Advertisement

Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 1651–1661 | Cite as

Numerical investigation of two-phase flow characteristics in multiphase pump with split vane impellers

  • Yi ShiEmail author
  • Hongwu Zhu
  • Binbin Yin
  • Ruiting Xu
  • Jiate Zhang
Article
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Multiphase pump is a cost-effective option for subsea oil and gas field development. The ability to handle different inlet gas volume fractions (GVFs) especially high inlet GVF is critical to the development of pump performance. In this study, the two-phase flow characteristics in normal impeller and split vane impeller at different inlet GVFs were investigated by steady numerical simulations. The gas distribution on blade-to-blade plane and meridional flow channel at different inlet GVFs were analyzed and compared. Gas accumulation area and movement characteristics of the gas-liquid flow in impeller flow passage were also pointed out by unsteady simulations. Experimental results of the pump differential pressure were compared with the numerical simulation results, to validate the accuracy of numerical simulation method. The flow characteristics in pump with modified impeller and its performance at different inlet GVFs were both compared with that of the normal impeller. The steady simulation results of normal impeller in different inlet GVFs show that gas concentrating area in the flow passage increases as inlet GVF grows. The unsteady simulation results indicate that gas pocket firstly occurs on the pressure side of impeller, then moves to the suction side in the middle area of blade and finally transfers to outlet of impeller and disappears. The errors between numerical simulation results and experiment data are below 10 %, which validated the feasibility of the numerical simulation method. Simulation results on the split vane impeller demonstrate that the gas accumulation area in flow passage of the modified impeller is dramatically decreased compared to that of the normal impeller. The performance of the modified impeller is generally better than the normal impeller especially in high inlet GVF conditions.

Keywords

Computational fluid dynamics Helico-axial pump High gas volume fraction Multiphase flow Split vane impeller 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    J. Y. Zhang, S. J. Cai and H. W. Zhu, Experimental investigation of the flow at the entrance of a rotodynamic multiphase pump by visualization, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 126 (2015) 254–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Serena and L. E. Bakken, Flow visualization of unsteady and transient phenomena in a mixed-flow multiphase pump, Proceedings of ASME Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition, Seoul, South Korea (2016).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. Faustini and F. Kenyery, 3D flow modeling in one helical-axial multiphase pump stage through CFD, USBLABCEM (2007).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. W. Suh, J. W. Kim and Y. S. Choi, Development of numerical Eulerian-Eulerian models for simulating multiphase pumps, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 162 (2018) 588–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Y. Zhang, H. W. Zhu and C. Yang, Multi-objective shape optimization of helico-axial multiphase pump impeller based on NSGA-II and ANN, Energy Conversion and Management, 52 (2011) 538–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. H. Kim and H. C. Lee, Improvement of hydrodynamic performance of a multiphase pump using design of experiment techniques, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 137 (2015) 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    R. Vilagines, C. Bratu and F. Spettel, Multiphase fluid pumping or compression device with blades of tandem design, US patent 6,149,385 (2000).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. Serena and L. E. Bakken, Experimental study of the influence of the operating parameters on the performance and capability of a mixed-flow multiphase pump, Proceedings of ASME Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition, Seoul, South Korea (2016).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    G. Morrison, S. Pirouzpanah and K. Kirland, Performance evaluation of a multiphase electric submersible pump, Offshore Technology Conference, Texas, USA (2014).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    S. Pirouzpanah, S. R. Gudigopuram and G. Morrison, Two-phase flow characterization in a split vane impeller electrical submersible pump, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 148 (2017) 82–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    ANSYS Inc., ANSYS academic research, release16, help system, CFX Documentation, USA (2015).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Rakibuzzaman, K. Kim and S. H. Suh, Numerical and experimental investigation of cavitation flows in a multistage centrifugal pump, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 32 (3) (2018) 1071–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    E. Marsis, S. Pirouzpanah and G. Morrison, CFD-based design improvement for single-phase and two-phase flows inside an electrical submersible pump, ASME Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, Nevada, USA (2013).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Y. Shi, H. W. Zhu and J. Y. Zhang, Investigation of condition parameters in each stage of a three-stage helico-axial multiphase pump via numerical simulation, The 27th International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference, California, USA (2017).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Y. Shi, H. W. Zhu, J. Y. Zhang, J. T. Zhang and J. L. Zhao, Experiment and numerical study of a new generation threestage multiphase pump, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 169 (2018) 471–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Y. Di, K. Ahmed and T. Qian, Numerical investigation of cavitation in twin-screw pumps, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science (2017) 1–18.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    M. Diaz, A. Iranzo and D. Cuadra, Numerical simulation of the gas-liquid flow in a laboratory scale bubble column: Influence of bubble size distribution and non-drag forces, Chemical Engineering Journal, 139 (2008) 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    S. Noroozi and S. H. Hashemabadi, CFD simulation of inlet design effect on deoiling hydrocyclone separation efficiency, Chemical Engineering and Technology, 32 (2009) 1885–1893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    M. V. Tabib and P. Schwarz, Quantifying sub-grid scale (SGS) turbulent dispersion force and its effect using one-equation SGS large Eddy simulation (LES) model in a gasliquid and a liquid-liquid system, Chemical Engineering Science, 66 (2011) 3071–3086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    A. Kendoush, The virtual mass of a rotating sphere in fluids, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 72 (2005) 801–802.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    M. Mohajerani, M. Mehrvar and F. Ein-Mozaffari, CFD analysis of two-phase turbulent flow in internal airlift reactors, The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 90 (2012) 1612–1631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    C. Bratu, Two-phase pump transient behavior, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dallas, Texas (1995).Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    J. Y. Zhang, S. J. Cai and Y. J. Li, Visualization study of gas—liquid two-phase flow patterns inside a three-stage rotodynamic multiphase pump, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 160 (2016) 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    J. Zhu and H. Q. Zhang, Mechanistic modeling and numerical simulation of in-situ gas void fraction inside ESP impeller, Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 36 (2016) 144–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© KSME & Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yi Shi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hongwu Zhu
    • 1
  • Binbin Yin
    • 1
  • Ruiting Xu
    • 1
  • Jiate Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Mechanical and Transportation EngineeringChina University of Petroleum BeijingBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations