processes

Article
Investigation on Aerodynamic Performance of a Centrifugal
Compressor with Leaned and Bowed 3D Blades
Zhehong Li 1,2 , Wanmin Kong 3, Genqiang Shao 3, Fujian Zhu 3, Chaowei Zhang 3, Feiyue Kong 3 and Yifan Zhang 2,*

1 School of Aeronautical Engineering, Taizhou University, Taizhou 318000, China; [email protected]

2 Wenling Research Institute, Taizhou University, Taizhou 318000, China
3 Zhejiang Mingzhen Electric & Electronic Co., Ltd., Taizhou 317515, China;
[email protected] (W.K.); [email protected] (G.S.); [email protected] (F.Z.);
[email protected] (C.Z.); [email protected] (F.K.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The application of centrifugal compressors is extensive in industries such as aerospace and
energy. The blade is the primary factor affecting the aerodynamic performance of compressors. In
this paper, the aerodynamic performance of a centrifugal compressor with leaned and bowed 3D
blades is investigated. The spanwise section profiles of the blade in the circumferential direction are
deflected at different angles, resulting in four compressors with distinct leaned and bowed 3D blades
based on the original model. There is a significant change in isentropic efficiency of the modified
models under design conditions. Specifically, models 1, 3, and 4 experienced an increase of 0.97%,
1.04%, and 0.79%, respectively, while model 2 experienced a decrease of 0.70%. The profile of the
blade tip and 50% spanwise section are shifted towards the suction surface, resulting in a geometric
structure where the blade is concave towards the pressure surface. This structure gradually lifts the
flow from the blade root to the blade tip downstream to the outlet area of the flow channel, reducing
the load on the trailing edge of the blade and making the flow more closely aligned with the blade.
At the same time, the larger radial velocity gradient near the blade tip suppresses the backflow on the
shroud side, making the flow at the impeller outlet more stable. The outlet velocity of the impeller is
more evenly distributed along the spanwise and circumferential directions, which improves the flow
Citation: Li, Z.; Kong, W.; Shao, G.; at the inlet of the diffuser and enhances the efficiency of the diffuser. Due to the high spanwise height
Zhu, F.; Zhang, C.; Kong, F.; Zhang, Y. of the leading edge of the blade, this bowed blade structure has little effect on the spanwise curvature
Investigation on Aerodynamic upstream of the blade, resulting in negligible influence on the flow of the upstream channel.
Performance of a Centrifugal
Compressor with Leaned and Bowed Keywords: centrifugal compressor; 3D blade; leaned blade; bowed blade; aerodynamic performance
3D Blades. Processes 2024, 12, 875.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12050875

Academic Editors: Blaž Likozar and

Krzysztof Rogowski 1. Introduction
Centrifugal compressors are widely utilized in industries such as energy and various
Received: 26 February 2024
Revised: 23 April 2024
other fields for processing gases. With the advancement of technology, the potential
Accepted: 25 April 2024
applications of centrifugal compressors are expected to further expand. In particular, the
Published: 26 April 2024
use of centrifugal air compressors in fuel cell systems (FCSs) is crucial for supplying air to
the cathode of the fuel cell, directly impacting the overall system efficiency. It is evident
that centrifugal air compressors exhibit superior performance in terms of power density,
isentropic efficiency, noise, and volume. Therefore, they are expected to be the dominant
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. direction for the development of specialized air compressors in FCSs [1]. To evaluate the
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. aerodynamic excitation, analyzing aerodynamic noise based on external acoustic field
This article is an open access article measurements could be a viable approach. The experimental measurements covered the
distributed under the terms and entire operational range of the selected centrifugal compressor [2,3].
conditions of the Creative Commons Currently, researchers are focused on improving the performance of centrifugal com-
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// pressors by optimizing blade geometry parameters such as camber, thickness, angle, and
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
profile shape, which directly impact their aerodynamic characteristics [4]. A well-designed
4.0/).

Processes 2024, 12, 875. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12050875 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes

Processes 2024, 12, 875 2 of 16

blade geometry can significantly enhance the efficiency of a centrifugal compressor. Tradi-
tionally, researchers have primarily concentrated on optimizing blade load. The orientation
of the trailing edge of the blade, whether it is backward- or forward-inclined in relation to
the leading edge, plays a crucial role in load distribution [5]. Bednarz et al. [6] demonstrated
that the baseline design fell within the optimal range of thrust-specific fuel consumption.
However, increasing the number of blades resulted in an aerodynamic loading crisis at
the splitters, preventing further increase in the pressure ratio. The blade count has the
most significant influence on the compressor’s performance, and the blade angle at the
inlet is also of great importance [7]. By comparing the optimized model to the original
model, a remarkable 16% reduction in entropy increase and a 1.3% increase in adiabatic
efficiency were observed [8]. Hiradate et al. [9,10] discovered that designing the blades
with a tilt direction opposite to the impeller rotation led to a substantial alteration in the
static pressure distribution within the impeller.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is widely utilized for analyzing the flow field and
optimizing the performance of centrifugal fans [11,12]. An interesting finding revealed that
the dominant patterns of jet-wake flow were caused by vortex and blade channel blockage,
resulting in high velocities on the pressure side of the blade [13]. The orthogonal method
has also been employed to improve the number of blades, manufacturing parameters of
fan blades, and aerodynamic performance of fans [14,15]. Xu et al. [16] investigated the
impact of different blade tilt angles on the performance of centrifugal compressors. Among
the tested tilt angles, the negative tilt angle demonstrated the highest peak efficiency, albeit
with the highest-pressure load. Optimization algorithms play a crucial role in enhancing
the performance of centrifugal compressors. By integrating multi-objective parameter
optimization with the Kriging model, an optimal model has been obtained [17].
The aforementioned study primarily examined the utilization of blade load and the
trailing edge of centrifugal compressor blades to enhance performance. Several designs
have been proposed, including magnetically levitated compressors with forward-curved
blades and radial flow compressors with straight blades [18]. Efficiency and pressure ratios
are influenced by various factors, such as the velocity coefficient, energy head coefficient,
rotational speed, blade height, inlet radius, and radial distance [19]. A comparative study
of different blade types revealed that impellers with a trailing edge bend opposite to the
rotating direction reduced the pressure difference near the blade tip, thereby minimizing
tip leakage loss and improving compressor performance [20].
The decrease in aerodynamic performance of compressors is primarily attributed to
flow loss, and researchers have explored various approaches to mitigate this issue and
improve compressor performance. Fan et al. [21] discovered that cracked blades exhibit a
significant deviation in natural frequency compared to intact blades, highlighting the impact
of cracked blades on the overall blade system. Jang et al. [22] utilized a response surface
analysis to optimize blade sweep, tilt, and bend structures, resulting in reduced leakage
loss at the blade tip and improved overall compressor performance. The influence of blade
inclination angle on high-pressure ratio centrifugal compressors cannot be overlooked [23].
A positive inclination at the outlet reduces wake loss, but excessive inclination limits the
operational range [23].
We hold the opinion that increasing the blade outlet angle and raising the impeller
outlet height to enhance the relative velocity diffusion ratio between the impeller inlet and
outlet can effectively reduce losses in the diffuser channel and prevent a decrease in the
pressure ratio. This paper investigates the aerodynamic performance of a centrifugal com-
pressor with leaned and bowed 3D blades. The section profiles of the blades are deflected at
different angles in the circumferential direction, resulting in four compressors with distinct
leaned and bowed 3D blades based on the original model. Under design conditions, there
was a notable change in the isentropic efficiency of the modified models. Specifically,
models 1, 3, and 4 experienced an increase of 0.97%, 1.04%, and 0.79%, respectively, while
model 2 experienced a decrease of 0.70%. A comparison of the velocity distributions at the
impeller outlet revealed that the velocity distribution of the new impeller was much more
 there was a notable change in the isentropic efficiency of the modified models. Specifically,
models 1, 3, and 4 experienced an increase of 0.97%, 1.04%, and 0.79%, respectively, while
Processes 2024, 12, 875
model 2 experienced a decrease of 0.70%. A comparison of the velocity distributions at3 the of 16

