IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v310y2024ics0360544224029414.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncertainty quantification of the inlet boundary conditions in a supercritical CO2 centrifugal compressor based on the non-intrusive polynomial chaos

Author

Listed:
  • Yue, Wenhao
  • Yang, Chen
  • Shi, Chenyue
  • Yang, Jinguang
  • Liao, Naibing

Abstract

Given the sensitivity of supercritical carbon dioxide centrifugal compressors performance to inlet boundary parameter fluctuations, this study focuses on the uncertainty quantification of the inlet boundary conditions. Non-intrusive polynomial chaos surrogate models were developed for both performance parameters and flow field of a supercritical carbon dioxide centrifugal compressor. Sensitivity and correlation analyses revealed that inlet total temperature is the primary influencing parameter. Fluctuations of 1.37 % in total temperature and 6.75 % in total pressure result in changes of 40.94 %, 18.57 %, and 1.77 % in mass flow rate, total pressure ratio, and total to total isentropic efficiency, respectively. Flow field statistical analysis shows that inlet uncertainties nonlinearly impact the dryness fraction and relative Mach number distributions near the blade leading edge, while the density in the condensation zone on the suction side of the leading edge is less affected. Error bands in static pressure on blade surfaces highlight significant variations, particularly at 90 % spanwise on the blade suction side, where shocks and supersonic flow induce prominent disturbances. This study offers a preliminary methodology and theoretical guidance for robust aerodynamic optimization and operational strategies of supercritical carbon dioxide centrifugal compressors.

Suggested Citation

  • Yue, Wenhao & Yang, Chen & Shi, Chenyue & Yang, Jinguang & Liao, Naibing, 2024. "Uncertainty quantification of the inlet boundary conditions in a supercritical CO2 centrifugal compressor based on the non-intrusive polynomial chaos," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:310:y:2024:i:c:s0360544224029414
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.133166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544224029414
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2024.133166?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhao, Quanbin & Xu, Jiayuan & Hou, Min & Chong, Daotong & Wang, Jinshi & Chen, Weixiong, 2024. "Dynamic characteristic analysis of SCO2 Brayton cycle under different turbine back pressure modes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 293(C).
    2. Li, Yuzhe & Zhang, Enbo & Feng, Jiaqi & Zhang, Xu & Yue, Liangyuan & Bai, Bofeng, 2024. "Reduced-dimensional prediction method for the axial aerodynamic forces in the off-design operation of near-critical CO2 centrifugal compressors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).
    3. Kriz, Daniel & Vlcek, Petr & Frybort, Otakar, 2024. "Numerical studies of sCO2 Brayton cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    4. Romei, Alessandro & Gaetani, Paolo & Persico, Giacomo, 2022. "Computational fluid-dynamic investigation of a centrifugal compressor with inlet guide vanes for supercritical carbon dioxide power systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    5. Jeong, Yongju & Son, Seongmin & Cho, Seong Kuk & Baik, Seungjoon & Lee, Jeong Ik, 2020. "Evaluation of supercritical CO2 compressor off-design performance prediction methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    6. Tang, Xinzi & Wang, Zhe & Xiao, Peng & Peng, Ruitao & Liu, Xiongwei, 2020. "Uncertainty quantification based optimization of centrifugal compressor impeller for aerodynamic robustness under stochastic operational conditions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    7. Sudret, Bruno, 2008. "Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(7), pages 964-979.
    8. Xia, Zhiheng & Luo, Jiaqi & Liu, Feng, 2019. "Statistical evaluation of performance impact of flow variations for a transonic compressor rotor blade," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    9. D'Alessandro, Valerio & Montelpare, Sergio & Ricci, Renato & Zoppi, Andrea, 2017. "Numerical modeling of the flow over wind turbine airfoils by means of Spalart–Allmaras local correlation based transition model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 402-419.
    10. Shields, Michael D. & Zhang, Jiaxin, 2016. "The generalization of Latin hypercube sampling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 96-108.
    11. Liang, Chengbin & Zheng, Qun & Lao, Xingsheng & Jiang, Yuting, 2024. "Enhancing robustness and accuracy of supercritical CO2 compressor performance prediction in closed Brayton cycles: A thermodynamic properties-based numerical method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    12. Blatman, Géraud & Sudret, Bruno, 2010. "Efficient computation of global sensitivity indices using sparse polynomial chaos expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1216-1229.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cheng, Kai & Lu, Zhenzhou, 2018. "Sparse polynomial chaos expansion based on D-MORPH regression," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 323(C), pages 17-30.
    2. Brown, S. & Beck, J. & Mahgerefteh, H. & Fraga, E.S., 2013. "Global sensitivity analysis of the impact of impurities on CO2 pipeline failure," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 43-54.
    3. Pronzato, Luc, 2019. "Sensitivity analysis via Karhunen–Loève expansion of a random field model: Estimation of Sobol’ indices and experimental design," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 93-109.
    4. Li, Jinxing & Liu, Tianyuan & Zhu, Guangya & Li, Yunzhu & Xie, Yonghui, 2023. "Uncertainty quantification and aerodynamic robust optimization of turbomachinery based on graph learning methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    5. Oladyshkin, S. & Nowak, W., 2012. "Data-driven uncertainty quantification using the arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 179-190.
    6. Wu, Zeping & Wang, Donghui & Okolo N, Patrick & Hu, Fan & Zhang, Weihua, 2016. "Global sensitivity analysis using a Gaussian Radial Basis Function metamodel," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 171-179.
    7. Deman, G. & Kerrou, J. & Benabderrahmane, H. & Perrochet, P., 2015. "Sensitivity analysis of groundwater lifetime expectancy to hydro-dispersive parameters: The case of ANDRA Meuse/Haute-Marne site," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 276-286.
    8. Wong, Chun Yui & Seshadri, Pranay & Parks, Geoffrey, 2021. "Extremum sensitivity analysis with polynomial Monte Carlo filtering," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    9. Dubreuil, S. & Berveiller, M. & Petitjean, F. & Salaün, M., 2014. "Construction of bootstrap confidence intervals on sensitivity indices computed by polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 263-275.
    10. Shang, Yue & Nogal, Maria & Teixeira, Rui & Wolfert, A.R. (Rogier) M., 2024. "Extreme-oriented sensitivity analysis using sparse polynomial chaos expansion. Application to train–track–bridge systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    11. Cremona, Marzia A. & Liu, Binbin & Hu, Yang & Bruni, Stefano & Lewis, Roger, 2016. "Predicting railway wheel wear under uncertainty of wear coefficient, using universal kriging," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 49-59.
    12. Alsawy, Tariq & Elsayed, Mohamed L. & Mohammed, Ramy H. & Mesalhy, Osama, 2024. "Accuracy assessment of the turbomachinery performance maps correction models used in dynamic characteristics of supercritical CO2 Brayton power cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    13. Steiner, M. & Bourinet, J.-M. & Lahmer, T., 2019. "An adaptive sampling method for global sensitivity analysis based on least-squares support vector regression," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 323-340.
    14. Palar, Pramudita Satria & Zuhal, Lavi Rizki & Shimoyama, Koji & Tsuchiya, Takeshi, 2018. "Global sensitivity analysis via multi-fidelity polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 175-190.
    15. Daneshkhah, Alireza & Bedford, Tim, 2013. "Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of system availability using Gaussian processes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 82-93.
    16. Miftakhova, Alena, 2021. "Global sensitivity analysis for optimal climate policies: Finding what truly matters," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    17. Awad, Mahmoud, 2017. "Analyzing sensitivity measures using moment-matching technique," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 90-99.
    18. Lu, Ning & Li, Yan-Feng & Mi, Jinhua & Huang, Hong-Zhong, 2024. "AMFGP: An active learning reliability analysis method based on multi-fidelity Gaussian process surrogate model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    19. Barry Anderson & Emanuele Borgonovo & Marzio Galeotti & Roberto Roson, 2014. "Uncertainty in Climate Change Modeling: Can Global Sensitivity Analysis Be of Help?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 271-293, February.
    20. Wang, Zhenqiang & Jia, Gaofeng, 2020. "Augmented sample-based approach for efficient evaluation of risk sensitivity with respect to epistemic uncertainty in distribution parameters," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:310:y:2024:i:c:s0360544224029414. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.