Compares hydraulic performance of axial-flow pumps using open-source and commercial solvers, suggesting validity for foam-Extend software.
In this paper, flow analysis of the open-source based hydraulic performance evalutaion and its validation of axial-flow pump are proceeded using the foam-Extend and Ansys CFX, which one is open-source solver and other one is commercial solver. To check validity of the open-source mesh generator, the cf-Mesh which can construct hex-dominant mesh is selected as unstructed mesh generator and the TurboGrid is selected as the counterpart. There are three cases to compare the performance result of the open-source solver, which is called as the CFX with TurboGrid, the foam-Extend with TurboGrid, and foam-Extend with cf-Mesh. by the performance comparing and flow structure analysis, the flow nearby IGV and Impeller is slightly different but can be accepted. However, nearby the diffuser vane, the foam-Extend with TurboGrid case cannot predict the separation nearby the trailing edge. Because of the differences of flow contour and performances are acceptable, the foam-Extend can be selected as flow analysis program of axial-flow pump with well-defined flow interfaces.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: