Proceedings of GT2007
ASME Turbo Expo 2007: Power for Land, Sea and Air
DETAILED FLOW STUDY OF MACH NUMBER 1.6 HIGH TRANSONIC FLOW IN A PRESSURE
RATIO 11 CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR IMPELLER
(PART 2; EFFECT OF INDUCER SHROUD BLEED AND DEVELOPMENT OF
A LOW ENERGY REGION ALONG THE SHROUD)
Hirotaka Higashimori, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Nagasaki R&D Center
Susumu Morishita, Masayuki Suzuki, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Nagoya
Tooru Suita, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Nagasaki R&D Center
ABSTRACT
Requirements for aeronautical gas turbine engines for
helicopters include small size, low weight, high output, and low
fuel consumption. In order to achieve these requirements,
development work has been carried out on high pressure ratio
compressors with high efficiency. As a result, we have
developed a single stage centrifugal compressor with a pressure
ratio of 11 for a 1000 shp class gas turbine. This report presents
a study on the internal flow of a high pressure ratio centrifugal
compressor impeller.
The centrifugal compressor is a high transonic compressor
with an inlet Mach number of about 1.6. In high inlet Mach
number compressors, the flow in the inducer is a complex
transonic flow characterized by interaction between the
shockwave and boundary layer, while the flow in the middle of
the impeller is a distorted flow with a low energy region[1-3].
In order to ensure the reliability of aerodynamic design
technology for such transonic centrifugal compressors, the
complex transonic flow and formation of the low energy region
predicted by CFD must be actually measured, comparison must
be undertaken between the CFD results and the actual flow
measurement, and the accuracy and other issues pertaining to
CFD must be clarified.
In a previous report [12], we elucidated the flow in the
inducer of a high transonic impeller by means of LDV and
unsteady pressure measurement. That report showed that, in the
flow of an inducer with a Mach number of approx. 1.6, the
oblique shockwave in the middle of the impeller throat interacts
with the blade tip leakage flow, and that reverse flow occurs in
the vicinity of the casing. Furthermore, although CFD
predicted a low energy region in the splitter portion, this could
not be detected in actual measurement.
In the context of the current report, comparative verification
of the CFD and LDV measurement results was undertaken with
respect to the formation of the casing wall surface boundary
layer in the transonic flow within the inducer. In this
conjunction, inducer bleed was introduced to control this
boundary layer, and the effect of the inducer bleed on the flow
was ascertained through actual measurement. It was also sought
1 Copyright © 2007 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or
May 14-17, 2007, Montreal, Canada
GT2007-27694
to additionally confirm the “low energy region” in the splitter.
Accordingly, the flow velocity distribution was measured at
two sections, thereby clarifying the characteristics of the actual
flow in the region.
The impeller for which measurement was performed has the
same specifications as that in the previous report[12] (see Table
1). In the present report, so as to measure the flow under
conditions encouraging the formation of a boundary layer
accompanying substantial inducer deceleration, measurement
was conducted at 95% of design speed and a relative Mach
number at the blade tips of about 1.5.
INTRODUCTION
Extensive research has been carried out regarding the
internal flow of high pressure ratio centrifugal compressors
applied to small gas turbines and industrial compressors. In
particular, actual flow measurements using laser velocimeters
and CFD verification have been carried out with respect to the
shock wave in the impeller inlet portion, as well as the low
energy region in the vicinity of the shroud casing, wake, and jet
at the impeller outlet.
Regarding the impeller outlet flow pattern, the jet and wake
of a radial impeller with a pressure ratio of 2.1 were measured
using L2F for the first time by D. Eckardt[1]. Smoothing of the
jet and wake in a backswept impeller with a pressure ratio of 4
was measured using L2F by H.Krain[2], and calculation using a
3D viscous code was carried out by C.Hah[3]. Regarding the
impeller inlet transonic flow, the pressure distribution of the
shock wave in the inducer of a radial impeller with a pressure
ratio of 10 was measured by Y.Senoo[4], and flow patterns were
measured using L2F by H.Hayami[5]. Furthermore, the
transonic flow of a backswept impeller with a pressure ratio of
6.1 and an inlet Mach number of 1.3 with a shock wave was
measured by H.Krain[6][7], and estimation using a 3D viscous
code was carried out by C.Hah [8].
The present authors also investigated the internal flow of
centrifugal compressors, measuring the actual flow in certain
impellers and verifying CFD in order to improve centrifugal
compressor performance for small gas turbines and
 turbochargers. LDV measurement and CFD verification have TEST FACILITY
been conducted for a subsonic single splitter impeller[9,10] and a Figure 1 shows the test impeller, while Figure 2 shows the
low transonic impeller having Mach number of about 1.2[11]. high pressure ratio compressor test facility. A double splitter
Also, in the previous report, detailed measurement was type backswept impeller design was adopted for the compressor
conducted on a high transonic impeller[12]. In the current report, to decrease blade loading and to increase the impeller choke
a further step is taken in consideration of a high transonic flow rate. Table 1 presents the impeller specifications. The
impeller. design speed is approx. 680 m/s in terms of tangential velocity
at the impeller outlet and approx. 460 m/s at the inlet, with the
NOMENCLATURE machine Mach number reaching about 1.35. The blade tip
C Absolute velocity, m/s clearance is about 0.2mm. The diffuser is also supersonic at the
Cm Meridional velocity, m/s design speed, having a Mach number of about 1.2.
Cu Tangential velocity, m/s Figure 3 indicates the compressor characteristics at 95%
G Discharge mass flow rate, kg/s design speed. These are for the case without inducer bleed,
Gb Inducer bleed mass flow rate , % of G exhibiting flat characteristics at a pressure ratio of approx. 9.3,
Mrel Relative Mach number and with diffuser choke at a flow rate of approx. 2.88kg/s. LDV
PR Pressure ratio measurement was conducted in the vicinity of the start of
U Peripheral velocity, m/s diffuser choke. The estimated impeller choke flow rate is
W Relative velocity, m/s 3.11kg/s, and the broken line shows the characteristics
PS Pressure surface estimated when the diffuser throat is sufficiently large. Taking
SP Splitter blade the impeller choke flow rate as the standard for evaluation,
SS Suction surface LDV measurement is at 92% of the flow rate.
SSP Second splitter blade The reasons why 95% of design speed was selected are as
Hub Hub surface follows: 1) At 95% of design speed, the same discharge mass
Shroud Shroud surface flow rate operating points can be selected with and without
inducer bleed. As shown in Fig.4, the choke flow rate at 95%
rpm is determined by the diffuser choke. The most efficient
operating point is adjacent to the choke flow rate without
inducer bleed. On the other hand, in the case with inducer
bleed, the diffuser choke flow rate increases due to higher
impeller efficiency. This choke flow rate without inducer bleed
is appropriate for the purpose of comparing the cases with and
without inducer bleed. 2) As the operating point is about 92%
11

