean value of the powers at the best
efficiency and part-loading points. Two powers are de-
pendent of fluid viscosity, pump working condition. The
power for Ap is approximate half smaller than the power
for Av . According to the mean values of power, it seems
to indicate increased viscosity results into greater power
in θ = 270°, 360°sections. The decay power of pressure
is in the 0.31∼0.68 range compared to 0.77 suggested in
[18], whereas the decay power of velocity head is in the

366
Wen-Guang Li

Table 2. Decay power of amplitude of pressure and velocity heads

in two sections of volute.

Best efficient Part-loading

Item Mean value
point point

mp
Water 0.3497 0.3086 0.3292
θ=270° Oil 0.3518 0.4872 0.4915

mv
section Water 0.7339 0.8108 0.7724
Oil 1.0656 0.9298 0.9977

mp
Water 0.4975 0.4549 0.4762
θ=360° Oil 0.6844 0.6075 0.6460

mv
section Water 0.8813 0.9124 0.8969
Oil 1.0656 0.8156 0.9406

0.63∼1.07. Such a variation range of power of velocity

head corresponds to the 0.32∼0.54 range for the decay
Figure 9.
power of velocity compared with 0.5 behind an airfoil in
[21] and 0.51∼0.58 behind a two-dimensional airfoil cas-
cade in [22].
Water and viscous oil flow pathlines in impeller and
volute at best efficiency and part-loading points, (a)
QBEP , ν=1mm2 /s, (b) 0.58QBEP , ν=1mm2/s, (c) QBEP ,
ν=48mm2 /s, (d) 0.58QBEP , ν=48mm2 /s.

In above three sections, the pulsations in flow parameters

behind the impeller have been made clear, but a survey of
flow patterns in the impeller and volute is ignored. In the
following, the effect of viscosity on the flow patterns will
be paid attention.

4.4. Discussion
Figure 9 illustrates the pathlines of water and the viscous
oil flows in the impeller and volute at the best efficiency
and part-loading points at a time instance that a blade is
Figure 10. Water and viscous oil flow pathlines in impeller and vo-
lute at shut-off condition, (a) ν=1mm2 /s, (b) ν=48mm2 /s.
passing the tongue of volute.
Obviously, the water flow has been separated from the
pressure side of the blade approaching the tongue of vo-
lute at the best efficiency point. Surprisingly, for the vis-
cous oil, such a separation doesn’t appear to exist. At the discharge of every flow passage. At the impeller entrance,
part-loading point, for water, a dominated separated flow the flow is in spiral and a recirculation is established. This
is observed on the pressure side of that blade; for the vis- recirculation flow pattern quite resembles that in [24].
cous oil, however, the size of the reverse flow seems to be Note that the extent of the recirculation of water flow
smaller. It suggests that a tongue can induce a separated is around 50% longer than that of the viscous oil. This
flow on the pressure side of a blade whenever coming near indicates that the extensive rotation of flow has been sup-
the tongue. pressed by an increased viscosity of fluid at the impeller
According to above results, it is clear that the tendency of entrance.
separation of a viscous oil flow from the blade pressure
side in the impeller is in decline. Such an effect has
been observed through viscous oil flow visualizations in 5. Conclusions
the impellers of centrifugal pump in [23].
Figure 10 presents the pathlines of water and the viscous The unsteady turbulent flows of water and viscous oil in
oil at the shut-off point when a blade is approaching the an experimental centrifugal pump have been analyzed nu-
tongue. merically by means of CFD code Fluent®. The influences
In the volute, the fluid is in spiral motion. The impeller ac- of viscosity of fluid on the fluctuations in torque and head
commodates full of vortices, further, a vortex obstructs the have been clarified. The relationship between the pulsa-

