Turbine Blade Aerodynamics
Turbine Blade Aerodynamics
Turbine Blade Aerodynamics
4.3
4.3-1 Introduction
The aerodynamics of the ow in a turbine stage (stator/rotor) is rather complex and is still the subject of many ongoing research activities in the gas turbine community. The ow is inherently three dimensional due to the vane/blade passage geometry with features such as twisting of the vane/blade along the span, clearance between the blade tip and the shroud, lm cooling holes, and end wall contouring1. The passage ow is characterized by boundary layer effects, secondary ows generated by the passage pressure gradients, and vortical ow structures such as the leading edge horse-shoe vortices, tip-leakage ow vortices, and corner vortices2. The effects of centrifugal-buoyancy, shockboundary layer interaction, and ow interactions between the stator and rotor rows complicate the passage ow eld even further. Along the end walls, the ow structure is strongly threedimensional with the passage vortex and coolant injection on the hub side and the tip-leakage vortex on the tip side. In the midspan regions located away from the passage walls and outside the viscous shear layer, the radial ow is almost negligible and the ow is effectively two dimensional. The uid dynamics in this region can then be based on two dimensional planar cascade ow studies without any signicant loss of information. The three dimensional complex ow structures near the hub endwall region and in the blade tip-shroud clearance have been simulated in annular vane/blade passages with and without rotating blade row3. Studies of the complex end-wall ows have also been performed in stationary cascades with three dimensional airfoil shapes4. The qualitative features of the passage ows, which comprise mainly of the passage crossow (ow from the pressure side of vane/blade to suction side of adjacent vane/blade) and vortical ows induced by the leading edge, the corners, and the injected coolant ows have been studied in detail in stationary cascades and are considered to be similar in both stationary and rotating blade rows. The primary difference in the secondary ow structure between the blade passage and vane passage is that the vortical ows and cross ows in the blade passage are stronger because of higher turning of the ows along the blade passage. Secondary ows are the major source of aerodynamic losses, which account for 35%-40% of all losses5 and thermal loading in the turbine passage, and thus require special considerations by the turbine designers. The primary objectives of this chapter are to present and analyze the features of the ow eld in the turbine vane/blade passage near the hub endwall and mid-span locations of the blade. Toward this effort, reported measurements and computations of pressure, velocity distributions, ow turning angles, turbulence intensity, and vorticity distributions in the cascade test section are presented. Recent efforts to reduce the secondary ows by structural modications in the passage are discussed. In this chapter, basic uid dynamic principles and mathematical models of the ow in the passage are not discussed, and the reader is referred to notes 1, 2, and 6 for additional details6. Also details on the aerodynamic design methodology for the vane/blade passage are not presented.
Sumanta Acharya
Gazi Mahmood
Louisiana State University CEBA 1419B, Mechanical Engineering Department Baton Rouge, LA 70803 phone: (225) 578-5809 email: acharya@me.lsu.edu
363
Fig. 1. Streamlines and static pressure distribution in the mid-span plane along blade passage. Source: See Note 56 (Acharya).
Fig. 2. Flow yaw angle (deg) contours in mid-span plane along blade passage. Source: See Note 56 (Acharya).
Figure 1 shows the streamlines and static pressure distribution along the mid-span plane of the blade passage. Flow along the blade passage at the mid-span locations turns with the passage contour and essentially follows the ideal ow behavior except very close to the blade walls. At zero degree angle of incidence, the streamline splits at the stagnation point corresponding to the blade leading edge with one leg moving along the pressure side and the other leg moving along the suction side of the blade. The pressure gradient from the pressure side to the suction side leads to the development of secondary ows. These secondary ows and the endwall boundary layer produce deviations to the nearly-inviscid mid-span streamlines shown in gure 2. The ow turning angle, known as the yaw angle relative to the axial +X direction, at the mid-span plane through the blade passage is shown in gure 2. The yaw angle is nearly uniform along a constant pitch line from the pressure side to the suction side, and also changes uniformly along the axial length of the passage. The high yaw angle near the leading edge occurs because of the stagnation region where the streamlines sharply turn around the blade suction side. Figure 3 shows the distribution of the static pressure coefcient, Cp, which is determined from the difference of blade surface pressure and reference pressure at the passage inlet normalized by the passage inlet dynamic pressure. The lowest Cp on the suction surface corresponds to the location at the passage throat area where the ow velocity is the highest. The highest Cp is the stagnation point location on the blade section at the mid-span height. The pressure distribution does not change along most of the blade span or height except near the hub or tip region. The blade loading or lift that provides work on the turbine shaft is determined based on the area circumscribed by such pressure curves as shown in gure 3. The pressure side velocity increases steadily as the Cp decreases on the pressure side from the leading edge to the trailing edge. Along the suction surface, the velocity initially increases toward the throat, but starts to decline when it encounters the adverse pressure gradients downstream of the throat in a subsonic ow. The peak velocity in gure 3 corresponds to the location of the minimum Cp on the suction surface. Due to the adverse pressure gradient on the suction surface downstream of the minimum Cp, there is the potential of boundary layer separation from the suction-side blade surface near the trailing edge and this represents a major source of prole losses in the blade passage. Boundary layer separation at the blade trailing edge can also occur due to a nite trailing-edge thickness and can lead to a distinct wake region. For blade proles with high loading, ow separation is a major issue. With increased loading on the blade surface, suction surface pressures are reduced, and the velocity and Mach number over the suction surface increases with the local Mach number reaching supersonic values. This leads to local shocks as schematically depicted in gure 3, and creates additional aerodynamic losses such as shock losses or wave drag7. Downstream of the shock, suction surface pressure rises in the adverse pressure gradient region and
364
Sumanta Acharya
boundary layer separation can occur earlier leading to increased prole losses for the highly loaded blade. Refer to notes 5 and 8 for discussion on the limiting pressure and velocity distributions on the blade surfaces and provide guidelines to limit the wake region over a very small region at the trailing edge in the blade design8.
Fig. 3. Pressure and velocity distribution on blade surface at different spanwise locations. Source: See Note 56 (Acharya).
Fig. 4. Streamlines showing separation lines in a near endwall plane of a linear blade passage.
365
Fig. 5. Flow yaw angle (deg) contours in a plane near endwall along a linear blade passage. Source: See Note 56 (Acharya).
Fig. 6. Surface pressure distribution at endwall of a blade passage in linear cascade. Source: See Note 56 (Acharya).
366
Sumanta Acharya
The axial pressure distributions along the blade surface (gure 3) change with the span location. The region below 14% span can be considered to be the boundary layer region in the gure. The difference between the free stream static pressure coefcient and endwall region static pressure coefcient Cp on the pressure surface is small and almost uniform. This suggests that pressure gradient on the pressure surface occurs mostly in the axial direction rather than in the spanwise direction. The differences in the suction surface Cp between the 50% span and below 14% span in gure 3 are signicant and occur because of the strong cross ow from the pressure side to the suction side in the endwall boundary layer and the vortex leg along the suction surface13. The locations of the lowest Cp within the boundary layer occurs further downstream of the lowest Cp location in the mid-span free-stream region. The endwall cross ow drives the low momentum boundary layer uid toward the suction surface-endwall junction and causes these observed differences in the Cp distributions. This is also the reason why the axial location of the lowest Cp in the boundary layer and the lowest Ps on the endwall are different. Also note that Cp magnitude decreases signicantly from the endwall (i.e. 4.4% span) to the boundary layer edge (i.e. 13.5% span) all along the axial direction. Such spanwise pressure gradient drives the boundary layer uid and the endwall region secondary ows toward the mid-span direction near the suction surface. The implications of such migrations are realized in the Heat Transfer Analysis section. The velocity distribution on the blade surface near the endwall is also shown in gure 3. The suction surface velocity in the endwall region is lower compared to the free-stream velocity in mid-span because of the inuence of strong secondary ows and higher Cp around the suction side edge (i.e. at 4.4% span). As Fig. 7. Surface oil-ow visualization on a linear blade surface and end-wall with the lowest Cp location, the associated peak suction in a linear cascade. LE= leading edge, TE= trailing edge, and BL= boundry surface velocity in the endwall region also moves down layer the axial direction relative to the peak velocity location at the mid-span. The difference in velocity distribution Source: See Note 14. on the pressures side is opposite to what is observed on the suction surface between the mid-span location and endwall region. This can be attributed to the smaller pressure surface Cp near endwall as well as the thin boundary layer, which is also skewed and thicker toward the suction surface, downstream of the endwall separation line. With the knowledge of velocity and pressure distribution on the blade surface at the mid-span and near endwall, it is now appropriate to discuss the three dimensional ow on the blade surface as a whole. It is apparent by now that the blade suction surface ow near the endwall wall region becomes skewed and three dimensional due to the interaction of the boundary layer and ow separation on the suction surface and endwall. The ow visualization on the suction surface of a two dimensional linear blade in gure 7, as observed in Hodson and Dominy, clearly shows the near surface ow behavior14. The ow on the pressure surface is two dimensional for most part of the span as the oil streaklines indicating the surface streamlines are parallel to the endwall in the upper ow visualization of gure 7. The uniform pressure distribution along the pressure surface span (see gure 3) and very weak interaction of the boundary layers between the pressure surface and endwall are responsible for such ow behavior. However, the laminar boundary layer near the pressure surface leading edge may diffuse with a rise in surface pressure when the incoming ow is at high speed. In this case, the boundary layer separates along the line S6 and re-attaches along the line R6 creating a closed separation bubble along most of the span near the leading edge. The laminar boundary layer accelerates following the re-attachment and continues to grow along the pressure surface toward the trailing edge. The two-dimensional separation bubble has no apparent inuence on the secondary ows on the endwall.
367
368
Sumanta Acharya
vortex. The vortex is conned in a region which is smaller than one boundary layer thickness from the endwall21. The endwall location where the reverse ow in the horse-shoe vortex meets the incoming boundary layer ow is termed as the saddle point which is generally located along the line corresponding to the zero degree incidence-angle as shown in gure 4. The center of the horse-shoe vortex is located in between the saddle point and the blade leading edge. The exact locations of the saddle point and horse-shoe vortex center depends on the radius of curvature of the blade leading edge and the oncoming boundary layer thickness. The ow visualization in gure 8 shows the typical formation of an instantaneous horse-shoe vortex at the blade leading edge in a linear cascade22. In the gure, the roll-up of the vortex is in the counter-clockwise direction. Periodically, a pair of horse-shoe vortices form that have the same relative size and the same sense of rotation. The time-averaged structure of the horse-shoe vortex obtained from a numerical simulation at the same blade leading edge is also shown in gure 8. The vortex structure is similar to the leading edge horse-shoe vortex in front of a cylinder23. The vortex center in gure 8 is located at the point of the maximum kinetic energy. At the corner of the leading edge, a small counter rotating vortex is induced by the large horse-shoe vortex. This clockwise rotating vortex is known as the leading edge corner vortex. Pressure side leg and suction side leg vortices:
Fig. 8. Typical horse-shoe vortex and corner vortex at a blade leading edge. HS=horse-shoe, LE=leading edge, and Tke=turbulent kinetic energy.