LDV measuring points Estimated impeller

choke
10
Fig. 1 High transonic impeller
PR

Characteristics
Diffuser choke
Without bleed
8
2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2
Discharge Mass Flow Rate Ｇ （kg/s）
Fig. 3 Compressor characteristics at 95% of design
speed without inducer bleed
3.5
Discyarge Mass Flow Rate G(kg/s)

Estimated impeller
Fig. 2 High pressure ratio compressor test facility choke flow rate

Table 1 Specification of compressor and impeller

Impeller choke line
3.0
Pressure Ratio 11
Mass Flow Ratio .3.3 kg/s
3.2 kg/s LDV measuring point
Peripheral Velocity 680m/s approx. Without bleed

Blade Number 11＋11＋22 （Double Splitter ） Diffuser choke line

2.5
Inlet Diameter 168 mm 90 95 100 105
Revolution Number Ratio N/N0
Fig. 4 Compressor choke limit

2 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 of the estimated impeller choke flow rate without inducer
bleed, the flow deceleration in the inducer is sufficiently large.
Accordingly, inducer bleed is expected to have a major impact
LDV Probe
on compressor performance.
LDV measurement was conducted at mass flow rates of
2.85kg/s and 2.87kg/s with and without inducer bleed,
respectively.
Table 2 shows the specifications of the LDV system. The
two component velocities are measured using a two color
system. All of the effective data detected by LDV can be
processed using a system that records LDV measurement data
and the phase of revolution. The LDV measurement results
shown in Figs.9 to 17 are the average values of data detected at
each point, corresponding to 1/80 of the blade pitch. For each
point, data represents the average of between approx. 1000 and
several thousand values.
Ⅳ
Figure 5 shows the arrangement of the LDV measuring
Second
0 ⅠⅡ
Ⅲ Splitter sections. LDV measurement was conducted for five sections:0,
I, II, IV and V. Fig.5(a) shows the state of the LDV probe, and
Impeller Leading Edge First Splitter Fig.5(b) presents the measurement point distances from the
(a) casing, as well as the location of the inducer bleed port. Section
0 is positioned to measure upstream of the impeller leading
edge. Referring to the CFD results shown in Fig.8(a), the
detached shock is seen to be measured.
Bleed Port In Fig.8(a), the Mach number just in front of the leading
edge is 1.4 and the contour line connects tangentially to the
contour line of the passage shock in the next passage. Section I
3 is positioned so as to measure the passage shock wave
9
3 3 15 proceeding upstream from the throat position. Section II is
9
9
15 15 positioned so that the center of the throat can be measured.
21 Ⅴ Section IV is placed downstream from the first splitter leading
25
edge and also the inducer bleed port, so as to ascertain the
35 Ⅳ effect of the presence or absence of a low energy region
extending on the shroud casing, as well as to confirm the effect
0 ⅠⅡ on the flow downstream of the bleed port depending on the case
with and without inducer bleed. Section V is placed
downstream from the second splitter leading edge so as to
ascertain the low energy region extending downstream.
(b)

LDV Ⅳ
RESULTS OF CFD
Figure 8 shows relative Mach number contours at two
different flow rates on a stream surface 4.5mm from the casing.
（LDV Ⅲ） The numerical method is a modified Dawes’s BtoB3D code for
a double splitter impeller. The computational grids are shown
LDV Ⅱ in Fig.6, and the grid size is 60 x 141 x 35 with 296,100 nodes.
LDV Ⅰ The clearance is about 0.3% of the blade height at the leading
LDV 0 edge, and is expressed using 4 meshes. Blade structure is such
that the blade thickness becomes progressively less towards the
blade tips.
(c) The upstream Mach number of the impeller leading edge
Fig. 5 Cross section of compressor and location of LDV : is about 1.4, with transonic flow accompanying the shock
(a) Impeller and LDV probe (b) Bleed port andLDV wave. Fig.8(a) corresponds to the LDV measuring flow rate
measuring points (c) LDV window arrangement indicated in Fig.3. The shock wave is detached from the leading
edge and normal passage shock exists in front of the throat.
Secs.0, I, and II for LDV measurement were aligned. At Sec.0,
Table 2 Specification of LDV
the detached shock wave extending from the blade leading edge
Focal Length 600 mm can be measured. The normal shock wave can be measured at
Sec.I, and the region at which the normal shock wave reaches
BSA
Signal Processor the blade surface can be measured at Sec.II. Fig.8(b) indicates
2 Color, 4 Beam
the flow at the slightly lower flow rate
Laser Power 5 W Argon Laser

3 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 Mrel=1.4 Mrel=1.4

0
Ⅰ
（a）
Ⅱ

(a)

Mrel=1.4 Mrel=1.4
（b）

0
Ⅰ
Ⅱ

（ c）
(b)
Fig. 6 Computational grid: (a)Stream surface in the vicinity
of casing (b) Clearance (c) Meridional surface Fig. 8 Mach number distribution on the stream surface
4.5mm from the casing:
(a) LDV measuring point (b) Choke flow rate

