A Numerical Study of the

S. Anish Unsteady Interaction Effects

Fluid Machinery Technology
and Research Centre,
Daejoo Machinery Co. Ltd.,
1028 Wolam-dong, Dalseo,
Daegu 704-833, South Korea
e-mail: anish.surendran@gmail.com
N. Sitaram
Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai 600-036, Tamil Nadu, India
e-mail: nsitaram@iitm.ac.in
H. D. Kim1
Professor
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Andong National University,
388 Songchun-Dong, Andong,
Gyeongbuk 760-749, South Korea
e-mail: kimhd@andong.ac.kr
on Diffuser Performance
in a Centrifugal Compressor
Interaction between rotating impeller and stationary diffuser in a centrifugal compressor
is of practical importance in evaluating system performance. The present study aims at
investigating how the interaction influences the unsteady diffuser performance and
understanding the physical phenomena in the centrifugal compressor. A computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) method has been applied to predict the flow field in the compressor,
which has a conventional vaned diffuser (VD) and a low solidity vaned diffuser (LSVD).
The radial gaps between impeller and diffuser and different flow coefficients are varied.
The results obtained show that the major parameter that influences the unsteady variation
of diffuser performance is due to the circumferential variation of the flow angle at the dif-
fuser vane leading edge. The physical phenomena behind the pressure recovery variation
are identified as the unsteady vortex shedding and the associated energy losses. The vor-
tex core region as well as the shedding of vortices from the diffuser vane are triggered by
the variation in the diffuser vane loading, which in turn is influenced by the circumferen-
tial variation of the impeller wake region. There is little unsteady variation of flow angle
in the span-wise direction. This indicates that the steady state performance characteris-
tics are related to the span-wise variation of flow angle, while the unsteady characteris-
tics are contributed by the circumferential variation of flow angle. At design conditions,
dominant frequency components of pressure fluctuation are all periodic and at near stall,
these are aperiodic. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4023471]

1 Introduction in terms of time and effort, recent advancements in high perform-

ance computing alleviate this problem to a certain extent.
Due to the increased demand for power, research in the field of
One of the earliest works about interaction was carried out by
centrifugal compressors is gaining more importance. An increas-
Inoue and Cumpsty [1]. They found that the circumferential flow
ingly researched area in this field is the impeller–diffuser interac-
distortion from the impeller had only minor effects on the flow
tion, which is originated when a rotating impeller is coupled with a
inside the vaned diffuser. Kirtley and Beach [2] and Dawes [3]
stationary diffuser. The requirements of a more efficient compres-
suggested that span-wise variation of flow angle exerts a more sig-
sor necessitate an accurate and detailed understanding of the
nificant influence on the diffuser performance than the unsteady
coupled flow behavior and incorporate the same in the design stage
circumferential variation of the flow. The effect of unsteadiness at
itself.
the impeller outlet on diffuser pressure recovery has been ruled
In general, the diffuser performance depends on the impeller exit
out by Shum et al. [4] and Boncinelli et al. [5]. Shum et al. [4]
flow conditions. In turn, the diffuser back pressure affects the impel-
suggested the existence of an optimum radius ratio for the diffuser
ler tip leakage and exit flows. The vaneless region between impeller
vane leading edge and concluded that the most influential aspect
trailing edge and the diffuser vane leading edge has often been
of the interaction effect is the impeller tip leakage flow. Zeigler
referred to as the interaction region. The study of interaction refers
et al. [6,7] showed that, a smaller radial gap provides a better dif-
to the understanding of the circumferential and span-wise variation
fuser pressure recovery, and the impeller efficiency is barely
of the flow properties in this region and its effect on the perform-
affected.
ance of the compressor under different operating conditions.
The pressure recovery process, often termed as pressure recov-
Present day compressors are designed based on the steady state
ery coefficient cp, inside a vaned diffuser is closely related with
performance simulations, especially in industry. Steady state
the interaction. Filipenco et al. [8] and Deniz et al. [9] observed
implies that the simulations are carried out at a particular instant
that the cp and operating range are functions of flow angle alone.
of time. Steady state simulations neglect the effects of spatial
While Deniz et al. [9] discarded the effect of Mach number, inlet
unsteadiness, due to the relative position of impeller blade and dif-
blockage, and inlet nonuniformity, Villanueva [10] considered the
fuser vane, and the temporal unsteadiness due to the turbulence.
effects of loss and inlet blockage on the time average value of cp.
Design of a more efficient compressor necessitates a more accu-
From the works done by the previous researchers, it is known
rate numerical prediction. Hence, efforts are underway to under-
that establishing a connection of the unsteady impeller–diffuser
stand and incorporate the unsteady behavior of the compressor at
interaction with the pressure recovery coefficient is of prime im-
the design stage itself. Although unsteady simulations are costly
portance. Anish and Sitaram [11] carried out steady state simula-
tions by varying the radial gap between impeller and diffuser and
identified that there is an optimum radial gap for maximum stage
1
Corresponding author. efficiency. However, information about the unsteady interaction
Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for
publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received November 29,
effects on the compressor performance was not included as the
2012; final manuscript received December 23, 2012; published online September 23, simulations were carried out using Frozen-rotor interface. In the
2013 Editor: David Wisler. present study, the objectives are to understand the effect of