369
The path of the leading edge horse-shoe vortex is along the separation line shown in gure 4, and is driven by the endwall Source: See Notes 22, 56 (Acharya). region pressure gradient and cross ow. The horse-shoe vortex essentially splits near the leading edge with one leg moving along the pressure side and the other leg moving along the suction side. These two primary legs of the horse-shoe vortex represent the origin of the major secondary ow system that develops in the blade passage. The two legs rotate opposite to each other. The pressure side leg of the horse-shoe vortex is driven along the separation line across the passage from the leading edge to the adjacent blade suction side. The suction side vortex leg wraps around the suction side from the leading edge along the separation line in gure 4. The vortices are termed as the right side clockwise and left side counter-clockwise vortices, respectively, in the ow visualization images in gure 924. The vortices in the gure are being viewed in the ow direction in pitchwise planes at different axial locations. The pressure side and suction side of the blade passage in the study are located on the right and left hand side, respectively, in the images. At location A, which represents the pitchwise plane going through the leading edge, a pair of vortex structures appears along both the pressure side leg and suction side leg of the vortex system. As with the leading edge horseshoe vortex pair, these pairs form periodically from a single pressure side and suction side leg vortex. The vortices are very close to the passage pressure side and suction side at plane A. As the vortex legs advect to farther downstream locations at planes B, C, and D in the passage in gure 9, the endwall cross ow and pressure gradient from the pressure side to the suction side sweeps the pressure side leg of the vortex toward the suction side of the passage. As a result, the pressure side vortex approaches Fig. 9. Flow visualization of pressure side leg and suction closer to the suction side leg vortex from the adjacent blade at side leg vortices from. Vph= pressure side leg vortex and the downstream locations. Nearly half way down the passage at Vsh=suction side leg vortex. location D, the two vortex legs merge to form a single structure
Source: See Note 9.
Fig. 10. Velocity vectors and axial vorticity representing pressure side leg vortex and suction side leg vortex near LE. VpLc=pressure side LE corner vortex and x=axial vorticity. Source: See Note 25.
Fig. 11. Flow visualization of passage vortex and induced vortices. Source: See Note 9.
370
Sumanta Acharya
originates at the same location where the passage vortex starts to form (merging point of the counter-rotating vortex legs). The wall vortex stays above the passage vortex and is driven along with the passage vortex. The small corner vortex induced at the junction of blade leading edge and endwall (see gure 8) by the horse-shoe vortex is driven along the pressure side and suction side edge with the two main vortex legs. In Wang, et al., they are identied as the pressure side leading edge vortex and suction side leading edge vortex, respectively29. They remain small as they travel inside the passage and their sense of rotation are opposite to the rotation of the main vortex legs they are associated with. The pressure side leading edge corner vortex sticks along the pressure surface corner near the leading edge as shown in gure 10. When it enters the passage farther downstream, it is also driven toward the suction side of the adjacent blade along with the pressure side leg vortex by the endwall cross-ow and pressure gradient. The suction side leading edge corner vortex on the other hand remains adjacent to the suction side edge until it meets with pressure side leg vortex from the neighboring blade. The corner vortices are not visible in the smoke ow visualization as the large vortex legs entrain most of the smoke in the ow and enough smoke is not available to generate their small patterns clearly. The threedimensional structures of different vortex ows in a blade passage sketched in gure 11 are adopted directly from Wang, et al.30. The sketch shows two additional small vortex ows located along the pressure surface corner and suction surface corner. They originate about half way downstream in the passage. The existence of such corner vortices is indicated by the high local mass transfer results at the blade surface-endwall corner in Goldstein et al.31. These corner vortices rotate in the same direction as the rotation of the suction side leg vortex. The time-averaged structures of the passage vortex in the same ow as in gure 10 are shown at two axial locations in gure 12. The data presented is measured with a ve-hole pressure probe32. The velocity vectors are determined based on the resolved components33. The plane H in gure 12 is located about half way down the passage and the plane I is located near the exit of the passage. Unlike gure 11, the ow is being viewed in the axial direction and therefore, the suction surface is on the left hand side in the plots of gure 12. Thus, the rotation of the passage vortex is in the clockwise direction in the velocity vector plots. The existence of the suction side leg vortex is not apparent in the vector plots as it becomes weak in the downstream locations. In a small region just above the passage vortex and adjacent to suction surface at plane I, the vectors seem to turn counter-clockwise indicating the presence of the wall vortex or suction side leg vortex. However, the vortex is clearly apparent in the vorticity plots in gure 12. The positive axial vorticity indicates the passage vortex while the negative axial vorticity located above the positive region indicates the suction side leg vortex or the wall vortex. The same arrangement of the vortex systems in the downstream locations have been observed in the ow visualization. The vortex center is located at the location of the maximum vorticity in congruence with the forced vortex motion.
Fig. 12. Velocity vectors and axial vorticity representing passage vortex at suction side. SS=suction side, Z=pitchwise distance from pressure side, and x=axial vorticity.
Fig. 13. Axial vorticity downstream of passage exit in a linear blade cascade. VP= passage vortex, Vsh=suction side leg vortex, and Vwip= wall vortex. Source: See Note 56 (Acharya).