Shock wave 100m/s

The LDV measurement in the current report was conducted
at about 92% of the impeller choke flow. The pressure rise
450m/s 200m/s caused by the shock wave was substantial in comparison with
the flow in the vicinity of the impeller choke flow rate, and a
flow field with major deceleration was detected.
Low energy Figure 7 illustrates another point of interest in the context
（a） region of the current report, i.e., the development of a low energy
region in the vicinity of the casing. The analysis flow rate
corresponds to the LDV measurement point. Fig.7(a) presents
the relative flow velocity distributions in the meridional surface
corresponding to 20% of the blade pitch from the suction side,
100m/s while Fig.7(b) shows for 70% of the pitch. As indicated in
300m/s 200m/s Fig.7(a), the flow decelerates just downstream of the
shockwave, and the low velocity region expands in the vicinity
of the casing surface in the middle of the impeller, such thus the
“low energy region” is indicated.
In the work reported here, this low energy region predicted
by CFD was measured so as to ascertain its actual scale, and the
（b）
results are presented. Furthermore, as shown in Fig.5(b), an
inducer bleed port was positioned in the downstream of the
shock wave, and measurement was conducted to ascertain the
Fig. 7 Relative velocity distribution on meridional stream improvement in the low energy region flow due to inducer
surfaces at LDV Measuring point: (a)20% pitch (b) bleed.
70% pitch
COMPARISON BETWEEN LDV AND CFD
A Section 0.
Figure 9 shows the meridional and tangential components of
the peripherally averaged velocity distribution between the hub
operating point with respect to the choke flow rate. This and shroud, measured immediately in front of the leading edge,
operating point is equivalent to one estimated as the impeller compared with CFD results for Sec.0. The measured meridional
choke limit, indicated in Fig.3. At impeller choke, the oblique velocity distribution is similar to the CFD results across nearly
shock appears from the leading edge toward the suction side, all the range from hub to casing except in the vicinity of the
and the passage shock appears across the throat. The flow is casing surface. The measured deceleration towards the casing is
similar to that shown in the previous report[12] that presented considered to be the boundary layer, and increased boundary
LDV measured results just below the impeller choke flow rate. layer thickness can be seen.

4 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 Gb= 0 % C FD In order to clarify the details of the flow distributions of this
300 section, Fig.10 shows the relative velocity, meridional velocity

shroud
hub
250
and tangential velocity distributions between the blade pitch on
three stream surfaces. The solid line corresponds to CFD, while
200 the dotted line indicates the LDV results.
Cm(m/s)

On the stream surface 4.5mm from the casing, the meridional

150
velocity distribution shows deceleration at about 0.2 on the
100 abscissa. This is caused by a detached shock and extends
towards the suction side indicated by CFD in Fig.8(a). Thus,
50
the LDV results are in good agreement with the CFD results. In
(a) 0 measurement results at locations 3mm from the casing and
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 1.5mm from the casing, the constant flow velocity portion with
Distance from Casing X(m) around 200m/s, as seen in the flow velocity distribution 4.5mm
Gb= 0 % C FD from the casing, is subject to deceleration in conjunction with
250 proximity to the casing, extending across the entire blade pitch.
shroud
hub

200
This is deemed to be deceleration resulting from the influence
of the wall surface, not due to the shockwave.
150 On the other hand, the tangential component in the vicinity
Cu(m/s)

of 0.2 on the abscissa is measured as being acceleration due to

100
the shockwave, with the tangential component becoming nearly
50 0 in the region from 0.4 to 1. That is to say, this constant flow
velocity portion is deemed to be tangentially uniform and
0
essentially axial in the direction of flow. Accordingly, the
(b) -50 deceleration in the vicinity of the casing as shown in Fig.9
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 represents the casing surface boundary layer.
Distance from Casing X(m)
Fig. 9 Peripherally averaged velocity distribution at Sec.0:
(a)Meridional velocity (b) Tangential velocity
600 400 400
1.5 mm from Casing (97% height)

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %

500 C FD CFD
300 300

400
Cm [m/s]

Cu [m/s]

200 200
W [m/s]

300
100 100
200
Gb= 0 %
0 0
100 C FD

0 -100 -100
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

600 40 0 400
Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
500 CFD C FD
30 0 300

400
3 mm (94%)

Cm [m/ s]

Cu [m/s]

