Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
suction performance of centrifugal pumps
- Thread starter 25362
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #3
To Scalleke, I haven't personally witnessed that effect, however books on pumps keep repeating that strange statement.
At higher temperatures, the NPSHa clearly drops as the water vapor pressure increases, however the NPSHr also seems to come down. I pressume it should be a result of the vapour bubbles' (steam) properties.
Taking extremes for an easier understanding, at 70oF saturated steam has a specific volume of 869 ft3/lb while at 200oF, just 33.7 ft3/lb. Therefore you need to evaporate 26 more water at 200oF than at 70oF to get the same volume of vapour. However, since the latent heat at 200oF is 93% of that at 70oF, the amount of heat needed to evaporate the same volume of steam would be 26*0.93=24 times larger at 200oF than at 70oF.
Since the time allowed for bubble formation in the low pressure zones inside the pump is quite short, a smaller volume of vapour would be generated at 200oF than at 70oF, meaning less cavitation intensity.
Although cavitation is not eliminated, I feel this is the explanation, could you confirm ?
A pump handling water under conditions of incipient cavitation, would seem be somehow "protected" by heating the water a few degrees, wouldn't it ?
If the above assumption is right, why hasn't this effect received more attention? Thanks.![[pipe]](/data/assets/smilies/pipe.gif "[pipe] [pipe]")
At higher temperatures, the NPSHa clearly drops as the water vapor pressure increases, however the NPSHr also seems to come down. I pressume it should be a result of the vapour bubbles' (steam) properties.
Taking extremes for an easier understanding, at 70oF saturated steam has a specific volume of 869 ft3/lb while at 200oF, just 33.7 ft3/lb. Therefore you need to evaporate 26 more water at 200oF than at 70oF to get the same volume of vapour. However, since the latent heat at 200oF is 93% of that at 70oF, the amount of heat needed to evaporate the same volume of steam would be 26*0.93=24 times larger at 200oF than at 70oF.
Since the time allowed for bubble formation in the low pressure zones inside the pump is quite short, a smaller volume of vapour would be generated at 200oF than at 70oF, meaning less cavitation intensity.
Although cavitation is not eliminated, I feel this is the explanation, could you confirm ?
A pump handling water under conditions of incipient cavitation, would seem be somehow "protected" by heating the water a few degrees, wouldn't it ?
If the above assumption is right, why hasn't this effect received more attention? Thanks.
Actually it is a proven effect, though I don't know the mechanics behind it myself, but there are published curves for NPSHR reductions for hot water & hydrocarbon condensates based on tests comparing pump cavitation in cold water and again at various other liquids. The Hydraulic Institute and Karassik's "Pump Handbook" have these curves in them. The Pump Handbook does refer to theories by Stepanoff and others explaining this, maybe you can find something in one of these references;
Stepanoff, A.J.: Pumps and Blowers: Two Phase Flow, Wiley, New York, 1967.
Stahl, H.A., and A.J. Stepanoff: "Thermodynamic Aspects of Cavitation in Centrifugal Pumps," Trans. ASME 78:1691 (1956)
Salemann, V.: "Cavitation and NPSHR Requirements of Various Liquids," Trans ASME, J. Basic Eng., ser. D, 81.167 (1959)
Stepanoff, A.J.: "Cavitation Properties of Liquids," Trans. ASME, J. Eng. Power, ser. A, 86:195 (1964)
I've never seen the NPSHR reduction pumping hot water, I have seen the effects of hydrocarbon reduction, I've got pumps running happily away in hydrocarbon condensate service with about half the manufacturer's stated NPSHR.
I haven't read any of those references, and I hadn't thought about steam properties since it also effects condensate - I'd been thinking about the fact that hot water or hydrocarbons have lower densities. Because of the lower densities, the shockwaves of implosion would travel at a lower velocity, possibly reducing the damage inflicted on metal components. Just a guess though.
Stepanoff, A.J.: Pumps and Blowers: Two Phase Flow, Wiley, New York, 1967.
Stahl, H.A., and A.J. Stepanoff: "Thermodynamic Aspects of Cavitation in Centrifugal Pumps," Trans. ASME 78:1691 (1956)
Salemann, V.: "Cavitation and NPSHR Requirements of Various Liquids," Trans ASME, J. Basic Eng., ser. D, 81.167 (1959)
Stepanoff, A.J.: "Cavitation Properties of Liquids," Trans. ASME, J. Eng. Power, ser. A, 86:195 (1964)
I've never seen the NPSHR reduction pumping hot water, I have seen the effects of hydrocarbon reduction, I've got pumps running happily away in hydrocarbon condensate service with about half the manufacturer's stated NPSHR.
I haven't read any of those references, and I hadn't thought about steam properties since it also effects condensate - I'd been thinking about the fact that hot water or hydrocarbons have lower densities. Because of the lower densities, the shockwaves of implosion would travel at a lower velocity, possibly reducing the damage inflicted on metal components. Just a guess though.
- Thread starter
- #5
To Scipio, thanks a lot for your comments and advice.
Following your thoughts, I went looking for the speed of sound in liquids. The speed of sound in liquids is given by the square root of the ratio: modulus of elasticity divided by the density.
The slower-moving shockwaves could indeed be one reason, as you propose, for the weaker effects of cavitation at higher temperatures for most liquids, including hydrocarbons.
Water, as usual, is an exception, i.e., sound velocity increases a bit with temperature, and this happens because the modulus of elasticity rises with temperature. Thus, perhaps the explanation based on thermodynamics suits better the cavitation effects at higher temperatures for water.
As a first thought it would be risky to use heat to reduce cavitation because pump materials may suffer a drop in strength at higher temperatures.
Any comments ? Thanks again.
Following your thoughts, I went looking for the speed of sound in liquids. The speed of sound in liquids is given by the square root of the ratio: modulus of elasticity divided by the density.
The slower-moving shockwaves could indeed be one reason, as you propose, for the weaker effects of cavitation at higher temperatures for most liquids, including hydrocarbons.
Water, as usual, is an exception, i.e., sound velocity increases a bit with temperature, and this happens because the modulus of elasticity rises with temperature. Thus, perhaps the explanation based on thermodynamics suits better the cavitation effects at higher temperatures for water.
As a first thought it would be risky to use heat to reduce cavitation because pump materials may suffer a drop in strength at higher temperatures.
Any comments ? Thanks again.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question
- Question