371
372
Sumanta Acharya
as on the blade surface. This also results in high local thermal loading on the turbine passage walls. Figure 15 shows the turbulent kinetic energy and total pressure loss generated by the secondary vortices at two axial locations of the blade passage of gure 12. The total pressure loss is determined from the difference of local total pressure and the reference total pressure at the passage inlet. The axial locations of gure 15 correspond to the pitchwise planes H and I in gure 12. At Z/P<-0.30, in plane H, the magnitudes of Tke/V2 larger than 0.020 and Cpt larger than 0.30 can be considered to be located within the secondary vortex ow region. In plane I, the secondary vortex ow region is represented by the contours of Tke/V2 and Cpt for Z/P<-0.50. Turbulent kinetic energy decreases from the axial location H to the location I in the secondary vortex ow region because the ow accelerates as it travels downstream. Because of its size and the magnitude of the vorticity, the passage vortex is primarily responsible for the turbulent kinetic energy and the total pressure losses in the secondary ow region near the suction side. Note that in both the axial locations of gure 15 the high turbulent kinetic energy just above the endwall and outside the secondary ow region occurs because of the boundary layer ow. Also it is important to realize that in the axial location I near the exit plane, the total pressure losses in the passage vortex core region are more than ve times the total pressure losses in the free stream region with Cpt<0.20.
Fig. 17. Static pressure and secondary velocity vectors across a plane in a vane passage of annular cascade. PS=pressure side and SS=suction side. Source: See Note 3. (Sieverding)
373
Fig. 18. Total pressure loss coefcients at exit plane of a linear and an annular cascade. Source: See Note 13.* (Moustapha)
*The original version of this material was published by the Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (AGARD/NATO) in AGARD Conference Proceedings CP469 Secondary Flows in Turbomachines in 1990.
Fig. 19. Spanwise distribution of pitchwise averaged total pressure loss coefcient for linear and annular cascades in Fig. 18. Source: See Note 13.* (Moustapha)
374
Sumanta Acharya
A comparative study of a linear cascade and an annular cascade with the same two dimensional blade geometry employed is presented in gure 1843. The total pressure losses in gure 18 are obtained at the same exit location relative to the blade trailing edge in the two passages. It is clearly evident from the plots that the radial pressure gradient in the annular cascade plays a signicant role and alters the pressure loss distribution when compared to the linear passage which experiences no such pressure gradient. The pressure losses in the linear cascade have two distinct high loss regions, located symmetrically about 50% blade span, near the suction surface. These are the signatures of passage vortices from the top and bottom endwalls. In contrast, the annular cascade has one high total pressure loss region between 48% and 77% span. In this loss region, the peak losses are 0.70 and 0.80 at 53% and 70% span, respectively, indicating that the cores of the hub side and casing side passage vortices are very close to each other. The plots in gure 19 determined from the local data in gure 18 compares the pitchwise averaged total pressure loss magnitudes between the linear cascade and the annular cascade. The two peaks in gure 19 for the planar cascade are a consequence of the distinct passage vortex pair observed in the local data. For the annular cascade, one peak in the average pressure loss distribution occurs because of a single high pressure loss region in the local data. In general, the average total pressure losses are much higher for the annular cascade than for the linear cascade along most of the span. Between 20% and 40% span at the inner endwall side the average losses are higher for the linear rig as the passage vortex from this endwall is located in this region. The static pressure distributions on the annular endwalls as shown in gure 20 indicate different distributions for the casing wall and hub wall. The pitchwise pressure gradient extends all the way down to the trailing edge for the casing wall. While the cross pitch pressure gradient for the hub wall is high in the rst half of the passage, the gradient decreases signicantly in the latter half of the passage compared to that for the casing. Such pressure distributions provide the radial pressure gradients between the two endwalls in the annular cascade which is responsible for the radial movement of the secondary ows as explained previously. The magnitudes of the static pressure coefcient near the suction side in gure 20 are higher for the hub wall than for the casing in the rst half of the passage. In the second half of the passage, these magnitudes near the suction surface are higher for the casing wall. Thus, the endwall cross ow covers most of the casing wall, while it covers only the rst 3 rd of the hub wall. Note the qualitative similarity of the contour distributions between the linear passage endwall (gure. 6) and annular passage casing wall (gure 20).
Fig. 21. Surface ow visualization on a vane suction surface in an annular cascade. Source: See Note 45.
*The original version of this material was published by the Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (AGARD/NATO) in AGARD Conference Proceedings CP469 Secondary Flows in Turbomachines in 1990.
2
Fig. 20. Static pressure coefcients on endwalls in a blade passage in an annular cascade. Source: See Note 13.* (Moustapha)
375
Fig. 23. Relative total pressure contours in an annular rotor passage showing vortex ows. PS= pressure side and SS= suction side. Source: See Note 47.
376
Sumanta Acharya
the casing wall and hub wall at the exit plane of a rotating rotor passage. As indicated in the gure, the counter-rotating secondary ows in the passage vortex near the casing wall are caused by the inuence of the tip vortex. According to Gallus et al., the ow interactions between the rotor-stator rows change the static pressure distributions on the rotor surface periodically46. The isobar contour lines in gure 23 show that the tip-clearance vortex strengthens the radial inward movement of the casing passage vortex in a rotor passage47. This occurs as the tip vortex grows and intensies along the passage and pushes the passage vortex in the radial direction. The size and strength of the passage vortices formed in the rotor passage uctuate depending on the position of the trailing edge wake and passage vortices from the stator row. When the stator wake and passage vortices hit the rotor blade leading edge, the passage vortices in the rotor passage grow larger and stronger. At the rotor exit, the locations of the passage vortices and trailing edge wake also uctuate depending on the wake and vortices from the upstream stator row48. The tip-clearance vortex increases the suction side static pressure and decreases the pressure side static pressure at the tip region of the rotor blade. This reduces the blade loading at the tip region in the rotor stage.
377
Fig. 26. Passage vortex and total pressure loss at 92% axial chord with and without llet. Source: See Note 25.