Journal of Turbomachinery Copyright V

C 2014 by ASME JANUARY 2014, Vol. 136 / 011012-1

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 1 Schematic views of centrifugal compressors with different types of diffusers

impeller–diffuser interaction on the unsteady diffuser perform-

ance of a low speed centrifugal compressor and to identify the
physical mechanisms that control the unsteady variations in the
pressure recovery inside the diffuser and how the interaction pro-
cess varies with different types of diffuser.

2 Type of Diffuser
Diffusers have an important role in deciding the stable operat-
ing range of a compressor. A vaneless diffuser (VLD) provides a
wide operating range, but the growing demand of a more efficient
compressor necessitates the use of a vaned diffuser. A vaned dif-
fuser (VD) will provide higher pressure rise and efficiency at
design flow coefficient, but the off-design performance is much
poorer than the vaneless diffuser. The choking flow rate of a
vaned diffuser is very small due to the formation of a geometric
throat (Fig. 1) at the diffuser vane. This can be avoided by reduc-
ing the number of vanes (in other words, reduce the solidity). As
such, the low solidity vaned diffuser (LSVD) provides a better
operating range than the vaned diffuser and a better pressure re-
covery than a vaneless diffuser. The first reference to low solidity
vaned diffuser was in a Japanese patent by Senoo [12]. Steady as
well as unsteady flow analysis in centrifugal compressor with low
solidity vane has been conducted by Yoshinaga et al. [13],
Osborne and Sorokes [14], Sorokes and Welch [15], Hohlweg
et al. [16], Amineni [17], Koumoutsos et al. [18], Kim et al. [19],
Siva Reddy et al. [20], Engeda [21], and Issac et al. [22]. These
works helped in assessing the effect of solidity and inlet distor-
tions on the performance of the compressor and also to assess the
relative performance. The amount of information available
regarding the interaction effects of LSVD is significantly lower
than VD in the open literature.
3 Computational Details
For the present investigation, a low specific speed centrifugal
compressor with a 20 impeller blade is selected. The shape num-
ber of the machine is 0.084 and detailed specifications of this
compressor test facility are given in Anish and Sitaram [11]. For
the unsteady interaction study, two types of diffuser configura-
tions are selected. These are vaned diffuser (VD) and low solidity
vaned diffuser (LSVD). The number of diffuser vanes is 22 in VD
and 11 in LSVD. The simulations are carried out at different flow
coefficients. These are design flow coefficient (/ ¼ 0.34), one
below design flow coefficient (/ ¼ 0.23), and above design flow
Fig. 2 Computational mesh for VD configuration
coefficients, (/ ¼ 0.45 and 0.60). For VD configuration, the solu-
tion at / ¼ 0.60 was not obtained as this is the choking limit for
this configuration. The radial gap is varied by keeping the vane
leading edge at R3 ¼ 1.05, 1.10, and 1.15.
Meshing of the computational domain is carried out using ICEM
CFD. Tetrahedral elements are used for meshing the domain. Near
the wall, meshing is carried out using prismatic layers to account
for the boundary layers (Fig. 2). Roache [23] identified grid-
convergence studies are the most reliable technique for the quantifi-
cation of numerical uncertainty. Grid independent studies for
impeller and diffuser are done separately. Three different types of
grids are used. These grids are at three different levels Grid 1 for
fine, Grid 2 for medium, and Grid 3 is for coarse mesh. Table 1
shows the grid independent study for impeller. Here, pressure ratios
P2/P01 and P02/P01 are compared for the three different grids. Grid
1 is taken as the reference and compared the pressure ratio obtained
with this grid to that of other two grids. The percentage differences
are shown in Table 1. The differences are considerably less for
Grid 2 when compared to Grid 3. Hence Grid 2 is considered for
the analysis.
In the case of diffuser, pressure recovery coefficient (cp) is
taken as the parameter for comparison between different grids.
Table 2 shows grid independent studies for VD. Here, Grid 1 is
taken as the reference. The percentage difference between Grid 2
and Grid 1 is 0.064% only whereas between Grid 3 and Grid 1 it
is 1.06%. Considering the fact that percentage difference is less

Table 1 Grid independence study for impeller

Elements P2/P01 P02/P01 P2/P01% difference P02/P01% difference

Impeller Grid 1 999,402 1.0182 1.039 — —

Grid 2 657,118 1.0182 1.039 0.003% 0.010%
Grid 3 351,682 1.0178 1.038 0.042% 0.077%

011012-2 / Vol. 136, JANUARY 2014 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Table 2 Grid independence study for VD

