Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization

of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller

Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

Abstract Centrifugal pumps are largely used in several fields and for different ap-
plications. Despite their wide diffusion, they are often not optimized for working at
the design conditions.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the potentialities offered by surrogate-based
optimization techniques in centrifugal pump impeller shape optimization, to obtain
a robust and fast algorithm for performance improvement.
The geometry chosen for validating the proposed method is the ERCOFTAC cen-
trifugal pump where accurate measurements and simulations are available in the
literature.
The three-dimensional geometry of the impeller is parametrized by means of para-
metric Bezier surfaces with an in-house Scilab script, which allows to export the
dictionary used by the utility blockMesh to create the mesh for the CFD simulation.
The surrogate-based optimization method here described maximizes the pump hy-
draulic efficiency, while keeping the total pressure rise prescribed to the design con-
dition, in order to find the optimal impeller design.
The whole optimization chain is designed for running in HPC environment with
open-source software, i.e. OpenFOAM for CFD simulation, Dakota for the opti-
mization and Scilab for the geometry parametrization.
Keywords: Centrifugal pump, surrogate-based optimization, impeller shape op-
timization, OpenFOAM, Dakota, Bezier polynomials, ERCOFTAC pump

Remo De Donno
Università degli Studi di Brescia, via Branze 38 Brescia Italy, e-mail: r.dedonno@unibs.it
Stefano Rebay
Università degli Studi di Brescia, via Branze 38 Brescia Italy, e-mail: stefano.rebay@unibs.it
Antonio Ghidoni
Università degli Studi di Brescia, via Branze 38 Brescia Italy, e-mail: antonio.ghidoni@unibs.it

1
2 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

1 Introduction

Centrifugal pumps can be used in different applications, requiring the operation for
a wide range of pressure ratios and flow rates. The design and the performance
prediction is however not an easy task due to the high number of free geometric
parameters to be determined, whose effect on pump performance is not trivial to
determine.
Nowadays, the coupling of CFD and shape optimization algorithms represents a
viable approach for an automatic, robust, and fast design of turbomachinery [5, 6,
8, 9, 10, 11].
The aim of this study is to implement a methodology for the robust and opti-
mal automatic design of centrifugal pumps [23, 24, 25, 26] based on open-source
software in HPC environment.
The centrifugal pump geometry chosen for this work is the well known ERCOF-
TAC centrifugal pump [2], being available the geometry definition and the experi-
mental results, as reported in Tab. 1. OpenFOAM [14] has been used for CFD sim-
ulations, Dakota [22] for the optimization algorithms, and an in-house Scilab [12]
script for the parametrization of the geometry which allows exporting directly the
dictionary for the BlockMesh utility.
An incompressible steady-state 3D Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)
approach, coupled with the RNG k − ε turbulence model has been used, allowing to
predict reasonably well the ERCOFTAC pump performance as demonstrated in [13,
3]. A single objective genetic algorithm (SOGA) has been applied to a surrogate
model, in order to find the optimal impeller design of the ERCOFTAC centrifugal
pump for fixed operative conditions.

Table 1 Main geometric data and operating condition of the ERCOFTAC centrifugal pump
Impeller
inlet blade diameter D1 = 240 mm
outlet diameter D2 = 420 mm
blade span b= 40 mm
number of blades zi = 7
Diffuser
inlet vane diameter D3 = 444 mm
outlet vane diameter D4 = 664 mm
vane span b = 40 mm
number of vanes zd = 12
Operating conditions
rotational speed n = 2000 rpm
flow rate coefficient φ = 0.048
total pressure rise coefficient ψ = 0.65
Reynolds number Re = 6.5 105
Inlet air reference conditions
temperature T = 298 K
air density ρ = 1.2 kg/m3
Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 3

2 Method

2.1 3D-geometry parameterization

In order to properly define the input variables for the optimization process, the im-
peller of the ERCOFTAC centrifugal pump is re-expressed from data-points [2, 3]
to Bezier polynomials [4] by means of Scilab [12]:
n
R(u) = ∑ Bn,i (u)Vi , 0≤u≤1 (1)
i=0

where Bn,i (u) represent the Bernstein basis polynomials, u is the independent vari-
able and Vi are the control points.
Starting from the prescribed data points R(u) and choosing the Bezier polynomial
order, it is possible to compute the control points of the curve that best approximate
the given data-points [7].
The hub and tip meridional curves are both defined by fourth order Bezier poly-
nomials as shown in Figure 1.
The blade profile of the ERCOFTAC impeller is two-dimensional and given by
data-points in the r-θ reference frame for the pressure side and the suction side [2].
The camber line is computed from the suction side and the pressure side and then
extruded along the span-direction in order to form the camber surface of the blade.
Once the camber surface is defined, it has been transformed in a parametric
geometry by means of Bezier surface of third order in the two independent vari-
ables u and v. The choice of giving degrees of freedom in the span-direction even if
the original impeller is purely two-dimensional, is made for enabling the optimiza-
tion algorithm to twist the blade along the span-direction. The pressure side and the
suction side of the blade are obtained by adding the original thickness distribution
to the parametric camber surface.
The control points of hub, tip and camber surfaces of the blade are shown in
Table 2 and represented in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

2.2 Flow computation

Previous works in the literature [13, 3] show that steady numerical simulation with
the k − ε turbulence model is reasonably in good agreement with the measurements,
although it obviously does not predict the unsteady features of the flow. Since an
unsteady numerical simulation setup would be very time consuming for an opti-
mization study and therefore would fail the objective of this work, the steady-state
setup is chosen.
The incompressible steady-state 3D Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)
equations, coupled with the RNG k − ε turbulence model are numerically solved
through the open-source CFD toolbox OpenFOAM [14] with the high accuracy nu-
4 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

Table 2 Control points of the original geometry. The radial and axial dimensions are r and z
respectively, while β indicates the angle between the radial dimension and the camber line [5]
r [mm] z [mm] β [rad]
h1 5.823 100.458 0.000
h2 15.674 36.804 0.000
h3 37.435 27.232 0.000
h4 67.098 -3.431 0.000
h5 113.630 0.000 0.000
t1 92.000 100.458 0.000
t2 92.647 38.801 0.000
t3 92.496 71.738 0.000
t4 92.814 41.709 0.000
t5 113.630 40.400 0.000
b11 128.630 0.000 0.957
b21 173.549 0.000 0.678
b31 180.023 0.000 0.541
b41 205.720 0.000 0.237
b12 128.630 10.100 0.955
b22 173.549 10.100 0.677
b32 180.023 10.100 0.540
b42 205.720 10.100 0.237
b13 128.630 30.300 0.944
b23 173.549 30.300 0.671
b33 180.023 30.300 0.535
b43 205.720 30.300 0.235
b14 128.630 40.400 0.935
b24 173.549 40.400 0.666
b34 180.023 40.400 0.530
b44 205.720 40.400 0.233

merical schemes available in the literature [16]. The multiple frame of reference
approach is adopted together with the frozen rotor technique and the fluxes at the
interface are transferred using the General Grid Interface (GGI) [18, 19, 13].
The computational grid includes the inlet, the rotor and the vaned diffuser re-
gions meshed separately with the OpenFOAM utility blockMesh. The grids of the
inlet and of the vaned diffuser do not change during the optimization process and
therefore are built only once. The complete grid is composed of about 4 million
hexahedral cells and the fluid domain of the initial design is shown in Figure 3,
while Figure 4 shows a detail of the grid in the impeller blade region.
To match the available experimental measurement conditions [2], the impeller
rotational speed is set to 2000 rpm and an inlet axial velocity corresponding to a
flow coefficient φ equal to 0.048 is prescribed, where

φ = 4Q/(U2 πD22 ), (2)

Q is the flow rate, U2 is the peripheral velocity at the impeller outlet and D2 is
the diameter at the impeller outlet. The inlet and outlet boundary conditions are set
according to the simulations already performed on this case-study and available in
the literature [3].
 Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 5

Fig. 1 Control points and design space of the Fig. 2 Control points and design space of the
impeller hub (h) and tip (t) impeller blade

The computational quantities of the CFD simulations are the efficiency η and the
total pressure rise coefficient ψ, where

ψ = 2(pt4 − pt0 )/ρU22 , (3)

pt4 is total pressure at the diffuser outlet and pt0 is total pressure at the suction pipe.
The mass averaged values of η and ψ calculated between inflow and outflow for the
initial design are 0.63 and 0.60, respectively.
Figures 5 and 6 show the comparison between the experimental measurements
[2] and the CFD results with grid and setup described above, in terms of radial and
tangential velocity distribution near the impeller outflow. The average relative error
in the x and y axis is lower than 30%, showing a reasonable agreement between
the steady-state numerical setup and the unsteady nature of the flow. In fact the
experimental trend of the velocity distributions is well captured by the simulations.
 6 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