impeller outlet revealed that the velocity distribution of the new impeller was much more
uniform than that of the original one. The leaned and bowed 3D blades primarily modified
uniform
the thancurvature
spanwise that of theoforiginal one.When
the blade. The leaned andblade
the entire bowed 3D blades
height profileprimarily modified
was rotated at a
certain angle along the rotating axis of the impeller, the curvature of the leading edge at
the spanwise curvature of the blade. When the entire blade height profile was rotated ofa
certain angle along the rotating axis of the impeller, the curvature of the leading
the blade underwent little change due to the large spanwise height of the blade’s leading edge of the
blade underwent little change due to the large spanwise height of the blade’s
edge. As a result, there was minimal influence on the upstream flow. Conversely, the lon- leading edge.
As a result,
gitudinal thereof
height was
theminimal
blade’s influence on the
trailing edge upstream
was smaller,flow. Conversely,
leading the longitudinal
to a relatively greater
height of the blade’s trailing edge was smaller, leading to a relatively greater
structural variation at the trailing edge. Consequently, both the downstream and outlet structural
variation at the trailing edge. Consequently, both the downstream and outlet flows within
flows within the blade channel were significantly affected.
the blade channel were significantly affected.
2. Geometry and Numerical Methodology
2. Geometry and Numerical Methodology
The
Thecomputational
computational domains
domains of the centrifugal
of the centrifugalcompressor
compressorare aredepicted
depictedinin Figure
Figure 1. 1.
As
As illustrated in Figure 1a, the computational domain comprised an impeller
illustrated in Figure 1a, the computational domain comprised an impeller along with an along with
an inlet
inlet and
and outlet
outlet forfor the
the compressor.
compressor. The
The meridianplane
meridian planeofofthe
thecompressor
compressorisisillustrated
illustratedin
inFigure
Figure1b, 1b,where
wherethetheflow
flowentered
enteredthe
theblade
bladepassage
passagethrough
throughthe thevaneless
vanelessdiffuser.
diffuser.Table
Table1
1shows
showsthe themain
mainparameters
parametersof ofthe
thecompressor
compressor[24,25].
[24,25].

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure1.1.Schematic of of
Schematic thethe
compressor andand
compressor computational domain:
computational (a) schematic
domain: of theofimpeller,
(a) schematic (b)
the impeller,
meridional plane schematic of the computational domain.
(b) meridional plane schematic of the computational domain.

Table 1. Main geometric parameters of the centrifugal compressor [24,25].

Table 1. Main geometric parameters of the centrifugal compressor [24,25].
Parameters of the Original Centrifugal Compressor Sizes
Parameters of the Original Centrifugal Compressor Sizes
Inlet total pressure (Pa) 101,325
InletInlet
totaltotal pressure (Pa)
temperature (K) 101,325
288.15
Inlet total temperature (K) 288.15
Shaft speed (rpm) 50,000
Shaft speed (rpm) 50,000
Blade
Bladecount
countfull/splitter
full/splitter(rpm)
(rpm) 13/13
13/13
Design
Design mass
massflow
flowrate
rate (kg/s) 2.55
2.55
Blade
Blade angle
angle ofofleading
leadingedge
edge tip
tip (deg)
(deg) 26.5
26.5
Impeller tip radius (mm) 112
Impeller tip radius (mm) 112
Blade angle of trailing edge (deg) 52
Blade
Impeller angle
pressure of trailing
ratio edge (deg)
(under design mass flow rate) 526.1
Impeller pressure
Efficiencyratio
(under (under
designdesign mass
mass flow flow rate)
rate) 6.1
0.84
Efficiency (under design mass flow rate) 0.84
The computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method is based on the fundamental control
equations of fluid dynamics: the continuity equation, momentum equation, and energy
equation. These equations are derived from the physical laws of mass conservation,
Newton’s second law, and energy conservation, respectively:

∂ρui
=0 (1)
∂xi
Processes 2024, 12, 875 4 of 16

1 ∂τji
f b,i + ( )=0 (2)
ρ ∂x j
∂ ∂ ∂T
ρ f b,i ui + (τij u j ) + (λ ) + ρq = 0 (3)
∂xi ∂xi ∂xi
where ρ is the fluid density, u is the velocity, fb is the body force, τ is the surface stress, q
is the quantity of heat, and T is the temperature. In this study, Ansys CFX18.0 software
was employed to simulate the three-dimensional steady flow field of the compressor. The
working fluid is compressible fluid. The based Shear-Stress-Transport (SST) model was
designed to give highly accurate predictions of the onset and the amount of flow separation
under adverse pressure gradients by the inclusion of transport effects into the formulation
of the eddy viscosity. This results in a major improvement in terms of flow separation
predictions. The superior performance of this model has been demonstrated in a large
number of validation studies. The SST model is recommended for accurate boundary layer
simulations. For free shear flows, the SST model is mathematically identical to the model.
The SST turbulence model was utilized, and the equations are as follows:
!
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂k
(ρk) + (ρkui ) = Γk + Gk − Yk + Sk (4)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j ∂x j
!
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ω
(ρω ) + (ρωui ) = Γω + Gω − Yω + Dω + Sω (5)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j ∂x j