Elements cp % difference

VD; R3¼1.10 Grid 1 635,874 0.6217 —

Grid 2 481,719 0.6213 0.064%
Grid 3 298,556 0.6151 1.062%

for Grid 2, it is taken up for simulation. Similar analysis is per-

formed for other diffuser configurations, too (not shown here).
The simulations are carried out using ANSYS CFX software. In the
unsteady analysis, results from a steady state simulation (Frozen
rotor model) are given as an initial condition. The Frozen rotor
model treats the flow from one component to the next by changing
the frame of reference while maintaining the relative position of
the components. The ‘transient rotor-stator model’ takes into
account all of the transient flow characteristics. A sliding interface
is used to allow a smooth rotation between the moving and station-
ary domains. ANSYS CFX solves the unsteady Reynolds-averaged
Navier–Stokes equations in their conservation form using the Finite
Volume Technique. Standard k–x model is used to model the
turbulent nature of the flow. At the inlet total pressure and total
temperature is specified as the boundary conditions and at the exit,
mass flow rate is specified.
Time dependent behavior for transient simulations is specified
through time duration and timestep (Dt). In unsteady simulations,
the timestep is related to rotational speed and angular displace-
ment of the impeller between two successive computations. The
solver will continue to compute solutions at each timestep itera-
tion until n(Dt)  time duration, where n is the number of time-
steps actually performed by the solver. The time period ‘T’ is
defined as the time taken for an impeller blade to cover one dif-
fuser passage. Solution dependency on the time step has been
studied for only one case (Fig. 3). The differences in the results
are insignificant as we increase the time steps. Considering the
simulation time and solution accuracy, Dt ¼ 4.13  105s seems
to be an optimum time step. Hence for VD, the time period
becomes T ¼ 0.000909 s and for LSVD, T ¼ 0.001818 s.
In the present study, the validation methodology adopted is simi-
lar to Boncinelli et al. [5], Smirnov et al. [24], and Guo et al. [25].
They have compared the time averaged values and the steady state
values with the experimental results. For the present study, compar-
ison of the numerical results is done with the results obtained by
Issac [26]. Detailed comparison of the present numerical model
with experiment is given in Anish and Sitaram [11] for design as
well as off-design condition. However, static pressure contours at
the diffuser wall are shown for the off-design contours (Fig. 4). The
static pressure values are normalized with respect to the dynamic
Fig. 3 Solution dependency on the time step, for VD
configuration
head at the diffuser inlet. Comparison between experimentally
obtained values and the numerical results show quite a good match.
The comparisons are shown for VLD at / ¼ 0.23 and for LSVD at
/ ¼ 0.45, and the results obtained are quite encouraging.
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Performance Analysis. In transient simulations, the
results were obtained for every discrete time step (Dt). Iterations
were carried out until a periodic variation of the target variable is
observed. The results for analysis are taken from the last impeller
blade pass. In order to understand the unsteady effects on the
overall stage performance, mass averaged total to static pressure
ratio is plotted at different time steps. Figure 5 shows the transient
variation of mass averaged total to static pressure ratio across the
stage for VD and LSVD at two different radial gaps R3 ¼ 1.05 and
R3 ¼ 1.10.
The unsteady pressure variations are found to be smaller at the
design flow coefficient (/ ¼ 0.34) for both the diffusers. While
moving towards the lower flow coefficients (/ ¼ 0.23) the com-
pressor enters into the stall region and large variations are
observed in the pressure rise, especially at R3 ¼ 1.05. However,
for LSVD configuration, the pressure variations are quite lower at
/ ¼ 0.23, which indicates that the compressor is becoming more
stable at lower flow coefficients. In other words, by reducing the

Fig. 4 Pressure coefficient contours at the diffuser wall (comparison expt. with CFD)

Journal of Turbomachinery JANUARY 2014, Vol. 136 / 011012-3

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 5 Transient variation of the mass averaged total to static pressure ratio: (a) R3 5 1.05, VD
(b) R3 5 1.10, VD (c) R3 5 1.05, LSVD, and (d) R3 5 1.10, LSVD

solidity, the stall is delayed in LSVD. Similarly, at higher flow
coefficients, variations are also observed in the mass averaged val-
ues. At closer radial gaps, the fluctuations in the pressure ratio val-
ues become higher due to a stronger interaction between the
impeller and diffuser. These unsteady variations in the stage pres-
sure ratio can be due to the variations either in the impeller, or in
the diffuser, or both. A detailed analysis showed that the unsteady
variations in the impeller are only marginal and major contribu-
tion come from the diffuser. Hence, the unsteady performance
variations of the diffuser are shown in the next section.
4.2 Variation in the Diffuser Performance. The unsteady
performance variation of the diffuser over one impeller blade pas-
sage is plotted in the Figs. 6 and 7 for VD. The diffuser perform-
ance is evaluated in terms of the pressure recovery coefficient (cp)
and the total pressure loss coefficient (wloss ) and are shown for
R3 ¼ 1.05 and R3 ¼ 1.15. The variations are quite large at closer
radial gaps, possibly due to the strong interaction with the impel-
ler blade. The pressure recovery varies due to the variations in the
total pressure loss inside the diffuser. The maximum cp occurs
where the wloss has a minimum. This indicates that the unsteady
variation in the pressure recovery is not because of the variation
in the dynamic head. In other words, the unsteadiness has little
effect in the energy transformation process inside the diffuser.
The peak value of cp occurs at different time steps for / ¼ 0.23
and 0.34 at close radial gaps. Whereas at R3 ¼ 1.15, the peak
occurs at almost similar time steps, or, in other words, at similar
relative positions of the impeller and diffuser.
Unsteady variation of cp and wloss for LSVD at different inter-
action levels is shown in Figs. 8 and 9. Unlike VD, in LSVD, two

Fig. 6 Variation of cp and wloss at different flow coefficients Fig. 7 Variation of cp and wloss at different flow coefficients
(VD and R3 5 1.05) (VD and R3 5 1.15)

011012-4 / Vol. 136, JANUARY 2014 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 8 Variation of cp and wloss at different flow coefficients Fig. 10 Total pressure contours at midspan (VD, R3 5 1.05 and
(LSVD and R3 5 1.05) / 5 0.23)

Fig. 9 Variation of cp and wloss at different flow coefficients

(LSVD and R3 5 1.15) Fig. 11 Total pressure contours at midspan (LSVD, R3 5 1.05
and / 5 0.23)

peak values are observed for cp and wloss at two different time
steps. This is because two impeller blade passages are coupled
with a single diffuser vane passage in LSVD. The occurrence of
peak cp value corresponds to the blade passing frequency. At
/ ¼ 0.34, the unsteady variations in cp and wloss values are small
and at / ¼ 0.45, the variations are almost nil. Most of the static
pressure recovery occurs inside the vaned portion of the diffuser.
At / ¼ 0.60, the variations in cp and wloss increases again. Note
that, at this flow coefficient, the variations are not smooth, possi-
bly due to the large separations from the diffuser vane surface. As
in the case of VD, in LSVD, the peak cp value also occurs at
almost similar relative position of impeller and diffuser. It seems
that as the radial gap increases, the variation in the cp becomes
more deterministic. The physical mechanisms that control the
unsteady variation in cp is discussed in the coming section.
Fig. 12 Vortex core region within the diffuser passage (LSVD,
R3 5 1.10 and / 5 0.23)
4.3 Physical Explanation of Variation of Diffuser
Performance
vane leading edge, lower concave surface of the vane and trailing
Flow Field Analysis. Total pressure contours at two different edge of the vane. The strength of the vortex core region at the lead-
instances corresponding to the maximum and minimum value of ing edge is small when compared to the other two. The major
cp is shown for R3 ¼ 1.05 at / ¼ 0.23. For VD, the total pressure source of unsteady variations in the losses is found to be the trailing
contours are shown at s ¼ 0 and s ¼ 0.36 s at the midspan location edge vortex and the separation vortex from the lower surface of the
(Fig. 10). The loss regions are found to be located near the trailing diffuser vane. These two vortex regions grow in size and detach
edge of the diffuser vane. Similarly for LSVD, a majority of the from the diffuser vane and move to the exit. The vortices are shed
losses occur near the trailing edge of the diffuser and also from into the through flow at frequent intervals of time. Figure 13 shows
the lower concave side of the diffuser vane (Fig. 11). In a similar the limiting streamlines at the lower concave surface of the vane.
manner, at higher flow coefficients, the separated flow regions are The strength of the vortex core region at s ¼ 0.45 s is found to be
observed (not shown here) from the pressure surface side of dif- much higher than at s ¼ 0.18 s. Similarly, at higher flow coefficient
fuser vane. vortices are generated from the upper convex surface of the vane.
The losses are generated due to the formation and shedding of At / ¼ 0.60, the separation zone is observed throughout from the
vortices from the diffuser vane. The generation of vortex core upper surface of the vane and the vortices are generated from the
region from the diffuser vane surface and its propagation through diffuser vane leading edge itself (Fig. 14). The variation in the vor-
the diffuser passage is shown in Fig. 12 for LSVD at / ¼ 0.23. At tex core region as well as the shedding of vortices from the diffuser
this flow coefficient, the vortices are generated mainly from the vane surface may be triggered by the variation in the diffuser vane

