Pump Lab

Manuel. A Urbina

St. Mary’s University

Thermodynamics and Fluids Laboratory

Spring 2025

Abstract

This experiment investigates the performance characteristics of a centrifugal pump

operating at various speeds. By systematically adjusting the pump’s rotational speed to
1500, 2000, and 2500 revolutions per minute (RPM), we were able to observe how changes
in speed affect fluid flow rate, pressure, torque, power, and overall efficiency. Through
careful measurement and data analysis, it was determined that both the flow rate and
efficiency increased with pump speed, although diminishing returns began to emerge at
higher speeds. These results provide valuable insight into how centrifugal pumps behave in
real-world applications and highlight the importance of matching pump speed to system
demands for maximum efficiency.

1. Introduction

Centrifugal pumps are widely used in industrial and mechanical systems to transport fluids
by converting rotational mechanical energy into hydrodynamic energy. These pumps are
critical in water treatment facilities, chemical processing plants, and HVAC systems,
among many others. Understanding the relationship between the pump’s operating
conditions and its performance is crucial for optimizing energy use and ensuring reliable
operation. The primary goal of this experiment was to explore how the speed of a
centrifugal pump affects its performance metrics, including pressure differential, flow rate,
shaft power, water power, and efficiency. By analyzing these parameters at three different
speeds—1500, 2000, and 2500 RPM—we aimed to establish trends and determine the
most effective operating conditions for the pump.

2. Methodology

The experiment was conducted using a centrifugal pump test rig equipped with sensors to
measure torque, rotational speed, and pressure at three points: the inlet, the outlet, and
the throat of the flow path. The pump was tested at three different speeds—1500, 2000,
and 2500 RPM—under controlled conditions. For each speed setting, readings were taken
multiple times to ensure accuracy and consistency. The torque applied to the pump shaft
was measured directly, allowing for the calculation of shaft power using the formula
Flow rate was determined indirectly through the use of pressure differential measurements
and known cross-sectional areas of the inlet and throat. Specifically, Bernoulli’s equation
and the continuity equation were applied to calculate the volumetric flow rate. The cross-
sectional area of the inlet was 0.000581069 m² and that of the throat was 0.000201062 m².
Using these values, the velocity of the fluid and subsequently the flow rate could be
deduced.

Water power—also referred to as hydraulic power—was calculated using the product of the
pressure head and flow rate, while the overall pump efficiency was calculated as the ratio
of water power to shaft power, expressed as a percentage:

This methodology allowed for a comprehensive evaluation of how the centrifugal pump’s
performance evolved with speed.

3. Results

The collected data revealed clear trends in pump behavior. At 1500 RPM, the average
torque was measured to be approximately 0.33 Nm, leading to a shaft power of about
52.25 watts. The corresponding average pressure differential was 0.14 bar, and the flow
rate was calculated at 3.41×10⁻⁶ m³/s. These conditions produced a relatively low
efficiency of about 9.68%.

As the speed increased to 2000 RPM, the torque rose to 0.44 Nm, and shaft power
increased to approximately 91.89 watts. This higher speed resulted in a greater pressure
differential of 0.29 bar and a higher flow rate of 4.34×10⁻⁶ m³/s. The efficiency improved
significantly to 17.91%, indicating that the pump was converting more of its mechanical
input into useful hydraulic energy.

At the highest speed tested—2500 RPM—the pump exhibited its best performance. The
torque reached 0.68 Nm, and shaft power climbed to 182.33 watts. Pressure differential
and flow rate also peaked at 0.44 bar and 5.48×10⁻⁶ m³/s, respectively. The pump efficiency
at this speed was calculated to be 25.31%, showing a substantial improvement over the
lower-speed conditions.
 1500
Pump Speed (RPM) Torque (Nm) P1 (bar) P2 (bar) P3 (bar) Wdot (W) Q (delta)P
1500 0.34 0.1 -0.09 0.06 53 4.05824E-06 m^2 0.19
1502 0.34 0.08 -0.07 0.11 53 3.60584E-06 m^2 0.15
1503 0.34 0.07 -0.06 0.16 53 3.35686E-06 m^2 0.13
1504 0.3 0.04 -0.04 0.22 50 2.63334E-06 m^2 0.08

2000
Torque (Nm) Pump Speed (RPM) Power (W) P1 (bar) P2 (bar) P3 (bar) (delta)P Q
0.49 1999 100 0.19 -0.16 0.1 0.35 5.50802E-06 m^2
0.48 2000 101 0.17 -0.15 0.15 0.32 5.26667E-06 m^2
0.47 2002 98 0.15 -0.13 0.2 0.28 4.92652E-06 m^2
0.45 2003 96 0.13 -0.11 0.25 0.24 4.56107E-06 m^2
0.45 2004 93 0.11 -0.1 0.3 0.21 4.26649E-06 m^2
0.43 2002 90 0.09 -0.08 0.35 0.17 3.83871E-06 m^2
0.42 2003 87 0.08 -0.07 0.39 0.15 3.60584E-06 m^2
0.39 2002 83 0.06 -0.05 0.45 0.11 3.08786E-06 m^2
0.37 2001 79 0.04 -0.04 0.49 0.08 2.63334E-06 m^2

2500
Torque (Nm) Pump Speed (RPM)
Power (W) P1 (bar) P2 (bar) P3 (bar) (delta)p Q
0.78 2501 204 0.3 -0.25 0.15 0.55 6.90466E-06 m^2
0.77 2502 204 0.28 -0.23 0.2 0.51 6.64885E-06 m^2
0.77 2503 202 0.26 -0.22 0.26 0.48 6.45033E-06 m^2
0.75 2503 198 0.24 -0.2 0.31 0.44 6.17572E-06 m^2
0.75 2505 198 0.23 -0.19 0.35 0.42 6.03373E-06 m^2
0.73 2459 193 0.21 -0.18 0.4 0.39 5.81425E-06 m^2
0.72 2500 189 0.19 -0.16 0.45 0.35 5.50802E-06 m^2
0.7 2501 186 0.18 -0.15 0.5 0.33 5.34833E-06 m^2
0.69 2503 185 0.15 -0.12 0.56 0.27 4.83775E-06 m^2
0.68 2505 180 0.13 -0.11 0.6 0.24 4.56107E-06 m^2
0.65 2499 171 0.11 -0.09 0.65 0.2 4.16367E-06 m^2
0.63 2501 166 0.1 -0.08 0.7 0.18 3.95E-06 m^2
0.6 2503 158 0.08 -0.07 0.75 0.15 3.60584E-06 m^2
0.58 2502 151 0.06 -0.05 0.8 0.11 3.08786E-06 m^2
0.54 2501 182 0.04 -0.03 0.85 0.07 2.46326E-06 m^2

Cross sectional Cross Sectional

inlet throat
581.0689772 201.0619298
0.000581069 m^2 0.000201062 m^2

ha Wf Wshaft Efficeny
0.019416345 0.000771066 m^2 53.38 14.44484785 m^2
0.015328693 0.000540876 m^2 53.38 10.13256641 m^2
0.013284867 0.000436391 m^2 53.38 8.175185176 m^2
0.008175303 0.000210667 m^2 53.38 3.946549466 m^2
ha Wf Wshaft Efficeny
5.629E-07 m^2 0.001927805 m^2 71.1733333 27.08606399 m^2
5.38208E-07 0.001685334 m^2 71.1733333 23.6792968 m^2
5.03447E-07 0.001379425 m^2 71.1733333 19.3812097 m^2
4.66102E-07 0.001094657 m^2 71.1733333 15.38015443 m^2
4.36E-07 m^2 0.000895963 m^2 71.1733333 12.58846497 m^2
3.92283E-07 0.000652581 m^2 71.1733333 9.168899567 m^2
3.68486E-07 0.000540876 m^2 71.1733333 7.599424806 m^2
3.15552E-07 0.000339665 m^2 71.1733333 4.772356311 m^2
2.691E-07 m^2 0.000210667 m^2 71.1733333 2.9599121 m^2

ha Wf Wshaft Efficeny
0.0562052 m^2 0.0037976 m^2 88.96667 42.6852525 m^2
0.0521176 m^2 0.0033909 m^2 88.96667 38.11439976 m^2
0.0490518 m^2 0.0030962 m^2 88.96667 34.80131677 m^2
0.0449642 m^2 0.0027173 m^2 88.96667 30.54308039 m^2
0.0429203 m^2 0.0025342 m^2 88.96667 28.48444462 m^2
0.0398546 m^2 0.0022676 m^2 88.96667 25.48770495 m^2
0.035767 m^2 0.0019278 m^2 88.96667 21.66885119 m^2
0.0337231 m^2 0.0017649 m^2 88.96667 19.83831265 m^2
0.0275916 m^2 0.0013062 m^2 88.96667 14.68180551 m^2
0.0245259 m^2 0.0010947 m^2 88.96667 12.30412354 m^2
0.0204383 m^2 0.0008327 m^2 88.96667 9.360063909 m^2
0.0183944 m^2 0.000711 m^2 88.96667 7.99176267 m^2
0.0153287 m^2 0.0005409 m^2 88.96667 6.079539845 m^2
0.011241 m^2 0.0003397 m^2 88.96667 3.817885049 m^2
0.0071534 m^2 0.0001724 m^2 88.96667 1.93812097 m^2

Units are wrong

A plot of pump head rise, ha, versus flow rate, Q, for each motor speed, N.
A plot of pump efficiency, n, versus flow rate, l, for each motor speed, N.

Disscussion

The results of this experiment align with theoretical expectations for centrifugal pump
behavior. As the rotational speed of the pump increased, more energy was imparted to
the fluid, resulting in higher flow rates and greater pressure heads. This increase in
mechanical input energy also led to a rise in shaft power, but not all of this energy was
efficiently transferred to the fluid. At lower speeds, the pump struggled to generate
sufficient head and flow, leading to lower efficiency. As speed increased, the pump
became more capable of moving the fluid effectively, and efficiency improved
accordingly.

However, the data also indicated that efficiency gains begin to taper off as the speed
continues to increase. While performance improved up to 2500 RPM, the relative
increase in efficiency from 2000 to 2500 RPM was smaller than that from 1500 to 2000
RPM. This diminishing return is likely due to increased internal losses such as friction,
turbulence, and heat generation at higher operating speeds. These losses prevent a
one-to-one increase in efficiency as speed rises, emphasizing the importance of
operating pumps within an optimal range rather than simply maximizing RPM.

Another noteworthy observation is the relationship between flow rate and pressure
differential. As expected, both parameters rose with speed, but not at the same rate.
The system's geometry, along with fluid properties like viscosity and density, contribute
to nonlinearities in this relationship. This is important in real-world systems, where
 designers must account for these interactions when sizing pumps and determining
operating points.

conclusion

This experiment effectively demonstrated the influence of rotational speed on the

performance of a centrifugal pump. Increasing the speed resulted in higher torque,
pressure differential, and flow rate, all of which contributed to greater shaft and water
power. Efficiency improved with speed, peaking at 2500 RPM, though the rate of
improvement declined due to internal losses within the pump.

The findings highlight the critical balance between energy input and output in fluid
systems. While increasing pump speed can enhance performance, it must be done with
consideration for system constraints and efficiency limitations. This lab provided valuable
hands-on experience with pump performance analysis and reinforced fundamental
principles of fluid dynamics and energy conversion.

5. References

- White, F. M. Fluid Mechanics. 8th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2021. - ASME. Guidelines for Journal
References. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2025. - Holman, J. P.
Experimental Methods for Engineers. 9th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2012