Fig. 27. Secondary velocity vectors and turbulent kinetic energy (k) at pressure side (Plane PS1) of a linear vane cascade with and without llet. PS= pressure side. Source: See Note 49. (Zess)
378
Sumanta Acharya
with a ve-hole pneumatic probe unlike the magnitudes in gure 15 which are obtained from computations in the same passage with an incoming boundary layer of smaller thickness. The total pressure losses in gure 26 are much lower at the bottom part of the passage vortex with the llet than without the llet. This indicates that the Fillet 1 has reduced the passage vortex both in size and strength. Also revealed, the under-turning (yaw angle) of the exit ow with the Fillet 1 occurs over a larger region in the passage vortex core52. Similar results about the passage vortex and associated total pressure losses are observed with other llet proles of type (i)53. Figure 27 shows the effectiveness of another llet prole of type (i) in reducing the passage vortex in a linear vane cascade. The quantities in gure 27 are measured in a plane normal to the vane pressure surface54. The velocity vectors in the gure show the structure of the pressure side vortex near the pressure surface. As can be clearly seen, the pressure side leg vortex is not complete for the lleted vane unlike the vortex for the unlleted case. The spiral of the vortex is not complete in the same location for the lleted case as the passage vortex is weakened. This will eventually make the passage vortex weaker down the passage for the lleted vane. Also, the location of the passage vortex center appears to shift farther away from the pressure side for the lleted case compared to that for the unlleted case. The turbulent kinetic energy magnitudes in gure 27 are much smaller for the lleted vane than those for the unlleted vane. The k-contours indicate a well-dened vortex core for the unlleted case while the k-contours for the lleted case are much uniform in the y/P direction. The llet causes the passage vortex in this plane to uctuate along y/P as the velocity component in this direction has the largest uctuations with the llet. On the contrast, the large uctuations in the w-velocity component cause the passage vortex to uctuate in the z/S direction for the unlleted vane. Endwall Proling: Endwall proling is achieved in two waysaxial proling along the passage with no pitchwise variation and nonaxisymmetric proling along the passage with prole variations in both the axial and pitchwise directions. The proling is aimed either to accelerate the boundary layer uid at the endwall or to reduce the pitchwise pressure gradient at the endwall. (i) Axial Proling of the Endwall: Since there is no variation of the prole in the pitch direction, this proling is also termed as the two dimensional axisymmetric contouring. The proling is employed on either of the endwalls in the passage, but not on the both endwalls. The height of the prole increases over a smooth curve from the leading edge to the trailing edge such that aspect ratio of the exit plane or the throat area is unaffected as shown in gure 28. This type of endwall prole was studied in linear vane passages55. The axisymmetric proles of the endwall upstream of the blade/vane passage such as the prole (b) of gure 28 are also studied56. Upstream proles in the rst stage nozzle guide vane are used for the gas path transition from the combustor chamber to the turbine inlet. In any prole shown in gure 28, the inlet velocity to the blade/vane passage decreases (due to increased passage area) and the ow acceleration through the passage increases (due to decreased passage area). This leads to a reduction in the boundary layer thickness and suppresses the growth of secondary ows on the endwalls. Also, the exit ow angle is expected to undergo less under-turning and over-turning due Fig. 29. Streamwise velocity and secondary velocity vectors at 0.90Cax in a linear vane passage with endwall proling through to the higher ow acceleration downstream with the endwall proling passage aft. extending through the passage.
Fig. 28. Axisymmetric axial proling of endwall: (a) endwall prole through blade passage, (b) endwall prole upstream of blade passage.
379
Fig. 30. Static pressure distributions near endwalls in a linear vane passage with endwall proling extending from leading edge to trailing. Source: See Note 55. (Shih)
Fig. 31. Total pressure loss, Cpt distributions at 1.10Cax for a linear vane cascade with and without endwall proling. Source: See Note 55. (Dossena)
380
Sumanta Acharya
The loss contours due to the passage vortex from the contoured endwall side in the contoured cascade are located just adjacent to the contoured wall side at z/S=0.95. Thus, the spanwise (z/ S) extent of the passage vortex at the contoured endwall side is smaller compared to those in the planar cascade. Another important difference between the two cascades is identied by comparing the wake regions. The pitchwise width of the wake region for the contoured cascade is smaller than that for the planar cascade. This can be attributed to the velocity and pressure distributions on the vane suction surface in the contoured cascade. The lowest pressure and consequently the peak velocity on the vane suction surface shifts toward the trailing edge in the presence of the contoured endwall. Thus, the diffusion rate of velocity is lower over the suction surface in the contoured cascade59. As a result the extent of the adverse pressure gradient region near the suction surface trailing edge decreases reducing the extent of the trailing edge wake. Thus, the prole loss in the contoured cascade also decreases. The effect of axial proling of endwall in an annular vane passage was measured60. The endwall contouring is employed at the tip wall in the last half of the passage. The contouring affects the pressure distributions signicantly on the vane suction surface at the tip region. The suction surface pressure at the tip region rises in the rst 50% of axial chord. In the latter 50% of axial chord, the pressure decreases on the suction surface and the maximum suction side velocity shifts toward the trailing edge at the tip region. As a result, the adverse pressure gradient on the blade suction surface is reduced at the vane tip region. In the annular ow area, the static pressure and total pressure loss distributions are affected in the latter part of the passage where the tip contouring is located. In the aft part of the passage, the radial pressure gradient directed toward the hub endwall in an annular passage with no tip wall contouring is inverted in the upper half span near the suction side when the tip contouring is employed. Unlike the annular passage without tip contouring, the radial ow angle at the exit plane is negative across most of the plane with the tip wall contouring. Downstream of the passage exit the total pressure loss region due to wake reduces in the pitch/circumferential direction signicantly for the contoured annular passage (tip wall proling) compared to that for the plain annular passage. This occurs as the adverse pressure gradient at the vane surface trailing edge reduces for the contoured tip/casing endwall. The same relative behavior for the wake region has been observed for the linear vane cascade with and without tip wall contouring61. At the same downstream location as above, Boletis (1985) shows that the high total pressure loss region near the contoured casing wall (annular) is also reduced compared to that near the plain annular casing wall. However, the magnitudes of the total pressure loss in this region are about the same for both type of casing walls. (ii) Non-axisymmetric Proling of Endwall: In this case, the endwall prole variations can be achieved by varying the height of the prole over a smooth curve in the axial direction and over another smooth curve in the pitch direction. The objective is to increase the endwall height near the passage pressure side and decrease the endwall height near the suction side with respect to a baseline at endwall. The endwall region static pressure on such prole is expected to decrease near the pressure side and increase near the suction side, thus reducing the pitchwise pressure gradient and the strength of the cross-pitch ows at
Blade LE
Pres s side ure
Endwall
on cti Su e sid
Pitchwise distance
Fig. 32. Non-axisymmetric prole of endwall employed in a linear blade cascade. Source: See Note 62.