Journal of Turbomachinery JANUARY 2014, Vol. 136 / 011012-5

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 13 Limiting streaklines at the lower vane surface showing
the vortex core region (LSVD, R3 5 1.10 and / 5 0.23)
Fig. 14 Vortex core region within the diffuser passage (LSVD,
R3 5 1.10 and / 5 0.60)
loading. Hence, the corresponding diffuser vane loading is plotted
at two span-wise locations and is shown in the next section.
Diffuser Vane Loading. Figure 15 shows the unsteady variation
of the diffuser vane loading at two span-wise locations for LSVD.
The x axis represents stream-wise location, where ‘0’ corresponds
to leading edge of diffuser vane, and ‘1’ corresponds to the trail-
ing edge. The vane loading plot reveals that from a stream-wise
location of 0.25, there is a variation in the vane loading with time.
The variations are getting stronger towards the trailing edge,
where the unloading of the diffuser vane is observed. Unloading
occurs when the pressure difference between the vane upper and
Fig. 15 Diffuser vane loading at different time steps for LSVD; R3 5 1.10; / 5 0.23
011012-6 / Vol. 136, JANUARY 2014
Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
Fig. 16 Variation in the diffuser vane loading at midspan for
different R3 values for VD
lower surfaces of the vane gradually comes to zero. The stream-
wise location at which the unloading occurs varies with time,
which can trigger the vortex shedding. From Fig. 12, it was
observed that the vortex core region near the vane is high at
s ¼ 0.45, the diffuser vane loading also exhibits a high value at
s ¼ 0.45, and the location at which the unloading occurs moves
downstream. It can be concluded that the loading of the diffuser
vane should be minimum in order to reduce the vortex core region
and thereby the losses within the passage.
Figure 16 shows the diffuser vane loading at different R3 values
for VD at two different flow coefficients. At closer radial gaps, the
nonuniform flow from the impeller enters into the diffuser vane
passage without significant circumferential mixing. The effect of
the impeller outflow is felt greater at closer radial gaps and this
reflects in the unsteady variation of the diffuser vane loading.
At design conditions, the upper convex side acts as the pressure
side and lower concave side acts as the suction side, but at higher
mass flow rates, this is reversed. When the flow coefficient
increases to 0.45, the incidence becomes highly negative. Due to
negative incidence, impeller exit flow does not hit at the leading
edge of the diffuser vane, but slightly away from the leading edge
on the lower concave side. As a result, the stagnation point is
shifted towards the suction side of the diffuser vane. Part of the
flow then takes a turn around the leading edge and accelerates. As
Transactions of the ASME
 such, pressure at the beginning of the convex side of the diffuser
vane is lower than that at the concave side of the vane. At certain
chord length, pressure from both the sides becomes equal and this
location varies with the incidence angle.
At R3 ¼ 1.15, nearly up to the midchord region, pressure at the
lower surface is higher than that at the upper surface. At
s ¼ 0.36 s, pressure from both surfaces becomes equal at a stream-
wise location of 0.52 of chord and at s ¼ 0.72 s, it happens at a
streamwise location of 0.63 of chord. This means that the loading
of the vane starts early at s ¼ 0.36 s and this variation in the load-
ing can cause vortex shedding.
4.4 Flow Angle at the Leading Edge
Circumferential Variation of Flow Angle. At different time
intervals, the relative position of impeller and diffuser varies and
hence the location of the impeller wake relative to the diffuser
vane leading edge also varies. The diffuser vane loading depends
on the incidence angle and the incidence at the leading edge
depends on the strength and location of the wake region. Wake is
characterized by a low velocity region and the flow is very tangen-
tial in that region. At close radial gaps, the flow angle oscillates
alternatively around the diffuser vane leading edge as the impeller
wakes are convected through the diffuser.
The variation of flow angle in the circumferential direction at
the diffuser vane leading edge is shown in Fig. 17 for VD at
/ ¼ 0.23. The abscissa represents the normalized circumferential
distance from the first periodic surface (which is on the upper con-
vex side of the vane) to the second periodic surface (which is on
the lower concave side of the vane). The circumferential flow
angle is plotted not exactly at the leading edge, but slightly
upstream from the diffuser vane leading edge. This is done to min-
imize the influence of back pressure from the vane leading edge.
For R3 ¼ 1.05 configuration, the flow angle is plotted at a radial
location of R ¼ 1.030, and for R3 ¼ 1.15 configuration the flow
angle is plotted at R ¼ 1.125.
At closer radial gaps (R3 ¼ 1.05), the fluctuations in the flow
angle are quite high in the circumferential direction. Two lower
flow angle regions are seen in the figure; one is due to the impeller
wake, which moves in the circumferential direction with time
step. The other one is caused by the back pressure of the diffuser
vane. In order to differentiate the effect of the diffuser vane, the
time average of the unsteady flow angle is calculated in the cir-
cumferential direction. This time average value is superimposed
over the instantaneous variation of the flow angle. The observed
dip in the time average flow angle is nothing but the effect of back
Fig. 17 Circumferential variation of flow angle at the vane lead-
ing edge (VD and / 5 0.23)
Journal of Turbomachinery
Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
pressure from the diffuser vane. The difference from the time
averaged value and the instantaneous values include both spatial
unsteadiness and the temporal unsteadiness. The movement of the
wake region in front of the diffuser vane leading edge is clearly
visible at closer radial gaps. At R3 ¼ 1.15, the fluctuations in the
flow angle are minimized. Though the variations are not contained
fully, the sharp jumps from a high flow angle to a low value are
not present at R3 ¼ 1.15. The large radial gap between the impeller
and diffuser vane provides the opportunity for an increased cir-
cumferential mixing of the flow in this region. As a result, the
flow angle becomes more uniform in the circumferential direction
before entering into the diffuser vane. Hence at R3 ¼ 1.15, the
vane loading is almost invariant with time. In addition, at higher
flow coefficients, similar flow angle oscillations are observed in
front of the vane leading edge. As such, it can be concluded that
the unsteady oscillations in the flow angle reflect in the unsteady
variation in the diffuser vane loading, which in turn reflects in the
total pressure loss.
Span-Wise Variation of Incidence Angle. The incidence angle
is defined as the camber angle at the leading edge minus the cir-
cumferentially mass averaged flow angle at 4 mm upstream of the
leading edge. Flow angle at 4 mm upstream of the leading edge is
taken as the flow is nearly uniform there. The span-wise variation
of incidence is shown for VD at different flow coefficients in
Figs. 18 and 19. Similar kinds of variations are observed for LSVD,
too, hence it is not shown here. The abscissa represents span-wise
variation, where ‘0’ represent hub and ‘1’ represents shroud.
Along the span-wise direction, the unsteady effects are almost
nil. Although there are small variations at some off-design condi-
tions, they are not in a significant level. Near the shroud, a low ve-
locity wake region is present and the flow is more tangential at
this location. This positive incidence shifts the stagnation point at
the pressure surface side, which causes the flow separation from
lower concave surface at lower flow coefficient. From the steady
state performance analysis [11], it was found that for lower flow
coefficient, R3 ¼ 1.15 gives higher efficiency. The reason for this
behavior can be identified from these incidence curves. As the ra-
dial gap increased, the incidence became less positive near the
shroud. This obviously reduces the separation from the vane sur-
face. Similarly, at a higher flow coefficient, moving the vane
closer to the impeller can reduce the negative incidence near the
hub. This will reduce the flow separation and vortex formation on
the upper concave side of the diffuser vane. Hence, at higher flow
coefficient, R3 ¼ 1.05 gives higher efficiency. From this analysis it
can be concluded that the span-wise variation of the flow angle is
the key parameter that decides the steady state performance,
whereas the unsteady variation in pressure recovery is caused by
the circumferential variation of the flow angle.
4.5 Analysis of Pressure Fluctuations. There are two sour-
ces of unsteadiness. The first one is linked to impeller rotational
Fig. 18 Span-wise variation of incidence angle (VD and
R3 5 1.05)
JANUARY 2014, Vol. 136 / 011012-7