The equations along with appropriate boundary conditions are solved numerically
to obtain the distribution of turbulent kinetic energy (k) and specific dissipation rate (ω)
throughout the computational domain of the SST turbulence model. In the equation,
the turbulent kinetic energy Gk is generated by the laminar velocity gradient, and Gω is
produced by the omega equation. The terms Γk and Γω represent the diffusion rates of k
and ω, respectively, while Yk and Yω represent the turbulence caused by diffusion. The
diffusion term equations are as follows:
µt
Γk = µ + (6)
σk
µt
Γω = µ + (7)
σω
where σk and σω are the turbulent Prandtl numbers for the k and ω equations, respectively.
The inlet boundary condition is defined by uniform temperature and total pressure. The
outlet boundary enforces the mass flow condition. Additionally, the wall boundary is
subject to non-sliding and adiabatic conditions. The second-order upwind scheme was
utilized for spatial discretization of the convection term, while the diffusion term was
discrete using a central difference scheme with second-order accuracy. The coupling
between velocity and pressure is achieved by employing the SIMPLE algorithm. As shown
in Figure 2, the wall y+ of the blade was under 10, as shown in the following picture. The
figures of grid details near the wall are also shown as follows.
As show in Table 2, the number of cells is 0.77 × 106 , 1.17 × 106 , 1.67 × 106 , and 2.46 × 106 ,
respectively. Total pressure was used as a criterion for grid independence verification.

Table 2. Grid parameters of the compressor.

Grid
No. Total Pressure Ratio Number of Cells
1 6.453 0.77 × 106
2 6.471 1.17 × 106
3 6.477 1.67 × 106
4 6.478 2.46 × 106
Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17

velocity and pressure is achieved by employing the SIMPLE algorithm. As shown in Fig-
Processes 2024, 12, 875 5 of 16
ure 2, the wall y+ of the blade was under 10, as shown in the following picture. The figures
of grid details near the wall are also shown as follows.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Structural
Structuralgrid of of
grid thethe
centrifugal compressor:
centrifugal (a) single-passage
compressor: structural
(a) single-passage cells, (b)
structural y+
cells,
contour of the blade, (c) mesh details at the leading edge of the blade, (d) mesh details at the trailing
(b) y+ contour of the blade, (c) mesh details at the leading edge of the blade, (d) mesh details
edge of the blade.
at the trailing edge of the blade.

As show
The in Table
impeller 2, the number by
was characterized of cells is 0.77grid,
a periodic × 106with
, 1.17each
× 106blade
, 1.67 ×section
106, and 2.46 ×
divided
10 6, respectively. Total pressure was used as a criterion for grid independence verification.
according to this periodicity. The computation results for total pressure show variations
depending on the number of cells employed, as illustrated in Figure 3. The simulated total
Table 2. Grid
pressure parameters
values of the compressor.
approached the experimentally obtained results as the number of cells
6
increased. When the total number of cells reachedGrid 2.46 × 10 , there was only a 1% deviation
between
No. the numerical simulation
Total Pressure Ratioand experimental results for theoftotal
Number Cellspressure ratio
6
under 1 the design condition (Q
6.453 = 2.55 kg/s). Therefore, this 0.77 × 106 2.46 × 10 grids
study used
Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
in the 6 of 17
2 numerical calculation6.471 of the stationary flow. This number 1.17 ×of
106grids had a good
calculation
3 cost and could predict the flow characteristics of the 1.67
6.477 fan ×well.
106
4 6.478 2.46 × 106

The impeller was characterized by a periodic grid, with each blade section divided
according to this periodicity. The computation results for total pressure show variations
depending on the number of cells employed, as illustrated in Figure 3. The simulated total
pressure values approached the experimentally obtained results as the number of cells
increased. When the total number of cells reached 2.46 × 106, there was only a 1% deviation
between the numerical simulation and experimental results for the total pressure ratio
under the design condition (Q = 2.55 kg/s). Therefore, this study used 2.46 × 106 grids in
the numerical calculation of the stationary flow. This number of grids had a good calcula-
tion cost and could predict the flow characteristics of the fan well.

Figure3.3. Grid
Figure Gridindependence
independencevalidation.
validation.

In
In addition
addition to
togrid-independence
grid-independence verification,
verification, the
the simulation
simulation results
results of
of the
the original
original
model were
model were compared with the experimental results. The comparison between thethe
with the experimental results. The comparison between ex-
exper-
perimental
imental result and the numerical simulation of the original blade model is depicted in
result and the numerical simulation of the original blade model is depicted in
Figure
Figure 4. The difference
4. The differencebetween
betweenthethenumerical
numericalandand experimental
experimental results
results waswas
lessless
thanthan
5%.
5%.
TheThe discrepancy
discrepancy waswas observed
observed at the
at the maximum
maximum flowflow operating
operating point
point from
from comparing
comparing ex-
perimental results obtained from full-flow channels with calculations conducted on single
flow channels in this study. The aforementioned error, however, did not impact the re-
search of this paper as its primary focus lies in optimizing the design operating condition.
 Figure 3. Grid independence validation.

In addition to grid-independence verification, the simulation results of the original

model were compared with the experimental results. The comparison between the exper-
Processes 2024, 12, 875 imental result and the numerical simulation of the original blade model is depicted 6 of in
16
Figure 4. The difference between the numerical and experimental results was less than 5%.
The discrepancy was observed at the maximum flow operating point from comparing ex-
experimental
perimental results
results obtained
obtained fromfrom full-flow
full-flow channels
channels with with calculations
calculations conducted
conducted on
on single
singlechannels
flow flow channels
in thisinstudy.
this study. The aforementioned
The aforementioned error,error, however,
however, did not
did not impact
impact the the
re-
research
search ofof this
this paper
paper asasitsitsprimary
primaryfocus
focuslies
liesininoptimizing
optimizingthethedesign
designoperating
operatingcondition.
condition.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 4.4.Comparison
Comparisonbetween
betweennumerical simulation
numerical and and
simulation experimental results:
experimental (a) pressure
results: coeffi-
(a) pressure
cient—mass flow rate, (b) total pressure efficiency—mass flow rate.
coefficient—mass flow rate, (b) total pressure efficiency—mass flow rate.