367

tion amplitude of static pressure and velocity heads of fluid
flow behind the impeller at different working conditions
and viscosities of fluid have been established. The major
findings are as follows: (1) the unsteady flow model can
achieve a more precise estimation of pump head; (2) the
amplitude of fluctuation in flow parameters is comparable
at impeller entrance and outlet; (3) the increased viscos-
ity of liquid can suppress the pulsation in velocity of fluid
behind the impeller; (4) the decay power of pressure and
velocity behind impeller depends on viscosity and work-
ing condition, specially the power for pressure decay is
in the 0.31∼0.68 range, but for velocity it is in 0.32∼0.54.
Further investigations consist of acoustic model for highly
viscous oil flow and pump geometrical optimization for a
low radiated noise level.
References
[1] Atkins K., Tison J., Solving Pulsation Induced Vibra-
tion Problems in Centrifugal Pumps, Pumps and Sys-
tems Magazine, 1993, (1), 44-46
[2] Grokhovskii D. V., Design Peinciples for Low-Noise
Multistage Centrifugal Pumps in Power Plants, Rus-
sian Engineering Research, 2010, 30(4), 315-323
[3] Kaiser T., Osman R. H., Dickan R. O., Analysis Guide
for Variable Frequency Drive Operated Centrifugal
Pumps, Proceedings of the 24th International Pump
User’s Symposium, Texas: Texas A&M University,
USA, 2008, 81-106
[4] Evans L. M., Centrifugal Pump-Noise Control,
Sewage and Industrial Wastes, 1956, 28(12), 1507-
1512
[5] Sasaki S., Hayashi H., Application of Wake Charac-
teristics to Prediction of Broadband Noise of a Multi-
blade Fan, Journal of Fluid Science and Technology,
2008, 3(6), 814-823
[6] Khitrik V. L., Acoustic Resonance in Turbine Centrifu-
gal Pumps, Acoustic Physics, 2000, 46(5), 698-710
[7] Khitrik V. L., The Effect of the Liquid Flow in the Out-
let of a Centrifugal Pump on the Acoustic Resonance,
Acoustic Physics, 2005, 51(4), 463-468
[8] Timushev S. F., Tourret J., Efficient 2D Numerical
Method for Reduction of BPF Pressure Pulsation and
Noise by Optimization Design of Centrifugal Pumps
and Ventilators, Proceedings of 2002 International
Congress and Exposition on Noise Control Engineer-
ing, Dearborn, MI USA, August 19-21, 2002
[9] Langthjem M. A., Olhoff N., A Numerical of Flow-
Induced Noise in a Two-Dimensional Centrifugal
Pump: Part II-Hydroacoustics, Journal of Fluids and
Structures, 2004, 19, 369-386
368
Unsteady Flow in a Viscous Oil Transporting Centrifugal Pump
[10] Parrondo J., Gonzalez J., Fernandez O., Gonzalez
P., Perez J., Characterization of Blade-Passing Fre-
quency Sound Sources in a Centrifugal Pump From
Pressure Fluctuation Measurements, Proceedings of
the 10th International Congress on Sound and Vibra-
tion, Stockholm, Sweden, 7-10 July 2003
[11] Choi J. S., McLaughlin D. K., Thompson D. E., Exper-
iments on the Unsteady Field and Noise Generation
in a Centrifugal Pump Impeller, Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 2003, 263, 493-514
[12] Li W. G., Flow of Viscous Oil in the Volute of a
Centrifugal Pump, Journal of Thermal Science, 2002,
11(1), 10-15
[13] Stepanoff A. J., Centrifugal and Axial Flow Pumps,
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1948
[14] Gonzalez J., Santolaria C., Unsteady Flow Structure
and Global Variables in a Centrifugal Pump, ASME
Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2006, 128(5), 937-946
[15] Li W. G., Performance computations of centrifugal
pump handling viscous oils, Journal of Drainage and
Irrigation Machinery Engineering, 2008, 26(4), 1-8
[16] Zhang H. B., Chen H. X., Zhang W., Li H. F., Effect of
Impeller Position in Steady Calculation of Centrifugal
Pump, Journal of Shanghai University(Natural Sci-
ence Edition), 2009, 15(5), 470-474
[17] Li W. G., Effect of Volute Tongue on Unsteady Flow
in a Centrifugal Pump, International Journal of Turbo
and Jet Engines, 2004, 21(4), 223-232
[18] Guelich J. F., Bolleter U., Pressure Pulsations in
Centrifugal Pumps, ASME Journal of Vibration and
Acoustics, 1992, 114(2), 272-279
[19] Yusa T., Hinata T., Fluctuating Flow Behind the Im-
peller of Centrifugal Pump, Bulletin of the JSME,
1979, 22(174), 1746-1753
[20] White F. M., Viscous Fluid Flow, New York: McGraw-
Hill, Inc., 1991, 478-481
[21] Spence D. A., Growth of the Turbulent Wake Close
Behind an Aerofoil at Incidence, London: her
Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1953, ARC CP No 125,
1-13
[22] Raj R., Lakashminarayana B., Characteristic of the
Wake Behind a Cascade Airfoil, Journal of Fluid
Mechiancs, 1973, 61(4), 707-730
[23] Ohta H., Aoki K., Effect of Impeller Outlet Angle on
Performance and Internal Flow of centrifugal Pump
for High-Viscosity Liquids, Proceedings of the School
of Engineering, Tokai University, 1996, 30(1), 159-168
[24] Dyson G., Teixeira J. A., Ivey P. C., Closed Valve Flow
Field Investigation using Computational Fluid Dy-
namics, Proceedings of the 2nd International Sym-
posium on Centrifugal Pumps, 22 Septemebr 2004,
IMechE Headquartters, London, UK, 1-16