Fig. 4 Grid for the CFD calculation, detail of

Fig. 3 Grid for the CFD calculation
the impeller blade

2.3 Optimization strategy

In the centrifugal pump performance, the hydraulic efficiency η and the total pres-
sure rise coefficient ψ have a fundamental role and therefore are chosen as optimiza-
tion objective and constraint, respectively. In particular the optimization algorithm
maximizes η, while keeping ψ constrained to the operative point analyzed with a
tolerance of ±5%.
In this work the single objective genetic algorithm SOGA, available in the soft-
ware Dakota [22], is applied to a surrogate model, in order to find the global opti-
mum of the objective function [20, 21]. The surrogate model has been built on the
results of 170 computer experiments (ten times the input variables number), gener-
ated through the Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) method.
The surrogate-based optimization strategy of this work consists in the following
steps:
• optimization problem definition (design variabls, objectives and constrained),
• computational design of experiments by means of the LHS method,
• surrogate model construction,
• surrogate model accuracy evaluation through cross validation,
• calculation of further designs if the surrogate accuracy is not satisfying,
• constrained single objective genetic algorithm on the accurate surrogate model,
 Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 7

Fig. 5 Instantaneous distributions of the en-
semble averaged radial velocity at the im-
peller outlet, at midspan position. Relative po-
sition beetween impeller and diffuser blade at
t/Ti=0.146 according to [2]
Fig. 6 Instantaneous distributions of the ensem-
ble averaged tangential relative velocity at the
impeller outlet, at midspan position. Relative
position beetween impeller and diffuser blade at
t/Ti=0.126 according to [2]

• CFD simulation of the optimum design.

Two surrogates, Kriging and Artificial Neural Network, have been compared re-
garding their accuracy respect to the CFD simulations. The analysis has been carried
out on the 5% of the computer experiments, showing that the two meta-models fit the
efficiency similarly, while the total pressure rise coefficient is fitted one order mag-
nitude better by the Kriging meta-model. Therefore the Kriging surrogate model,
showing a better accuracy for the problem analyzed, has been used for this study.
The population size of the genetic algorithm has been set equal to 100 samples,
while the mutation rate and the crossover rate have been set equal to 0.1 and 0.8,
respectively.
Figures 1 and 2 show the design space of the input variables for hub, tip and
blade. In order to prevent changes in the overall size of the centrifugal pump, the
initial and final control points of hub and tip as well as the control points of lead-
ing edge and trailing edge of the blades are not modified during the optimization
process. Furthermore control point t3 shown in Figure 1 is not taken into account
for the optimization for the sake of shape feasibility. The input variable b1-beta
controls the β -coordinate of control points b21, b22, b23 and b24 while b2-beta
8 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

controls the β -coordinate of control points b31, b32, b33 and b34. The input vari-
ables b1-r, b2-r, b3-r and b4-r control the r-coordinates of control points b21-b31,
b22-b32, b23-b33 and b24-b34 respectively. Beyond Bezier control points, also the
impeller blade number is considered as input variable. A total number of 17 design
variables is therefore considered in this study, details are shown in Table 3.

3 Results and Discussions

The relation between the objective function η and the nonlinear inequality con-
strained ψ is shown in Figure 7, where the output of the computer experiments
and the evolution of the genetic algorithm applied to the surrogate model are rep-
resented. The figure highlights also the improvement from the initial to the optimal
design in terms of pump efficiency.

Fig. 7 Optimization results: SOGA applied to the Kriging surrogate model

Figures 8 and 9 show the geometrical comparison between the starting and the
optimal design for the hub, tip and blade. It can be observed that the hub and tip
have been modified in order to increase the flow passage before the blade leading
Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 9

Table 3 Input variables description: original value, space domain and values of the optimal design.
The letter h indicates the hub, t indicates the tip and b indicates the blade. R, z and β indicate the
coordinate in the reference frame
descr. orig. min max type unit opt.
1 h2-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm -4.971
2 h3-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 1.260
3 h4-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm -4.846
4 h2-z 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm -4.961
5 h3-z 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 4.976
6 h4-z 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 1.251
7 t2-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 4.930
8 t4-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 4.902
9 t2-z 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 4.917
10 t4-z 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm -1.647
11 b1-beta 0.000 -0.050 0.050 float. rad -0.035
12 b2-beta 0.000 -0.050 0.050 float. rad -0.023
13 b1-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm -4.923
14 b2-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 4.978
15 b3-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm -2.070
16 b4-r 0.000 -5.000 5.000 float. mm 4.858
17 n-blades 7 5 9 int. - 6

edge, while the blade surface has been twisted along the span-direction. After the
optimization, the impeller blade curvature has been reduced and gradually increases
when moving from the impeller hub to the impeller tip as shown in Figure 10. It
is also interesting to notice that the optimal design reduces the number of blades to
6 instead of 7. Table 3 shows the design variables comparison between the starting
and the optimal design.
To better understand the effects of the geometry changes on the pump perfor-
mance, the static pressure coefficient C p as well as the wall shear stress τw have
been calculated for the impeller blade and for the diffuser blade at different span
positions. The static pressure coefficient is defined as

C p = 2(p − p0 )/ρU22 , (4)

where p is the static pressure of a generic point and p0 is the static pressure in the
suction pipe, while the wall shear stress is calculated as
 
∂u
τw = µ , (5)
∂ y y=0
where µ is the dynamic viscosity, u is the flow velocity parallel to the wall and y is
the distance to the wall.
The impeller geometry, even with different number of blades, is built keeping
fixed the relative position between one impeller blade and the diffuser blades, with
respect to the initial configuration. This choice allows a direct comparison of the
results for the initial and optimal geometry, Figure 11 shows the blades of impeller
and diffuser where the results are calculated.
 10 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

Fig. 9 Comparison between the starting and the

Fig. 8 Comparison between the starting and the optimal design for the impeller blade. The black
optimal design. Detail of the impeller hub and color represents the starting design, while the
tip red color represents the optimal design. The
markers show the Bezier surface control points

The comparison of the static pressure coefficient shows that the optimal impeller
has an higher fluid-dynamic load at all the span positions, as shown in Figures
12,14,16, without modifying the overall behavior of the wall shear stress depicted in
Figures 13,15,17. These improvements and the decrease of the blades number, i.e. a
reduction of the wetted area, explain the better efficiency of the optimal design.
The higher fluid-dynamic load of the impeller blades in the optimal design can be
observed also in Figure 19, where the high-velocity region at the impeller pressure
and suction side is significantly greater with respect to the original design, shown
in Figure 18. The increase of velocity at impeller outlet and, consequently, at the
diffuser inlet explains the higher peak of the wall shear stress of the optimal design
diffuser blade shown in Figure 20. However Figure 20 shows that the τw distribution
on the diffuser blade slightly changes, suggesting that the overall performance of the
diffuser has not been modified during the optimization process.
 Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 11

Fig. 10 Impeller shape comparison between the Fig. 11 Blades of impeller and diffuser where
original and the optimal design at different sec- the static pressure coefficient and the wall shear
tions along the span direction stress are calculated

4 Conclusions

A fully automated surrogate-based optimization method has been presented for im-
proving the centrifugal pump impeller efficiency, entirely based on open-source and
in-house software.
The method has been tested on the ERCOFTAC centrigal pump, where the im-
peller shape has been converted in Bezier polynomials from data points and 17
control points have been used as design variables for the optimization.
The Kriging surrogate model has been adopted for this work and trained on com-
puter experiments in order to connect accurately the impeller geometry with the
pump performance, predicted by computational fluid dynamics. A single objective
genetic algorithm has been set in order to maximize the pump efficiency coefficient
η, while keeping constrained the pressure rise coefficient ψ, for making the pump
working at the initial operative point.
The results of this work show an improvement of the pump efficiency about
2.63% with respect to the initial design and, therefore, demonstrate the effective-
 12 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

Fig. 12 C p distribution on the impeller Fig. 13 τw distribution on the impeller blade

blade at span 25% for the original and op- at span 25% for the original and optimized
timized configuration configuration

Fig. 14 C p distribution on the impeller Fig. 15 τw distribution on the impeller blade

blade at span 50% for the original and op- at span 50% for the original and optimized
timized configuration configuration
 Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 13

Fig. 16 C p distribution on the impeller Fig. 17 τw distribution on the impeller blade

blade at span 75% for the original and op- at span 75% for the original and optimized
timized configuration configuration

Fig. 18 Velocity magnitude contours Fig. 19 Velocity magnitude contours

of the original impeller at span 50% of the optimal impeller at span 50%
14 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

Fig. 20 τw distribution on the diffuser blade at span 50% for the original and optimized configura-
tion

ness of a surrogate-based optimization strategy for improving the pump hydraulic

efficiency, while maintaining the prescribed operative condition.
Surrogate-Based Shape Optimization of the ERCOFTAC Centrifugal Pump Impeller 15