Figure
Figure 55 presents
presentsaacomparison
comparisonofofthe theMach
Machnumber
number at at
thethe impeller
impeller inlet
inlet forfor
thethe de-
design
sign condition (Q = 2.55 kg/s), where the Mach number distribution
condition (Q = 2.55 kg/s), where the Mach number distribution primarily ranged between primarily ranged be-
tween
0.5 and0.5 and
1.5. 1.5.computed
The The computed MachMach number number distribution
distribution showedshowedgoodgood agreement
agreement withwith
the
the experimental
experimental results
results reported
reported in theinliterature
the literature [24,25].
[24,25]. As shown
As shown in Figure
in Figure 6, at the6, design
at the
design condition,
condition, the Mach the number
Mach number comparison
comparison at theatimpeller
the impeller
outletoutlet
was was mainly
mainly between
between 0.4
0.4 and 0.8. The suction and pressure sides of the main blade, near the
and 0.8. The suction and pressure sides of the main blade, near the splitter blade, exhibitedsplitter blade, ex-
hibited
distinct distinct Mach number
Mach number distribution
distribution characteristics,
characteristics, which were which were consistent
consistent with ex-
with experimental
Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 17
perimental
results found results
in thefound in the
literature. In literature.
summary, In thesummary,
comparison theand
comparison
validationand validation of
of computational
computational
results for bothresults
external forcharacteristics
both external characteristics
and flow field anddetailsflowoffield details of the
the compressor com-
against
pressor against
experimental experimental
results results
demonstrated demonstrated
that the numerical that the numerical
results for externalresults for external
performance and
performance and flow
flow details were in gooddetails were inwith
agreement goodexperimental
agreement with data,experimental
indicating the data, indicating
validity of the
the validitysolution
numerical of the numerical
method used solution method
in this study.used in this study.

Figure
Figure 5.
5. Comparison
Comparison of
of impeller
impeller inlet
inlet Mach
Mach numbers
numbers under
under the
the design
design condition
condition (Q
(Q == 2.55
2.55 kg/s).
kg/s).
Processes 2024, 12, 875 7 of 16
Figure 5. Comparison of impeller inlet Mach numbers under the design condition (Q = 2.55 kg/s).

Figure
Figure6.6.Comparison
Comparisonofofimpeller
impelleroutlet
outletMach
Machnumbers
numbersunder
underthe
thedesign
designcondition
condition(Q
(Q==2.55
2.55kg/s).
kg/s).

3.3.Numerical
NumericalResults
Resultsand andDiscussions
Discussions
Theoverall
The overallefficiency
efficiencyofofa acentrifugal
centrifugalcompressor
compressorisisdefined
definedasasthe
theratio
ratioofofthe
theactual
actual
work exerted on the gas to the ideal work. It can be broken down into several
work exerted on the gas to the ideal work. It can be broken down into several components,components,
includingmechanical,
including mechanical,adiabatic,
adiabatic, and
and volumetric
volumetric efficiency.
efficiency. Higher
Highercentrifugal
centrifugalcompressor
compres-
efficiency results in lower power consumption. When the compressor is more efficient, it
sor efficiency results in lower power consumption. When the compressor is more efficient,
requires less energy input to deliver the desired mass flow rate. This can lead to energy
it requires less energy input to deliver the desired mass flow rate. This can lead to energy
savings and reduced operating costs. Centrifugal compressor efficiency also affects the
savings and reduced operating costs. Centrifugal compressor efficiency also affects the
mass flow rate. A more efficient compressor can handle a higher mass flow rate for a given
mass flow rate. A more efficient compressor can handle a higher mass flow rate for a given
power input. This means that as the efficiency increases, the compressor can compress and
power input. This means that as the efficiency increases, the compressor can compress and
deliver a larger volume of gas per unit of time. It is important to note that the efficiency of
deliver a larger volume of gas per unit of time. It is important to note that the efficiency of
a centrifugal compressor is influenced by various factors, such as design parameters, oper-
ating conditions, and maintenance. Optimizing these factors can help improve compressor
efficiency, resulting in more cost-effective and higher-performance operations.
The schematic diagram of each section in the transverse direction of the blade is
depicted in Figure 7a. In accordance with the original model, the sections of both the
main blade and splitter blade exhibited deflections at varying angles along the circumfer-
ential direction. The deflection angle was defined as positive when the circumferential
deflection direction opposed the impeller rotation direction, and four blades with different
deflection angles could be obtained. The blade tip section was deflected by +2◦ and −2◦
in models 1 and 2, respectively, while the blade root section remained unchanged. The
remaining sections conformed to the deflection angle to maintain a straight trailing edge
of the blade. The deflection of the tip section of models 3 and 4 at +2◦ served as the basis
for deflecting the section at 50% leaf height by +0.5◦ and −0.5◦ , respectively. The modified
geometry of the four models is illustrated in Figure 7b.
The total pressure ratio of the modified models under the design condition remained
relatively unchanged, as depicted in Figure 8. However, there was a significant vari-
ation in isentropic efficiency. Specifically, models 1, 3, and 4 exhibited an increase of
0.97%, 1.04%, and 0.79%, respectively, while model 2 experienced a decrease of 0.70%.
Under low flow conditions, the total pressure ratio of model 2 remained nearly un-
changed; however, its isentropic efficiency experienced a significant decrease. Conversely,
models 1, 3, and 4 exhibited notable improvements in their isentropic efficiency when
there was a slight reduction in the total pressure ratio. The total pressure ratio and isen-
tropic efficiency of models 1, 3, and 4 were enhanced under high flow conditions, whereas
model 2 experienced a significant decrease. The high flow conditions of models 1, 3, and 4
exhibited an expanded range, while model 2 experienced a slight reduction. Model 3
 a centrifugal compressor is influenced by various factors, such as design parameters, op-
erating conditions, and maintenance. Optimizing these factors can help improve compres-
sor efficiency, resulting in more cost-effective and higher-performance operations.
The schematic diagram of each section in the transverse direction of the blade is de-
picted in Figure 7a. In accordance with the original model, the sections of both the main
Processes 2024, 12, 875 blade and splitter blade exhibited deflections at varying angles along the circumferential 8 of 16
direction. The deflection angle was defined as positive when the circumferential deflection
direction opposed the impeller rotation direction, and four blades with different deflec-
tion angles could be obtained. The blade tip section was deflected by +2° and −2° in models
demonstrated the best
1 and overall performance,
2, respectively, while the bladewhereas model
root section 2 performed
remained unchanged.the Theworst. Con-
remaining
sequently, a subsequent analysis
sections conformed will
to the primarily
deflection anglefocus on comparing
to maintain andedge
a straight trailing examining the
of the blade.
Thedifferences
internal flow field deflection of the tip section
between of original
the models 3 and 4 at +2°
model andserved as the2basis
models andfor
3 deflecting
under the
the section at 50% leaf height by +0.5° and −0.5°, respectively. The modified geometry of
design condition.
the four models is illustrated in Figure 7b.

(a)

Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17

The total pressure ratio of the modified models under the design condition remained
relatively unchanged, as depicted in Figure 8. However, there was a significant variation
in isentropic efficiency. Specifically, models 1, 3, and 4 exhibited an increase of 0.97%,
1.04%, and 0.79%, respectively, while model 2 experienced a decrease of 0.70%. Under low
flow conditions, the total pressure ratio of model 2 remained nearly unchanged; however,
its isentropic efficiency experienced a significant decrease. Conversely, models 1, 3, and 4
exhibited notable improvements in their isentropic efficiency when there was a slight re-
duction in the total pressure ratio. The total pressure ratio and isentropic efficiency of
models 1, 3, and 4 were enhanced under high flow conditions, whereas model 2 experi-
enced a significant decrease.(b) The high flow conditions of models 1, 3, and 4 exhibited an
expanded range, while model 2 experienced a slight reduction. Model 3 demonstrated the
Figure
best 7. Comparison of impeller geometry differences: (a) cross sections of blade along the
Figure 7. Comparison ofoverall performance,
impeller geometry whereas model
differences:
spanwise direction, (b) impeller geometries.
(a)2cross
performed the of
sections worst.
bladeConsequently, a subse-
along the spanwise
quent analysis will primarily focus on comparing and examining the internal flow field
direction, (b) impeller geometries.
differences between the original model and models 2 and 3 under the design condition.

(a) (b)
Figure 8. Performance comparison: (a) total pressure ratio—mass flow rate, (b) isentropic effi-
Figure 8. Performance comparison: (a) total pressure ratio—mass flow rate, (b) isentropic
ciency—mass flow rate.
efficiency—mass flow rate.
Figure 9 illustrates the dimensionless meridian velocity distribution of multiple sec-
tions from the downstream to the outlet of the impeller. In the original model, the high-
speed region was mainly concentrated on the blade suction surface and near the wheel.
However, as the blade width to height ratio increased, this high-speed region shifted from
the wheel towards the blades. Eventually, a high-speed region formed on both sides of the
blade at the impeller outlet, with slightly lower speeds observed on both sides of the split-
ter blade compared to that on the main blade. There was a thin, low-speed reflux region
on one side of the casing within the flow channel, and the changes in the meridian velocity
 Processes 2024, 12, 875 9 of 16

Figure 9 illustrates the dimensionless meridian velocity distribution of multiple sections

from the downstream to the outlet of the impeller. In the original model, the high-speed
region was mainly concentrated on the blade suction surface and near the wheel. However,
as the blade width to height ratio increased, this high-speed region shifted from the wheel
towards the blades. Eventually, a high-speed region formed on both sides of the blade at
the impeller outlet, with slightly lower speeds observed on both sides of the splitter blade
compared to that on the main blade. There was a thin, low-speed reflux region on one side
of the casing within the flow channel, and the changes in the meridian velocity distribution
within this channel were mainly concentrated between sections c and d. Due to tilting towards
the rotation direction, the increased angle between the pressure surface and wheel led to a
larger high-speed area on one side of the pressure surface for each blade. As a result, a higher
speed and wider range high-speed region emerged on both sides of each blade at the impeller
outlet. In model 3, where the blades tilted against the rotation direction, causing suction-side
convexity and pressure-side concavity due to bending effects, there was a reduction in range
and speed for the high-speed region along the suction surface at the impeller outlet. Growth
inhibition was observed for the high-speed region along the pressure surface, resulting in
12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
similar but lower speeds compared to those of the original model across both sides of each
10 of 17
blade. Additionally, there was a slight reduction observed in the return flow region adjacent
to the casing.

Figure 9. Meridional velocity

Figure distribution
9. Meridional downstream
velocity distributionofdownstream
impeller passages.
of impeller passages.

The comparisonThe comparison

diagram shown diagram shown
in Figure 10 in Figure a10dimensionless
depicts depicts a dimensionless
relative relative
veloc- velocity
distribution on the main blade high-suction surface of 95%. The differences
ity distribution on the main blade high-suction surface of 95%. The differences in relative in relative
velocity distribution among the three models were mainly concentrated within the flow
velocity distribution among the three models were mainly concentrated within the flow
direction range of 0.2–0.5 and 0.9–1. The relative velocity fluctuated within a specific
range, with the largest difference occurring at wave peaks. Model 2 exhibited the highest
level of fluctuation, while model 3 showed minimal fluctuation. In general, model 3
demonstrated a more evenly distributed relative velocity along the blade passage.
 Figure 9. Meridional velocity distribution downstream of impeller passages.

Processes 2024, 12, 875 The comparison diagram shown in Figure 10 depicts a dimensionless relative 10 veloc-
of 16
ity distribution on the main blade high-suction surface of 95%. The differences in relative
velocity distribution among the three models were mainly concentrated within the flow
direction range
direction rangeofof0.2–0.5
0.2–0.5
andand 0.9–1.
0.9–1. TheThe relative
relative velocity
velocity fluctuated
fluctuated within
within a specific
a specific range,
with
range,the largest
with difference
the largest occurring
difference at waveatpeaks.
occurring waveModel
peaks. 2Model
exhibited the highest
2 exhibited level of
the highest
fluctuation, while model
level of fluctuation, 3 showed
while model minimal
3 showed fluctuation.
minimal In general, model
fluctuation. 3 demonstrated
In general, model 3
ademonstrated
more evenly adistributed
more evenly relative velocity
distributed along the
relative bladealong
velocity passage.
the blade passage.

Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

Figure 10. Relative velocity distribution on the suction surface side of the main blade at 95% spans.

Figure
Figure 11
11 shows
shows the
the non-dimensional
non-dimensional load
load distribution
distribution on
on the
the main
main blade
blade surface
surface at
at
50%
50% and
and 95%
95% blade
blade height.
height. At
Ataa blade
blade height
height of
of 50%,
50%, all
all three
three models
models exhibited
exhibited aa similar
similar
trend in
trend in load
load distribution,
distribution, with
with the
the pressure
pressure difference between the two sides sides of
of the
the blade
blade
gradually increasing
gradually increasingtowards
towardsits
itsmaximum
maximumvaluevalueinin the
the downstream
downstream region.
region. However,
However, at
at a blade height of 95%, noticeable differences in load distribution were observed
a blade height of 95%, noticeable differences in load distribution were observed in the in the
downstream region. Model
downstream Model 33 showed
showed thethe smallest
smallest pressure
pressure difference
difference between
between both
both sides
sides
of the
of the blade. Additionally,
Additionally, model
model 33 demonstrated
demonstrated aa moremore gradual
gradual attenuation
attenuation trend
trend for
for
pressure differences near the trailing edge of the blade.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 11.
11.Pressure
Pressuredistribution
distributionand
anddifference
differencebetween
between the suction
the surface
suction and
surface pressure
and surface
pressure of
surface
the main blade at two spans: (a) pressure distribution at 50% spans, (b) pressure distribution at 95%
of the main blade at two spans: (a) pressure distribution at 50% spans, (b) pressure distribution at
spans.
95% spans.
Figure 12 illustrates
Figure 12 illustratesthe
theinternal
internal entropy
entropy distribution
distribution of the
of the flowflow channel
channel at ablade
at a 95% 95%
blade
heightheight section.
section. The regions
The regions with
with the the highest
highest entropy entropy
amongamong themodels
the three three models were
were mainly
mainly located in the middle of the flow channel, gradually decreasing downstream. Fur-
thermore, there was a slight increase in entropy at the impeller outlet, with model 2 ex-
hibiting the highest entropy, while model 3 showed a significant reduction compared to
that of the original model. From the above analysis of the flow field in the impeller along
the flow direction, it can be seen that the different deflection angles of the blades mainly
affected the flow downstream of the blade passage near the impeller outlet.
 (a) (b)
Figure 11. Pressure distribution and difference between the suction surface and pressure surface of
the main blade at two spans: (a) pressure distribution at 50% spans, (b) pressure distribution at 95%
Processes 2024, 12, 875 11 of 16
spans.

Figure 12 illustrates the internal entropy distribution of the flow channel at a 95%
blade
locatedheight section.
in the middle Theofregions
the flowwith the highest
channel, entropydecreasing
gradually among thedownstream.
three models were
Furthermore,
mainly located in the middle of the flow channel, gradually decreasing
there was a slight increase in entropy at the impeller outlet, with downstream. Fur-
model 2 exhibiting the
thermore, there was a slight increase in entropy at the impeller outlet, with model 2 ex-
highest entropy, while model 3 showed a significant reduction compared to that of the
hibiting the highest entropy, while model 3 showed a significant reduction compared to
original model. From the above analysis of the flow field in the impeller along the flow
that of the original model. From the above analysis of the flow field in the impeller along
direction, it can be seen that the different deflection angles of the blades mainly affected the
the flow direction, it can be seen that the different deflection angles of the blades mainly
flow downstream
affected of the blade
the flow downstream passage
of the near thenear
blade passage impeller outlet.outlet.
the impeller

Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Figure 12. Entropy distribution at 95% spans. 12 of 17
Figure 12. Entropy distribution at 95% spans.

Figure 13 illustrates the distribution of the dimensionless radial velocity (average cir-
Figure 13mass)
cumferential illustrates theimpeller
at the distribution of the
outlet dimensionless
along radial
the spanwise velocity (average
direction. In the tipcir-clearance
cumferential mass) at the impeller outlet along the spanwise direction. In the tip
region, all three models exhibited a backflow region. However, model 3 exhibited a smaller clearance
region, allregion
backflow three with
models exhibited
lower a backflow
backflow region. However,
speed compared model
to that of 3 exhibited
the original model,a while
smaller backflow region with lower backflow speed compared to that of the original
model 2 showed the opposite trend. The radial velocity of model 3 experienced a signifi-
model, while model 2 showed the opposite trend. The radial velocity of model 3 experi-
cant increase from 65% to 95% of the blade height, eventually reaching relative stability.
enced a significant increase from 65% to 95% of the blade height, eventually reaching rel-
Subsequently, the values gradually
ative stability. Subsequently, the valuesdecreased and became
gradually decreased and more
became uniformly distributed in
more uniformly
the spanwise direction. As shown in Figure 14, model 3 displayed a
distributed in the spanwise direction. As shown in Figure 14, model 3 displayed a nar-narrower fluctuation
range
rower fluctuation range in the circumferential direction and an overall more uniform dis-of radial
in the circumferential direction and an overall more uniform distribution
velocity
tributionatof the impeller
radial velocityoutlet. This hadoutlet.
at the impeller a significant
This had impact on flow
a significant stability
impact on flowwhen the
fluid entered
stability whenthethe vaneless diffuser.
fluid entered the vaneless diffuser.

Figure 13.
Figure 13. Radial
Radialvelocity
velocitydistribution at impeller
distribution outletoutlet
at impeller alongalong
spanwise direction.
spanwise direction.
Processes 2024, 12, 875 12 of 16

Figure 13. Radial velocity distribution at impeller outlet along spanwise direction.

Figure 14. Radial velocity distribution along circumferential direction of 50% span at impeller outlet.

Figure 15a illustrates the distribution of blade angles and relative airflow angles along
the flow direction in the original model. The figure shows that the blade angle of the
original model had a uniform distribution at different blade heights. In the upstream
region of the flow channel, there was a slight disparity between the relative airflow angle
and blade angle, primarily noticeable in the lower section (10–50% span) of the blade
height. Downstream, there was a significant increase in difference between the relative
airflow angle and blade angle for the high blade height (80–90% span). At the outlet of
the flow channel, except for a high blade height of 80% span, the discrepancy between
the relative airflow angle and blade angle further escalated. The analysis of the variation
between the blade angle and relative airflow angle for all three models at each specific blade
height, as depicted in Figure 15b, indicated that the disparities primarily manifested within
the intermediate to lower regions of the flow channel at a 10% span position. Model 3
demonstrated a minimal difference, indicating greater stability in its flow behavior during
this period compared to those of the other models. The differences among all three models
rapidly increased near the outlet region of the flow channel. However, model 3 exhibited
the least change between its respective values for both angles compared to the other models.
The difference among the three models was minimal at a blade height of 80%, while it
exhibited significant fluctuations in the middle and downstream regions of the flow channel
at a blade height of 90%. The reduction in the discrepancy between the blade angle and
relative flow angle in the vicinity of the flow channel outlet of model 3 signified that the
bending structure could effectively impede flow separation at said outlet, thereby further
impacting efficiency.
The distribution of absolute airflow angles at the inlet of the vaneless diffuser is shown
in Figure 16. Model 3 demonstrated a more uniform distribution in the circumferential
direction. Model 2, however, demonstrated a decrease in airflow angle on the side of the
wheel cover, while showing an increase on the side of the wheel. This resulted in a more
pronounced gradient along the circumferential direction. The presence of a non-uniform
flow at the vaneless diffuser inlet enhanced the probability of internal flow separation.
Figure 17 illustrates the distribution of dimensionless meridional velocity (average circum-
ferential mass) on the meridional surface of the vaneless diffuser. Model 2 experienced a
wider range of flow separation on its wheel cover side, while also exhibiting a significant
increase in meridional velocity on its wheel side. The consequence of this phenomenon
 3 demonstrated a minimal difference, indicating greater stability in its flow behavior dur-
ing this period compared to those of the other models. The differences among all three
models rapidly increased near the outlet region of the flow channel. However, model 3
exhibited the least change between its respective values for both angles compared to the
Processes 2024, 12, 875 13 of 16
other models. The difference among the three models was minimal at a blade height of
80%, while it exhibited significant fluctuations in the middle and downstream regions of
the flow channel at a blade height of 90%. The reduction in the discrepancy between the
was an amplified
blade angle andtransverse
relative flowvelocity
anglegradient within of
in the vicinity thethe
vaneless diffuser,outlet
flow channel thereby
of exerting
model 3
an
signified that the bending structure could effectively impede flow separation at separation
influence on the efficiency. Model 3, in contrast, exhibited a reduction in flow said outlet,
on its wheel
thereby cover
further side, resulting
impacting in a more uniform distribution of transverse velocity.
efficiency.

Processes 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17

(a)

(b)
Figure15.
Figure 15. Blade
Blade angle
angleand
andrelative
relativeflow angle
flow distribution
angle andand
distribution difference: (a) blade
difference: angleangle
(a) blade and rela-
and
tive flow angle distribution of the baseline along the streamwise location, (b) difference between
relative flow angle distribution of the baseline along the streamwise location, (b) difference between
blade angle and relative flow angle for the three models at different spans (the dashed line is the
blade angle and relative flow angle for the three models at different spans (the dashed line is the
zero scale line).
zero scale line).
The distribution of absolute airflow angles at the inlet of the vaneless diffuser is
shown in Figure 16. Model 3 demonstrated a more uniform distribution in the circumfer-
ential direction. Model 2, however, demonstrated a decrease in airflow angle on the side
of the wheel cover, while showing an increase on the side of the wheel. This resulted in a
more pronounced gradient along the circumferential direction. The presence of a non-
uniform flow at the vaneless diffuser inlet enhanced the probability of internal flow sepa-
ration. Figure 17 illustrates the distribution of dimensionless meridional velocity (average
4, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 17
Processes
Processes2024,
2024, 12,
12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
875 15 of
14 of 16

Figure 16. Absolute flow angle distribution at inlet of vaneless diffuser.

Figure
Figure Absolute
16.16. flowflow
Absolute angle distribution
angle at inletatofinlet
distribution vaneless diffuser.diffuser.
of vaneless

Figure 17. Meridional

Figurevelocity distribution
17. Meridional velocityon meridional
distribution onsurface of vaneless
meridional surface ofdiffuser.
vaneless diffuser.
Figure 17. Meridional velocity distribution on meridional surface of vaneless diffuser.
4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
In this study, the aerodynamic performance of a centrifugal compressor with leaned
and bowed 3D bladesInwas thisinvestigated. There was aperformance
study, the aerodynamic significant change in isentropic
of a centrifugal effi-
compressor with leane
ciency of the modified models
and bowed under design
3D blades conditions.There
was investigated. Specifically, models 1, change
was a significant 3, and 4in isentropic effi
Processes 2024, 12, 875 15 of 16

4. Conclusions
In this study, the aerodynamic performance of a centrifugal compressor with leaned
and bowed 3D blades was investigated. There was a significant change in isentropic
efficiency of the modified models under design conditions. Specifically, models 1, 3, and 4
experienced an increase of 0.97%, 1.04%, and 0.79%, respectively, while model 2 experienced
a decrease of 0.70%. The findings obtained by this study can be summarized as follows:
(a) The leaned and bowed 3D blades primarily modified the spanwise curvature of the
blade. When a spanwise section profile was rotated at a certain angle along the
rotating axis of the impeller, the curvature along the spanwise direction of the leading
edge changed little due to the large spanwise height of the blade. As a result, there
was a negligible influence on the upstream flow. On the contrary, the spanwise height
of the trailing edge of the blade was smaller, resulting in a relatively greater structural
variation at the trailing edge. As a consequence, the flow both downstream and at the
outlet of the blade channel was significantly influenced.
(b) Due to the inclination of the blade tip towards the suction surface side and the
deviation of the 50% spanwise section profile towards the suction surface side, the
blade was concave towards the pressure surface side, the flow was gradually lifted
from the blade root to the blade tip in the downstream to outlet area of the flow
channel. The load on the trailing edge of the blade was reduced, and the flow was
more closely aligned with the blade. The flow separation was reduced, and the outlet
velocity of the impeller was more evenly distributed along the spanwise direction. At
the same time, the larger radial velocity gradient near the blade tip area suppressed the
backflow on the shroud side, which made the flow at the impeller outlet more stable.
(c) The improvement in impeller outlet flow made the inlet flow of the diffuser more
stable, the flow separation on the shroud side decreased, and the spanwise velocity
distribution was more uniform, resulting in higher diffusion efficiency.
The current research in this article was based on numerical simulation results. In
the future, the reliability of the simulation method and modification method will be veri-
fied through experiments. At the same time, thermodynamic discussions will be added
to further analyze the results in order to better explain the mechanism of compressor
performance improvement.