381
Fig. 33. Measured static pressure and computed surface streamlines at a at endwall and at a non-axisymmetric contoured endwall in a linear blade passage. Ps= wall static pressure.
Fig. 34. Streamlines and total pressure loss coefcients with and without non-axisymmetric contoured endwall showing pressure side leg vortex and passage vortex. Source: See Note 62.
Fig. 35. Coolant injection through holes in endwall for lm cooling. L= hole length and D= characteristic scale of hole shape.
382
Sumanta Acharya
layer and interacts with the boundary layer uid downstream of the hole. Thus, the coolant jets signicantly inuence the endwall pressure eld and the cross-pitch ow in the blade passage. As the coolant jets also interact with the vortex ows, especially with the pressure side leg vortex and suction side leg vortex along the separation line, the secondary ow dynamics changes along with the total pressure losses across the passage. As mentioned in the beginning of Section 4.3-7 that the coolant lm is lifted away from the endwall by these vortices, the separation lines in the passage is sometimes termed as the liftoff line. The physics of mixing and diffusion of the jets in the boundary layer and interactions between a coolant jet and the boundary layer or the vortices are frequently complicated by the action of neighboring coolant jets. Such physics are studied under the subject of Jets in Cross Flow and hence, will not be discussed here. The primary objective of this section is to discuss the effects of the lm injection on the secondary ow eld and not the dynamics of the jets. The arrangement of the coolant holes in gure 35 is expected to provide coverage for the entire passage endwall and hence, sometimes is termed as the full-coverage lm cooling. The effective coverage of the endwall by the coolant depends on various factors like injection angle, coolant hole orientation, coolant hole shape, hole size, L/D ratio, relative locations of the holes, and mass ux or local blowing ratio from individual hole. These are also the fundamental characteristics of the coolant holes and must all play the role together when the coolant holes are employed. The local blowing ratio is dened as the ratio of the mass ux of the coolant to the mass ux of the passage ow. It is not always easy to measure the mass ux of individual holes with accuracy. Thus, an inlet blowing ratio, Minlet is dened based on coolant ow through an idealized, loss free hole at the passage inlet condition65.
M inlet =
383
Here, Po,plenum is the stagnation pressure of the coolant supply plenum, Po,inlet is the stagnation pressure at the passage inlet, and Pinlet is the static pressure at the passage inlet. The boundary layer is energized and strengthened with the properly ejected Fig. 36. Coolant jet locations downstream of injection holes in a linear coolant jets. This enables the boundary layer uid to withstand vane passage. the pitchwise pressure gradient in the passage and cross-pitch ow is weakened as a consequence. Thus, with proper design Source: See Note 66. and conguration the endwall lm injection can also provide an effective structural modication that reduces the secondary ows and aerodynamic losses. It is difcult to generalize the ow eld at the endwall when the coolant jets are ejected. Each geometric conguration and ow parameter associated with the coolant holes just mentioned can alter the endwall boundary layer uniquely. On the other hand, the secondary and cross ows affect the coolant jets. The illustrations that are going to be presented next do not represent a typical behavior of the near wall ow. The readers will have some understanding about the relative importance of the coolant jet conguration and secondary ows. Figure 36 shows the measured locations of the coolant jets as they travel downstream from their ejection points in a linear vane passage66. The conguration of the coolant holes is also shown in the gure. The holes are ejecting at 35 degree with respect to the endwall surface. Data are presented near
Fig. 37. Visualization of surface ow and coolant jet trajectories along endwall in a linear blade passage at Minlet=1.0. Source: See Note 70.
Fig. 38. Passage vortex and total pressure losses at exit ow with (Minlet=2.0) and without coolant injection in a linear blade passage. Source: See Note 65.
384
Sumanta Acharya
coolant jets from the pressure side at 30% axial chord seem to dislocate the lift-off line slightly downstream from their positions. The jet traces from the holes located upstream of the passage in gure 37 shows virtually very little or no traces near the pressure side and all jets near the suction side are deected around the lift-off line. The strong leading edge horse-vortex is either lifting the jets or deecting the jets even if they are shooting directly toward the leading edge. The jets from the middle holes in the upstream row have low momentum and are aimed toward the pressure side while the cross ow here is directed in the axial direction have low kinetic energy. Thus, these jets have small trajectories and are easily swept in the main ow as soon as they are ejected. The traces of the jets from the holes inside the passage, except those near the pressure side, are swept toward the suction side by the cross ow. Similar behavior of the jets inside a blade passage is also observed72. The 3rd to 5th jet from the pressure side at 30% axial chord and 2nd to 4th jet from the suction side at 60% axial chord are additionally pulled in by the passage vortex (see the lift-off line) and in cases, are entrained into the passage vortex at the hole location itself. The traces nearest the pressure side are almost parallel to the pressure side as the boundary layer is very thin here and ow behaves as inviscid. A single jet from one of the four holes at the pressure side corner interacts with and strengthens the jet downstream and the combined jet trajectory is very long at this location. The jets at 90% axial chord and nearest the suction side in the previous two rows eject with high momentum due to the low wall static pressure. The main ow kinetic energy is also high at these locations because of its high speed. These keep these jet traces narrow and stick to the endwall for a longer distance. Also note that the last row of jets are covering a large area on the endwall as they are swept toward the suction side by the cross ow. These jets affect the cross ow as seen in the surface ow visualization of gure 37 (the top image). The streamlines downstream of the holes at 90% axial chord are parallel to the passage rather than being turned toward the suction side as compared to the streamlines upstream of these holes. Thus, these jets have weakened the cross ow near the passage exit. The effects of the same cooling holes as in gure 37 on the passage vortex structure and total pressure losses at the exit ow are shown in gure 3873. But, the inlet blowing ratio for the data with the endwall coolant injection is now 2.0. The plots with no coolant injection are included in gure 38 for comparison. The dashed lines in the gure indicate the spanwise locations of the passage vortex cores. The passage vortex is identied in the vector plot at the location of the clockwise rotation and in the total pressure loss contour at the location of circular region with high loss magnitudes. As noted in both the vector and contour plots, the passage vortex with coolant ow is located much nearer the endwall than with no coolant ow. The momentum of the ejected coolant adds energy to the boundary layer uid. Therefore, when the passage vortex entrains these boundary layer uids, the total pressure losses near the bottom part of the passage vortex are reduced. Coolant jets can be injected from continuous slots located in the upstream endwall/platform of the blade passage inlet. This type of coolant ow is often termed as the slot-bleed injection. The readers are referred to note 74 for information on the secondary ow eld behavior with the slot-bleed74.
4.3-9 Notes
______________________________ 1. B. Lakshminarayana, Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer of Turbomachinery (New York:John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1996). 2. S. L. Dixon, Fluid Mechanics, Thermodynamics of Turbomachinery, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., 1995). 3. H. E. Gallus, J. Zeschky, and C. Hah, Endwall and Unsteady Flow Phenomena in an Axial Turbine Stage, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 117 (1995): 562-570; E. Boletis, Effects of Tip Endwall Contouring on the Three-Dimensional Flow Field in an Annular Turbine Nozzle Guide Vane: Part 1- Experimental Investigation, ASME Tran. J. Engr for Gas Turbines and Power 107 (1985): 983-990; C. H. Sieverding, W. Van-Hove, and E. Boletis, Experimental Study of the Three-Dimensional Flow Field in an Annular Turbine Nozzle Guidevane, ASME Tran. J. Engr for Gas Turbines and Power 106 (1984): 437-444. 4. A. Duden, I. Raab, and L. Fottner, Controlling the Secondary Flow in a Turbine Cascade by Three-Dimensional Airfoil Design and Endwall Contouring, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 121(1999): 191-199; S. P. Harasgama and C. D. Burton, Film Cooling Research on the Endwall of a Turbine Nozzle Guide Vane in a Short Duration Annular Cascade: Part 1- Experimental Technique and Results, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery, Vol. 114 (1992): 734-740. 5. R. P. Dring and W. H. Heiser, Turbine Aerodynamics, Chap.4 in Aerothermodynamics of Aircraft Engine Components, AIAA education series (New York: AIAA Inc., 1985). 6. L. Fielding, Turbine Design- The Effect of an Axial Flow Turbine Performance of Parameter Variation, (New York: ASME Press, 2000); J.P. Gostelow, Cascade Aerodynamics, (OxfordPergamon Press Ltd., Oxford, U.K., 1984).
385
386
Sumanta Acharya
37. K. Hermanson, S. Kern, G. Picker, and S. Parneix, Predictions of External Heat Transfer For Turbine Vanes and Blades With Secondary Flowelds, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, GT-2002-30206, 2002. 38. See note 33 above. 39. A. Yamamoto, Production and Development of Secondary Flows and Losses in Two Types of Straight Turbine Cascades: Part 1- A Stator Case, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 109 (1987): 186-193;R.P. Roy, K.D. Squires, M. Gerendas, S. Song, W.J. Howe and A. Ansari, Flow and Heat Transfer at the Hub Endwall of Inlet Vane PassagesExperiments and Simulations, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, 2000-GT-198, 2000. 40. See note 3 above. 41. See note 3 above. 42. See note 3 above. 43. See note 13 above. 44. See note 13 above. 45. R.G. Dominy and S.C. Harding, An Investigation of Secondary Flows in Nozzle Guide Vanes, AGARD Conf. Proc. No. 469, Secondary Flows in Turbomachines (1990): 7.1-7.15. 46. See note 3 above (Gallus). 47. M.V. Hoyningen-Huene, W. Frank, and A.R. Jung, Three-Dimensional Time-Resolved Flow Field in the First and Last Turbine Stage of a Heavy Duty Gas Turbine, Part I: Secondary Flow Field, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, 2000-GT-0438, 2000. 48. J. Zeschky and H.E. Gallus, Effects of Stator Wakes and Spanwise Nonuniform Inlet Conditions on the Rotor Flow of an Axial Turbine Stage, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 115 (1993): 128-136. 49. H. Sauer, R. Mller, and K. Vogeler, Reduction of Secondary Flow Losses in Turbine Cascades by Leading Edge Modications at the Endwall, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 123 (2001): 207-213; G. A. Zess and K.A. Thole, Computational Design and Experimental Evaluation of Using a Leading Edge Fillet on a Gas Turbine Vane, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, GT-2001-0404, 2001; A.T. Lethander, K.A. Thole, G. Zess, and J. Wagner, Ortimizing the VaneEndwall Junction to Reduce Adiabatic Wall Temperatures in a Turbine Vane Passage, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, GT2003-38939, 2003; S. Becz, M.S. Majewski, and L.S. Langston, Leading Edge Modication Effects on Turbine Cascade Endwall Loss, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, GT-2003-38898, 2003;S. Becz, M.S. Majewski, and L.S. Langston, An Experimental Investigation of Contoured Leading Edges for Secondary Flow Loss Reduction, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, GT-2004-53964, 2004; also see notes 22 and 25 above. 50. See notes 22 and 25 above. 51. See note 21 above. 52. See note 25 above. 53. See note 49 above. 54. See note 49 above (Zess). 55. S.W. Burd and T.W. Simon, Flow Measurements in a Nozzle Guide Vane Passage With a Low Aspect Ratio and Endwall Contouring, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, 2000-GT-0213, 2000; T.I-P Shih, Y.-L Lin, and T.W. Simon, Control of Secondary Flows in a Turbine Nozzle Guide Vane by Endwall Contouring, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, 2000-GT-0556, 2000; V. Dossena, A. Perdichizzi, and M. Savini, The Inuence of Endwall Contouring on the Performance of a Turbine Nozzle Guide Vane, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 121(1999): 200-208; F.C. Kopper, R. Milano, and M. Vanco, Experimental Investigation of Endwall Proling in a Turbine Vane Cascade, AIAA Journal, AIAA 80-1089R 19, No. 8 ( August 1981). 56. S. Acharya, Eendwall Cooling With Endwall Contouring and Leading Edge Fillet, Smi-annual Report Submiited to UTSR, South Carolina, Project No. 02-01-SR098, June 2003-December 2003; D.E. Bohn, K. Kusterer, N. Srken, and F. Kreitmeler, Inuence of Endwall Contouring in Axial Gaps on the Flow Field in a Four-Stage Turbine, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, 2000-GT-472, 2000; L.P. Timko, Energy Efcient Engine High Pressure Turbine Component Test Performance Report, Contract Report for NASA, Report No. NASA CR-168289; also see note 55 above (Shih). 57. See note 55 above (Burd). 58. See note 55 above (Dossena). 59. Ibid. 60. See note 3 above (Boletis). 61. See note 55 above (Dossena). 62. R. Gustafson, G.I. Mahmood, and S. Acharya, Control of Secondary Flows in a Low Speed Blade Cascade with a Nonaxisymmetric 3-D Endwall, in preparation for the ASME Trans J. Turbomachinery. 63. N. W. Harvey, M.G. Rose, M.D. Taylor, S. Shahpar, J. Hartland, and D.G. Gregory-Smith, Nonaxisymmetric Turbine End Wall Design: Part I- Three-Dimensional Linear Design System, ASME Tran. J. Turbomachinery 122 (2000): 278-285; J.C. Hartland, D.G. Gregory-Smith, and M.G. Rose, Non-axisymmetric Endwall Proling in a Turbine Rotor Blade, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, 98-GT-525, 1998. 64. G. Ingram, D.G. Gregory-Smith, M. Rose, N. Harvey, and G. Brennan, The Effect of End-wall Proling on Secondary Flow and Loss Development in a Turbine Cascade, ASME Proc. Turbo Expo, GT-2002-30339, 2002; J.C. Hartland, D.G. Gregory-Smith, N.W. Harvey, and M.G. Rose, Nonaxisymmetric Turbine End Wall Design: Part II- Experimental
387
388
BIOGRAPHY
Sumanta Acharya
Louisiana State University CEBA 1419B, Mechanical Engineering Department Baton Rouge, LA 70803 phone: (225) 578-5809 email: acharya@me.lsu.edu
Sumanta Acharya is currently the L. R. Daniel Professor in Mechanical Engineering, and the Director of the Turbine Innovation and Energy Research (TIER) Center at Louisiana State University (LSU), Baton Rouge . He received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from IITKharagpur, India, in 1978, his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Minnesota in 1982, and has been on the faculty at LSU since 1982. He has worked in several areas pertaining to turbine blade cooling and aerodynamics including internal cooling, lm cooling, blade tip leakage ows, and 3D endwall ows (hub). In the gas turbine area he has received funding from Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, the University Turbine Systems Research Program (UTSR) of the Department of Energy, the U. S Navy, the Air Force Ofce of Scientic Research, the National Science Foundation, and the State of Louisiana. He has published 130 journal articles and book chapters, and presented over 160 conference papers.
Gazi Mahmood
Louisiana State University CEBA 1419B, Mechanical Engineering Department Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Dr. Gazi Mahmood is currently working as a postdoctoral research associate at the Turbine Innovation and Energy Research (TIER) Center of the Louisiana State University. He received his B.Tech. in Mechanical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology in Bombay in 1995 and his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Utah in 2001. The research interests of Dr. Gazi Mahmood include turbulent channel ows, uid dynamics and convective heat transfer on special surface structures, aerodynamics, gas turbine cooling, pumps, infrared imaging techniques, ow control on wing-shaped bodies, uidic actuators, and miniature contact probes for ow measurements. Presently, he has been working in a research project investigating the aerodynamic performances and endwall cooling in the gas turbine passages with endwall contouring and leading edge llets. His work experiences also include research on dimples, pin-ns, and vortex passage employed in heat exchangers, wing bodies, bearing cooling, and turbine blade cooling. He was a lecturer at the Mechanical Engineering Department in Columbia University (New York) in 2001.