References

1. Japikse D, Marscher W D, Furst R B, Centrifugal Pump Design and Performance, Concepts

ETI, Inc (1997).
2. M. Ubaldi, P. Zunino, G. Barigozzi, A. Cattanei, An Experimental Investigation of Stator
Induced Unsteadiness on Centrifugal Impeller Outflow, ASME. J. Turbomach., 118 (1) (1996)
41–51.
3. O. Peti, H. Nilsson, Numerical Investigations of Unsteady Flow in a Centrifugal Pump with
a Vaned Diffuser, International Journal of Rotating Machinery, (2013).
4. L. A. Piegl, W. Tiller, The NURBS Book, Springer (1997).
5. R.A. Van den Braembussche, Optimization of Radial Impeller Geometry, RTO-EN-AVT-143,
(2006)
6. D. Pasquale, A. Ghidoni, S. Rebay, Shape Optimization of an Organic Rankine Cycle Radial
Turbine Nozzle, ASME. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 135 (4) (2013) 042308–042308-13.
7. Cho S-Y, Ahn K-J, Lee Y-D, Kim Y-C (2012) Optimal Design of a Centrifugal Compressor
Impeller Using Evolutionary Algorithms. Mathematical Problems in Engineering
8. Z. Guo, L. Song, Z. Zhou, Y. Li, Z. Feng, Multi-Objective Aerodynamic Optimization Design
and Data Mining of a High Pressure Ratio Centrifugal Impeller, ASME. J. Eng. Gas Turbines
Power, 137 (9) (2015) 092602-092602–14.
9. T. Verstraete, Z. Alsalihi, R.A. Van den Braembussche, Multidisciplinary Optimization of a
Radial Compressor for Microgas Turbine Applications, ASME. J. Turbomach., 132 (3) (2010)
031004–031004-7.
10. M. Olivero, D. Pasquale, A. Ghidoni, S. Rebay, Three-dimensional turbulent optimization of
vaned diffusers for centrifugal compressors based on metamodel-assisted genetic algorithms,
Optimization and Engineering, 15 (4) (2014) 973–992.
11. M. Pini, G. Persico, D. Pasquale, S. Rebay, Adjoint Method for Shape Optimization in Real-
Gas Flow Applications, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 3 (137) (2014)
032604–032604-13.
12. Scilab 5.5.2: http://www.scilab.org
13. Petit O, Page M, Beaudoin M, Nilsson H, The ERCOFTAC centrifugal pump OpenFOAM
case-study. 3rd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic
Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, (2009).
14. OpenFOAM Extend 3.2: https://sourceforge.net/projects/openfoam-extend/
15. Versteeg H K, Malalasekera W, An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics. The Finite
Volume Method. Longman Group Ltd., London (1995).
16. Auvinen M, Ala-Juusela J, Nicholas P, Siikonen T, Time-Accurate Turbomachinery Simula-
tions with Open-Source CFD; Flow Analysis of a Single-Channel Pump with OpenFOAM.
In Pereira JCF, Sequiera A, Pereira JMC, editors, Fifth European Conference on Computa-
tional Fluid Dynamics, Eccomas CFD 2010, Lisbon, Portugal, 14.-17.6.2010. Lisbon, Portu-
gal (2010).
17. Moukalled F, Mangani L, Darwish M, The Finite Volume Method in Computational Fluid
Dynamics - An Advanced Introduction with OpenFOAM and Matlab. Springer (2015).
18. Beaudoin M, Jasak H Development of a generalized grid interface for turbomachinery sim-
ulations with OpenFOAM. Proceedings of the Open Source CFD International Conference,
Berlin, Germany (2008).
19. H. Jasak, M. Beaudoin, OpenFOAM Turbo Tools: From General Purpose CFD to Turboma-
chinery Simulations, Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, ASME-JSME-KSME
Joint Fluids Engineering Conference (2011).
20. C.A. Coello Coello, G.B. Lamont, D. Veldhuizen, Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving
Multi-Objective Problems, Springer (2007).
21. S. Pierret, R.A. Van den Braembussche, Turbomachinery blade design using a Navier-Stokes
Solver and Artificial Neural Network, ASME. J. Turbomach., 121 (2) (1999) 326–332.
22. Dakota 6.3: https://dakota.sandia.gov/
16 Remo De Donno, Stefano Rebay and Antonio Ghidoni

23. Kim J, Kim K, Analysis and Optimization of a Vaned Diffuser in a Mixed Flow Pump to
Improve Hydrodynamic Performance. ASME. J. Fluids Eng. 2012;134(7):071104-071104-
10.
24. Zhou L., Shi W., Wu S., High-efficiency design optimization of a centrifugal pump, Journal
of Mechanical Science and Technology, 30 (9), (2016) 3917–3927.
25. Lomakin V.O., Chaburko P.S. , Kuleshova M.S., Multi-criteria Optimization of the Flow of
a Centrifugal Pump on Energy and Vibroacoustic Characteristics, In Procedia Engineering,
Volume 176, (2017) 476–482.
26. Heo M., Ma S., Shim H., Kim K., High-efficiency design optimization of a centrifugal pump,
Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 30 (9), (2016) 3917–3927.