20 0 200
W [m/s]

300
10 0 100
200
Gb= 0 %

100 C FD
0 0

0 -10 0 -100
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 .0 0 .2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

600 400 400

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
500 300
C FD C FD
300
4.5 mm (91%)

400
Cm [m/s]

Cu [m/s]

200 200
W [m/s]

300
100 100
200
Gb=0%

CFD 0 0
100

0 -100 -100
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 10 Velocity distribution between blade pitch compared with CFD at Sec.0:
(a) Relative velocity (b) Meridional velocity (c) Tangential velocity

5 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 Gb= 0 % C FD Gb= 0 % Gb= 3 . 2 % C FD
300 300

shroud
hub

shroud
hub
250 250

200 200
C m (m / s)

C m (m / s)
150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0
(a) Distance from the Shroud X(m) (a) Distanc e from Casin g X(m)
Gb= 0 % C FD
Gb= 0 % Gb= 3 . 2 % C FD
250 250
hub

shroud

hub

shroud
200 200

150 150
C u (m / s)

Cu(m/s)
100 100

50 50

0 0

-50 -50
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0
(b) Distan ce from the Sh rou d X(m) (b) Distanc e from Casin g X(m)
Fig. 11 Peripherally averaged velocity distribution at Sec.Ⅰ: Fig. 12 Peripherally averaged velocity distribution at Sec.Ⅱ:
(a)Meridional velocity (b) Tangential velocity (a)Meridional velocity (b) Tangential velocity

600 400 400

1.5mm from Casing (97% height)

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 . 2 % Gb= 3 . 2 %
500 300 300
C FD C FD

400
Cm [m/s]

Cu [m/s]

200 200
W [m/s]

300
100 100
200 Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 . 2 %
100 0 0
C FD

0 -100 -100
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
600 400 400
Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 . 2 % Gb= 3 .2 %
500 Gb= 3 .2 %
300 300
C FD C FD
C FD
3mm (94%)

400
Cm [m/ s]

Cu [m/s]

200 200
W [m/s]

300
100 100
200

0 0
100

0 -100 -100
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 .0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 .0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

600 400 400

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 . 2 % Gb= 3 . 2 %
500 300
C FD 300
C FD
6mm (91%)

400
Cm [m/s]

200
Cu [m/s]

200
W [m/s]

300
100 100
200 Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 .2 % 0 0
100 C FD

0 -100 -100
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 13 Velocity distribution between blade pitch compared with CFD at Sec.Ⅱ:
(a) Relative velocity (b) Meridional velocity (c) Tangential velocity

6 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 B Section I
Figure 11 shows the meridional and tangential components
of the peripherally averaged velocity distribution between the
hub and shroud measured at the middle of the throat compared
with CFD results for Sec.I. The measured meridional velocity is
greater than in the CFD results, and the tangential velocity is
less. In Sec.I, because of the shock wave, considerable relative
flow velocity deceleration is estimated by CFD, while the LDV
results show smaller deceleration. Focusing on the meridional
flow velocity component in the vicinity of the casing, the wall
surface boundary layer is seen to expand in comparison with
Sec.0.
C Section II
Figure 12 shows the meridional and tangential components
of the peripherally averaged velocity distribution between the
hub and shroud measured at the middle of the throat, compared
with CFD results for Sec.II in the region where the passage
shock reaches the blade surface. In this figure, the dotted line
with open circles shows LDV results without inducer bleed,
while the dotted line with solid dots shows LDV results with a
3.5% bleed from the inducer (percentage of discharge flow
rate). In the case without inducer bleed, the meridional velocity
in the vicinity of the casing decreases substantially. Conversely,
in the case with inducer bleed, flow velocity increases in the
vicinity of the casing, and the flow velocity distribution is seen
to be smooth.
Figure 13 shows the velocity distribution between the blade
pitch compared with CFD results, so as to clarify the details of
the measured cross-sectional flow velocity distribution. The
dotted line with open circles indicates LDV results without
inducer bleed, while the dotted line with open triangles
indicates LDV results with inducer bleed. On the stream
surface 6mm from the casing, both of the LDV meridional
meridional flow velocity distribution indicate a progressively
decelerating distribution in a wide region from 0.6 to 0.2 on the
abscissa, towards the suction surface, and this trend is
increasingly pronounced as the casing is approached. Also, the
data fluctuation is substantial.
Consequently it is concluded that in the case without inducer
bleed, interaction between the shockwave and the casing wall
surface boundary layer leads to major deceleration in the
vicinity of the casing wall, thus resulting in substantial
reduction of meridional flow velocity in the vicinity of the
casing, as seen in Fig.12(a).
However, as indicated in Fig.5(b), the bleed port is located
downstream of Sec.II. With respect to the improvement in the
flow velocity distribution upstream of the bleed port (due to the
3.5% inducer bleed), the upstream flow rate increases 3.5%,
and considering that the flow ratio corresponding to choke flow
rises to 95.5% in the inducer, the cause is considered to be the
lower deceleration resulting from the shockwave, as shown in
Fig.6(b).
D Sections IV and V
Figures 14 and 15 show the meridional and tangential
components of the peripherally averaged velocity distribution
and the velocity distribution between hub and shroud compared
with CFD results for Sec.IV. There are two items to be
discussed with respect to Sec.IV, one being the development of
the low energy region in the vicinity of the casing, and the other
being the effect of inducer bleed on the flow downstream of the
bleed port.
Gb=0% Gb=3.2% CFD
300
hub

shroud
velocity results show nearly the same values and distributions, 250
Low energy region
except around 0.3 on the abscissa. estimated by CFD
The meridional velocity distribution with inducer bleed 200
Cm(m/s)

around 0.3 shows a small deceleration with a steep profile. This 150
deceleration is due to the shock wave. In the stream surface
3mm from the casing and also 1.5mm from the casing, steep 100
deceleration of meridional velocity is seen between 0.2 to 0.3 50
on the abscissa. The velocity reaches about 100m/s, down from
about 250 m/s. 0
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0
On the other hand, LDV results without inducer bleed on the Distance from Casing X(m)
stream surface at 3 and 1.5mm from the casing show a wide- (a)
ranging deceleration between 0.2 to 0.4 on the abscissa. It is
considered that the shock wave interacts at the boundary layer Gb= 0 % Gb= 3 . 2 % C FD
400
without inducer bleed.
hub

shroud

In the CFD results shown in Fig.13(a), a large region with a 350

steep relative flow velocity profile can be seen in the vicinity of 300

the suction surface, 3mm and 1.5mm from the casing. Referring 250
Cu(m/ s)

to Fig.8(a), this region corresponds to that in which the 200

shockwave reaches the blade surface. The Mach number 150
contour line interval in this region is wider, and the influence of 100
the interaction between the blade surface boundary layer and 50
shockwave is apparent. 0
In the LDV results with inducer bleed, this trend is obvious -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0
in the meridional flow velocity distribution 3mm from the Distan ce from Casin g X(m)
casing, and in the relative velocity distribution. (b)
On the other hand, in the LDV results without inducer bleed
Fig. 14 Peripherally averaged velocity distribution at Sec.Ⅳ:
at the flow surface 3mm and 1.5mm from the casing, the
(a)Meridional velocity (b) Tangential velocity