Fig. 19 Span-wise variation of incidence angle (VD and
R3 5 1.15)
speed, which makes the circumferential nonuniformity reaches
the diffuser vane leading edge in a periodic manner. This disturb-
ance can be identified by the blade passing frequency and its har-
monics. The other one is associated with flow turbulence, trailing
edge vortex, tip leakage vortex, flow separations, and all the other
unsteady phenomena not correlated to blade passing frequency.
The unsteady variations in the pressure is noted down at two dif-
ferent radial locations, one before the vane leading edge (r ¼ 1.08r2)
and another close to the diffuser exit (r ¼ 1.47r2). The pressure sig-
nal from the time domain is converted into the frequency domain
by Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) in order to understand the in-
tensity of interaction in the flow field. The points P2 and P5 are
located in line with the camber line of the diffuser vane. The points
P1 and P4 are located on the right half (near the convex side of
vane) whereas P3 and P6 located on the left half (near the concave
side of vane) of the camber line. All the points are located at the
midspan in order to avoid the wall effect. Figures 20 and 21 show
the FFT analysis of LSVD at two different flow coefficients.
At the design flow coefficient, the peak value occurs corre-
sponding to the blade passing frequency. Smaller spikes are
observed at a lower frequency of 250 Hz and at higher harmonic
of 2000 Hz. At the diffuser exit, the magnitude of the blade pass-
ing frequency comes down greatly, but the magnitude of the lower
harmonic frequency increases.
When the flow coefficient is reduced to / ¼ 0.23, the FFT
yields a different result. The peaks are observed at a lower fre-
quency of 120 Hz. This flow coefficient lies in the stalling region;
hence the unsteadiness includes largely aperiodic components. At
the diffuser exit, the magnitude of the 120 Hz increases whereas

Fig. 20 Power spectral density (PSD) distributions of the static pressure fluctuations (LSVD,
R3 5 1.10 and / 5 0.34)

Fig. 21 Power spectral density (PSD) distributions of the static pressure fluctuations (LSVD,
R3 5 1.10 and / 5 0.23)