Author Contributions: Y.Z. and Z.L. conceived and wrote the paper; Z.L., W.K. and G.S. analyzed
the data; F.Z., C.Z. and F.K. contributed the reagents/materials/analysis tools. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by the Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of
China under Grant No. LTGY24E060001.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.
Conflicts of Interest: Authors Wanmin Kong, Genqiang Shao, Fujian Zhu, Chaowei Zhang, and
Feiyue Kong are employed by the company Zhejiang Mingzhen Electric&Electronic Co., Ltd.; the
remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or
financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References
1. Yue, W.; Huanhuan, B.; Jianqin, F.; Xun, W.; Jingping, L. Review of recent developments in fuel cell centrifugal air compressor:
Comprehensive performance and testing techniques. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2023, 4, 262.
2. Jı̆rí, V.; Pavel, N. Identification of Aerodynamic Tonal Noise Sources of a Centrifugal Compressor of a Turbocharger for Large
Stationary Engines. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 5964. [CrossRef]
3. Zhehong, L.; Wenbin, C.; Xinxue, Y.; Yikun, W. Experimental Investigation on the Noise Characteristics of a Squirrel-Cage Fan
with Different Blade Lengths. Energies 2023, 16, 69.
4. Hergt, A.; Klinner, J.; Wellner, J.; Willert, C.; Beversdorff, M. The present challenge of transonic compressor blade design.
J. Turbomach. 2019, 141, 4043329. [CrossRef]
Processes 2024, 12, 875 16 of 16

5. Rosic, B.; Xu, L. Blade Lean and Shroud Leakage Flows in Low Aspect Ratio Turbines. In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo
2008: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, Berlin, Germany, 9–13 June 2012.
6. Arkadiusz, B.; Kirill, K.; Robert, J.; Rafał, B. Numerical Study on Sensitivity of Turbofan Engine Performance to Blade Count of
Centrifugal Compressor Impeller. Energies 2023, 16, 5251. [CrossRef]
7. Huanxin, Z.; Lei, T.; Dangguo, Y.; Bing, L.; Honggang, F.; Hongshuai, L. Optimization Design and Pressure Fluctuation
Suppression Based on Orthogonal Method for a Centrifugal Compressor. Machines 2023, 11, 559. [CrossRef]
8. Oyama, A.; Liou, M.S.; Obayashi, S. High-fidelity swept and leaned rotor blade design optimization using evolutionary algorithm.
In Proceedings of the 16th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 23–26 June 2003; p. 4091.
9. Hiradate, K.; Kobayashi, H.; Sugimura, K.; Ito, T.; Nishida, H. Proposal and experimental verification of design guidelines
for centrifugal compressor impellers with curvilinear element blades to improve compressor performance. J. Turbomach. 2015,
137, 051008. [CrossRef]
10. Hiradate, K.; Kobayashi, H.; Nishioka, T. Investigation on effect of curvilinear element blades on centrifugal impeller performance.
In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Charlotte, NC, USA, 26–30 June 2017; p. 63213.
11. Yang, L.; Jiatong, L.; Xiangli, L.; Zhehong, L.; Guohui, L.; Lixing, Z. Large eddy simulation of particle hydrodynamic characteristics
in a dense gas-particle bubbling fluidized bed. Powder Technol. 2024, 433, 119285.
12. Li, Z.; Luo, P.; Zhu, M. Effect of Motor Installation Heights on the Performance of an Isolated Centrifugal Fan. Processes 2023,
11, 2116. [CrossRef]
13. Li, Z.; Ye, X.; Wei, Y. Investigation on Vortex Characteristics of a Multi-Blade Centrifugal Fan near Volute Outlet Region. Processes
2020, 8, 1240. [CrossRef]
14. Li, Z.; Dou, H.; Lin, P. Design for a Squirrel Cage Fan with Double Arc Blade. J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 2020, 13, 881–891. [CrossRef]
15. Li, Z.; Luo, P.; Zhu, M.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Z. Surrogate model on the extension operation range of an isolated centrifugal fan. J. Appl.
Fluid Mech. 2024, 17, 900–911.
16. Xu, C.; Amano, R. Aerodynamic and structure considerations in centrifugal compressor design blade lean effects. In Proceedings
of the ASME Turbo Expo, Copenhagen, Denmark, 11–15 June 2012; p. 68207.
17. Sugimura, K.; Kobayashi, H.; Nishida, H. Design optimization and experimental verification of centrifugal compressors with
curvilinear element blades. In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Copenhagen, Denmark, 11–15 June 2012; p. 69162.
18. Shuhao, W.; Donghai, J.; Yin, Z.; Kun, W.; Xingmin, G. A forward-curved blade centrifugal compressor for anode recirculation in
proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2024, 53, 736–748.
19. Ertang, L.; Yingxue, Y. Blade design and analysis of centrifugal compressors for the transcritical carbon dioxide refrigeration
cycle. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2023, 45, 102884.
20. Tsukamoto, K.; Hiradate, K.; Sakamoto, K.; Chiba, H.; Shinkawa, Y. Efficiency increase in centrifugal compressor with open
impeller by using curvilinear element blade. In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Montreal, QC, Canada, 15–19 June 2015;
p. 43193.
21. Zhenfang, F.; Hongkun, L.; Hongwei, C.; Jiannan, D. Research on Running Status Monitoring and Rotating Blade Crack Detection
of Large-Scale Centrifugal Compressor Based on Blade Tip Timing Technique. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2023, 72, 3501011.
22. Jang, C.M.; Abudus, S.; Kim, K.Y. Optimal design of swept, leaned and skewed blades in a transonic axial compressor. In
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Barcelona, Spain, 8–11 May 2006; p. 90384.
23. Oh, J.S.; Buckley, C.W.; Agrawal, G.L. Numerical study on the effects of blade lean on high-pressure centrifugal impeller
performance. In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 6–10 June 2011; p. 45383.
24. Eisenlohr, G.; Hartmut, K.; Franz, A.R.; Valentin, T. Investigation of the flow through a high pressure ratio centrifugal impeller. In
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 3–6 June 2002; p. 30394.
25. Luca, M.; Ernesto, C.; Sebastiano, M. Assessment of various turbulence models in a high pressure ratio centrifugal compressor
with an object oriented CFD code. In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, Charlotte, NC, USA, 26–30 June 2017; p. 63213.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.