7 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 First, the development of the low energy region is velocity in the LDV results is at a blade height of 2/3. Although
considered. In Fig.14, CFD predicts a large low energy region hub side velocity could not be measured due to the reflection of
about 10mm from the casing surface. The LDV results, either laser light from the hub surface, it is deemed that the LDV
with or without inducer bleed, do not show the existence of an results represent the deceleration of flow velocity on the hub
obvious low velocity region. Focusing on the LDV results for side. Looking at the velocity distribution between the blades
the case without inducer bleed, although meridional velocity as shown in Fig.17, The low energy region indicated by CFD
shows slight deceleration towards the wall surface in a region remains unmeasured by LDV.
about 10mm from the casing, the amount of this deceleration is Considering the meridional flow velocity distributions in
much less than the amount predicted using CFD. Figs.14 and 17, it appears that the impeller under observation is
So as to clarify the details of the velocity distribution for Sec. subject to progressive deviation towards the casing side in the
IV, Fig.15 presents the flow velocity distribution between the middle portion of the impeller.
blade pitch for the two flow surfaces in the region of meridional Next, inducer bleed is examined. In Fig.14, the change in the
deceleration in the vicinity of the casing. CFD shows a flow velocity distribution attributable to inducer bleed is slight.
concave-shaped low velocity region of considerable magnitude As indicated above, in the case without inducer bleed,
between the suction surface and first splitter pressure surface. deceleration occurs towards the casing in a region of about
In contrast, the LDV results show a velocity distribution having 10mm from the casing. In the case with inducer bleed,
a flat slope for the suction side passage, illustrating a major however, the region of deceleration is a mere 2~3mm in the
difference as compared with the CFD results. vicinity of the casing, with flow being seen in other regions
The existence of a low energy region has been confirmed in characterized by a uniform increase in velocity towards the
the L2F measurements of Eckerdt[1] and Krain[2], and in CFD casing. This change in the velocity distribution is considered to
performed by Hah[8]. Also, in LDV measurements by the depend on the presence or absence of inducer bleed. Note that
present authors[10] on a subsonic impeller with an inlet Mach at Section V further downstream, as seen in the meridional flow
number of around 0.6, the low energy region indicated by CFD velocity distribution shown in Fig.16(a), no major change is
has been detected using a laser velocimeter. Concerning the identified.
impeller used in the current work, however, the existence of the
low energy region could not be established. CONCLUSIONS
Furthermore, in order to ascertain the downstream flow, In this study, results were presented on detailed flow velocity
Figures 16 and 17 present the LDV results for the double distribution measurement with respect to high transonic flow
splitter region of Sec.V. CFD predicts a large low energy with a Mach number of about 1.5 in a high pressure ratio
region about 15mm from the casing surface, as shown in Fig. centrifugal compressor having a design pressure ratio of 11, at
16. However, the LDV results provide a very different flow an operating point of 95% of design speed. Regarding the
velocity distribution. In the CFD results, the maximum flow region in the inducer and middle of the impeller, the flow
velocity is at about 1/3 of blade height, with a large between the blades was measured using LDV, and discussion
deceleration region seen towards the casing, but the maximum was undertaken concerning a) interaction

500 400 500

3 mm from Casing (92% height)

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 . 5 % Gb= 3 . 5 %
400 300 C FD 400
C FD

Low energy region

Cm [m/s]

Cu [m/s]

300 200 300

W [m/s]

estimated by CFD

200 100 200

Gb= 0 %
100 0 100 Gb= 3 . 5 %
C FD

0 -100 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

500 400 500

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
Gb= 3 . 5 %
400
Low energy region Gb= 3 . 5 %
300 C FD 400
estimated by CFD C FD
6 mm (83%)

Cm [m/s]

300
Cu [m/s]

200 300
W [m/s]

200 100 200

Gb= 0 %
100 0 100 Gb= 3 .5 %
C FD

0 -100 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 15 Velocity distribution between blade pitch compared with CFD at Sec.Ⅳ:
(a) Relative velocity (b) Meridional velocity (c) Tangential velocity

8 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 between the shockwave and the boundary layer in the REFERENCES
vicinity of the casing, b) the low energy region in the vicinity of [1] Eckardt, D., 1976, “Detailed Flow Investigations With in a
the casing, and c) the effect of inducer bleed. As a result, the High-Speed Centrifugal Compressor Impeller,” Trans.
following conclusions were obtained. ASME, J of Fluids Eng. pp.390-402..
[2] Krain,H., 1988, “Swirling Impeller Flow,” Trans. ASME, J
(1) Upstream of the impeller leading edge, the boundary layer of Turbomach. Vol.110, pp.122-128.
on the casing wall surface expanded to a greater extent [3] Hah,C., Krain,H., 1990, “Secondary Flows and Vortex
than predicted by CFD. On the other hand, the flow Motion in a High-Efficiency Backswept Impeller at Design
velocity distribution for the pitch between blades was in and Off-Design Conditions,” Trans. ASME, J of
good agreement with CFD. Turbomach. Vol.112,pp.7-13
(2) Shock wave and boundary layer interaction was measured [4] Senoo,Y., Hayami,H., Kinoshita,Y., Yamasaki,H., 1978,
in the inducer. In the case with inducer bleed, measurement “Experimental Study on Flow in a Supersonic Centrifugal
indicated that this interaction makes for a gentle slope of Impeller,” ASME 78-GT-2, 1978.
flow velocity in the vicinity of the suction surface. In the [5] Hayami,H., Senoo,Y., Ueki,H., 1985, “Flow in the Inducer
case without inducer bleed, sharp deceleration occurred in of a Centrifugal Compressure Measured With a Laser
the vicinity of the casing wall surface due to interaction Velocimeter,” Trans. ASME, J. of Eng. For G/T and
between the shockwave and the casing wall boundary Power, Vol.107, pp.534-540.
layer. [6] Krain,H., Hoffmann,B., Pak,H., 1995, “Aerodynamics of a
(3) In the middle of the impeller, CFD predicted expansion of Centrifugal Compressor Impeller with Transonic Inlet
a low energy region, particularly showing a noticeable low Conditions”, ASME 95-GT-79.
velocity region with a concave profile at the center [7] Krain,H., Karpinski,G.,Beversdorff,M., 2001, “Flow
between the blades in the passage on the suction surface Analysis in a Transonic Centrifugal Compressor Rotor
side. Consistent with the measurement results of the Using 3-Component Laser Velocimetry”, ASME 2001-GT-
previous report[12], however, it was found that this low 0315.
energy region does not actually exist, and that the flow [8] Hah,C., Krain,H., “Analysis of Transonic Flow Fields
velocity distribution tends to de-center on the casing side. Inside a High Pressure Ratio Centrifugal Compressor at
(4) The flow velocity distribution was improved in the region Design and Off Design Conditions”, ASME 99-GT-446,
of deceleration in the vicinity of the casing by the effect of 1999
inducer bleed, and the change in the distribution was also
small.

Gb=0% Gb=3.5% CFD Gb= 0 % Gb= 3 . 5 % C FD

300 500
hub

shroud

hub

shroud
Low energy region
250 400
estimated by CFD
200
Cu(m/s)
Cm(m/s)

300
150
200
100
100
50

0 0
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0

Distance from Casing X(m) Distan c e f rom Casin g X(m)

(a) (b)
Fig. 16 Peripherally averaged velocity distribution at Sec.Ⅴ:
(a)Meridional velocity (b) Tangential velocity
6 mm from Casing (80% height)

500 400 500

Gb= 0 % Gb= 0 %
C FD C FD
400 300 400
Low energy region
estimated by CFD
Cm [m/s]

Cu [m/s]

300 200 300

W [m/s]

200 100 200 Gb= 0 %

C FD
100 0 100

0 -100 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 17 Velocity distribution between blade pitch compared with CFD at Sec.Ⅴ:
(a) Relative velocity (b) Meridional velocity (c) Tangential velocity

9 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or

 [9] Higashimori,H., Matsuo,E., Noda,M., 1987, “Flow Study
in Radial Impellers Using a Laser Velocimeter,” 87-
Tokyo-IGTC-2.
[10] Higashimori,H., Ibaraki,S., Mikogami,T., 1998, “Flow
Study on A Centrifugal Compressor Impeller for
Turbocharger,” 22nd CIMAC 10-03,
[11] Ibaraki,S., Higashimori,H., Matsuo,T., 2001, “Flow
Investigation of a Transonic Centrifugal Compressor for
Turbocharger”, 23nd CIMAC.
[12] Higashimori,H., Hasegawa,K. ,Sumida,K. Suita,T.,2004,
“Detailed Flow Study of Mach Number 1.6 High
Transonic Flow With a Shock Wave in a Pressure Ratio 11
Centrifugal Compressor Impeller”, Trans. ASME, J of
Turbomach. Vol.126,pp.473-481

10 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2007/71733/ on 05/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.or