Fig. 22 Power spectral density (PSD) distributions of the static pressure fluctuations (VD,
R3 5 1.10 and / 5 0.34)

011012-8 / Vol. 136, JANUARY 2014 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 the magnitude of the blade passing frequency comes down. This
increase of the magnitude of the lower frequency components
may be due to the tip leakage vortices and separation vortices
shed from the diffuser vane surface.
An almost similar kind of variations is observed with VD where
the major frequency component is found to be the blade passing
frequency at the design condition. The magnitude is slightly
higher than the LSVD, indicating that the interaction effects are
stronger in VD (Fig. 22). Unlike LSVD, here no definite peak is
found at lower frequency components—not only that, but the
lower frequency components do not correspond to the rotation of
the impeller. The magnitude of 430 Hz and 676 Hz are significant
at the inlet of the diffuser vane, although much lower than the
blade passing frequency. These frequency components belong to
the aperiodic unsteadiness and they are dissipated towards the exit
of the diffuser vane. At the diffuser exit, the frequency variation
at P4, P5, and P6 are similar. This may be due to the high circum-
ferential mixing within the vaned diffuser, which eliminates the
spatial nonuniformities at the diffuser exit.
5 Conclusions
From the numerical study of impeller diffuser interaction, it is
understood that the major parameter that influences the unsteady
diffuser performance is the variation of flow angle in the circum-
ferential direction at the diffuser vane leading edge. The physical
mechanisms behind the pressure recovery variation are identified
as the unsteady vortex shedding and the associated pressure
losses, and are not due to any variation in the dynamic pressure of
the flow. In addition, the unsteadiness has no role in the energy
transformation process inside the diffuser. The movement of the
vortex core region as well as the shedding of vortices from the dif-
fuser vane surface is triggered by the fluctuations in the diffuser
vane loading. The unsteady behavior of the diffuser vane loading
is caused by the circumferential variation of the impeller wake
region. There is little unsteady variation of flow angle in the span-
wise direction. This indicates that the steady state performance
characteristics are contributed by the span-wise variation of flow
angle and the unsteady characteristics are contributed by the cir-
cumferential variation of flow angle. It is observed that the inter-
action effects are stronger at off-design conditions. At design
conditions, dominant pressure fluctuation components are all peri-
odic, and at near stall, they are aperiodic. The interaction effects
are stronger in VD compared to that of LSVD, but the physics
behind the diffuser pressure recovery are similar for both the
vanes. All these conclusions are derived from a low speed centrif-
ugal compressor. To generalize these conclusions, further study
has to be conducted on a high specific speed compressor.
Nomenclature
b¼ diffuser width (m)
Cm ¼ meridional velocity (m/s)
cp ¼ pressure recovery coefficient ¼ ðP4  P2 Þ=ðP02  P2 Þ
m_ ¼ mass flow rate (kg/s)
N¼ speed
Nsh ¼ shape number
P¼ pressure (Pa)
R¼ radius ratio ¼ r/r2
r¼ radial distance (m)
T¼ time period for one blade pass (s)
U¼ impeller blade velocity (m/s)
z/b ¼ nondimensional distance from hub to shroud
/¼ flow coefficient ¼ Cm/U2
q¼ density of air (kg/m3)
s¼ fraction of the time period T
h¼ normalized vane spacing
wloss ¼ total pressure loss coefficient, ðP02  P04 Þ=ðP02  P2 Þ
ws ¼ static pressure coefficient, ðPs  Pa Þ1=2 qU 22
Journal of Turbomachinery
Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
Subscripts
a¼ ambient condition
0¼ total state
s¼ static state
1¼ inlet
2¼ exit of impeller
3¼ diffuser vane leading edge
4¼ outlet
Superscripts
¼ mass averaged value
References
[1] Inoue, M., and Cumpsty, N. A., 1984, “Experimental Study of Centrifugal
Impeller Discharge Flow in Vaneless and Vaned Diffusers,” ASME J. Eng. Gas
Turbines Power, 106, pp. 455–467.
[2] Kirtley, K. R., and Beach, T. A., 1992, “Deterministic Blade Row
Interactions in a Centrifugal Compressor Stage,” ASME J. Turbomach., 114,
pp. 304–311.
[3] Dawes, W., 1995, “A Simulation of the Unsteady Interaction of a Centrifugal
Impeller With Its Vaned Diffuser: Flow Analysis,” ASME J. Turbomach., 117,
pp. 213–222.
[4] Shum, Y. K. P., Tan, C. S., and Cumpsty, N. A., 2000, “Impeller–Diffuser
Interaction in Centrifugal Compressor,” ASME J. Turbomach., 122, pp.
777–786.
