From a historical viewpoint, the centrifugal compressor configuration was developed and used well before axial-flow compressors, even in the propulsion field. The common belief that such a “bulky” compressor type, because of its large envelope and weight (Fig. 11.1), has no place except in ground applications is not exactly accurate. For example, with a typical total-to-total pressure ratio of, say, 5:1, it would take up to three axial-compressor stages to absorb similar amounts of shaft work that a single centrifugal compressor stage would. In fact, the added engine length, with so many axial stages, would increase the skin-friction drag on the engine exterior almost as much as the profile drag, which is a function of the frontal area.

Despite the preceding argument, the tradition remains that the centrifugalcompressor propulsion applications are unpopular. Exceptions to this rule include turboprop engines and short-mission turbofan engines, as shown in Figure 11.2.

An attractive feature of centrifugal compressors has to do with their off-design performance. Carefully designed, a centrifugal compressor will operate efficiently over a comparatively wider shaft speed range. This exclusive advantage helps alleviate some of the problems associated with the turbine-compressor matching within the gas generator.

One of the inherent drawbacks of centrifugal compressors has to do with multiple staging. As illustrated in Figure 2.12, the excessive 180 flow-turning angle of the annular return duct, in this case, will increase the flow rotationality (in terms of vorticity) and encourage the cross-stream secondary flow migration. This simply sets the stage for high magnitudes of total pressure loss and boundary-layer separation.