[5] Boncinelli, P., Ermini, M., Bartolacci, S., and Arnone, A., 2007, “Impeller–
Diffuser Interaction in Centrifugal Compressors: Numerical Analysis of Rad-
iver Test Case,” AIAA J. Propul. Power, 23, pp. 1304–1312.
[6] Ziegler, K. U., Gallus, H. E., and Niehuis, R., 2003, “A Study on Impeller–
Diffuser Interaction—Part I: Influence on the Performance,” ASME J. Turbo-
mach., 125, pp. 173–182.
[7] Ziegler, K. U., Gallus, H. E., and Niehuis, R., 2003, “A Study on Impeller–
Diffuser Interaction—Part II: Detailed Flow Analysis,” ASME J. Turbomach.,
125, pp. 183–192.
[8] Filipenco, V. Deniz, S., Johnston, J., Greitzer, E. M., and Cumpsty, N., 2000,
“Effects of Inlet Flow Field Conditions on the Performance of Centrifugal
Compressor Diffusers: Part I—Discrete-Passage Diffuser,” ASME J. Turbo-
mach., 122, pp. 1–10.
[9] Deniz, S., Greitzer, E. M., and Cumpsty, N. A., 2000, “Effects of Inlet
Flow Field Conditions on the Performance of Centrifugal Compressor
Diffusers: Part II—Straight Channel Diffuser,” ASME J. Turbomach., 122, pp.
11–21.
[10] Villanueva, V. D. A., 2006, “Characterization of the Flow Field Response to
Vaneless Space Reduction in Centrifugal Compressors,” M.S. thesis, Depart-
ment of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA.
[11] Anish, S., and Sitaram, N., 2009, “Computational Investigation of Impeller–
Diffuser Interaction in a Centrifugal Compressor With Different Types of Dif-
fusers,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 223, pp. 167–177.
[12] Senoo, Y., 1978, Japanese patent application disclosure No. 11941/78 (in
Japanese).
[13] Yoshinaga, Y., Kaneki, T., Kobayashi, H., and Hoshino, M., 1987, “A Study of
Performance Improvement for High Specific Speed Centrifugal Compressors
by Using Diffusers With Half Guide Vanes,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 109, pp.
359–367.
[14] Osborne, C., and Sorokes, J., 1988, “The Application of Low Solidity Diffusers
in Centrifugal Compressor,” Flow in Non Rotating Turbomachinery Compo-
nent, ASME FED Vol. 69, ASME, New York, pp. 89–101.
[15] Sorokes, J. M., and Welch, J. P., 1992, “Experimental Results on a Rotatable
Low Solidity Vaned Diffuser,” ASME Paper No. 92-GT-19.
[16] Hohlweg, W. C., Direnzi, G. L., and Aungier, R. H., 1993, “Comparison
of Conventional and Low Solidity Vaned Diffusers,” ASME Paper No. 93-
GT-98.
[17] Amineni, N. K., 1996, “Design and Development of Advanced Vaned Diffusers
for Centrifugal Compressors,” Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI.
[18] Koumoutsos, A., Tourlidakis, A., and Elder, R. L., 2000, “Computational Stud-
ies of Unsteady Flows in a Centrifugal Compressor Stage,” Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng., Part A, 214, pp. 611–633.
[19] Kim, Y., Engeda, A., Aungier, R., and Amineni, N., 2002, “A Centrifugal
Compressor Stage With Wide Flow Range Vaned Diffusers and Different Inlet
Configurations,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 216, pp. 307–320.
[20] Siva Reddy, T. Ch., Ramana Murty, G. V., Mukkavilli, P., and Reddy, D. N.,
2004, “Effect of Settling Angle of a Low-Solidity Vaned Diffuser on the Per-
formance of a Centrifugal Compressor Stage,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A,
218, pp. 637–646.
[21] Engeda, A., 2001, “The Design and Performance Results of Simple Flat Plate
Low Solidity Vaned Diffusers,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 215, pp.
109–118.
[22] Issac, J. M., Sitaram, N., and Govardhan, M., 2004, “Effect of Diffuser Vane
Height and Position on the Performance of a Centrifugal Compressor,” Proc.
Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 218, pp. 647–654.
JANUARY 2014, Vol. 136 / 011012-9
 [23] Roache, P. J., 1998, “Verification and Validation in Computational Science and
Engineering,” Hermosa Publishers, Albuquerque, NM.
[24] Smirnov, P. E., Hansen, T., and Menter, F. R., 2007, “Numerical Simulation of
Turbulent Flows in Centrifugal Compressor Stages With Different Radial
Gaps,” ASME Paper No. GT2007-27376.
[25] Guo, Q., Chen, H., Zhu, X. C., Du, Z. H., and Zhao, Y., 2007, “Numerical Sim-
ulations of a Stall Inside a Centrifugal Compressor,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.,
Part A, 221, pp. 683–693.
[26] Issac, J. M., 2004, “Performance and Flow Field Measurements in Different
Types of Diffusers of a Centrifugal Compressor,” Ph.D. thesis, IIT Madras, Chen-
nai, India.

011012-10 / Vol. 136, JANUARY 2014 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://turbomachinery.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jotuei/927657/ on 02/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab