Boundary Layer Development in Axial Compressors and Turbines: Part 1 of 4—Composite Picture

[+] Author and Article Information
D. E. Halstead, D. C. Wisler, H.-W. Shin

GE Aircraft Engines, Cincinnati, OH 45215

T. H. Okiishi

Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011

G. J. Walker

University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania

H. P. Hodson

University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

J. Turbomach 119(1), 114-127 (Jan 01, 1997) (14 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2841000 History: Received April 07, 1995; Online January 29, 2008


Comprehensive experiments and computational analyses were conducted to understand boundary layer development on airfoil surfaces in multistage, axial-flow compressors and LP turbines. The tests were run over a broad range of Reynolds numbers and loading levels in large, low-speed research facilities which simulate the relevant aerodynamic features of modern engine components. Measurements of boundary layer characteristics were obtained by using arrays of densely packed, hot-film gauges mounted on airfoil surfaces and by making boundary layer surveys with hot wire probes. Computational predictions were made using both steady flow codes and an unsteady flow code. This is the first time that time-resolved boundary layer measurements and detailed comparisons of measured data with predictions of boundary layer codes have been reported for multistage compressor and turbine blading. Part 1 of this paper summarizes all of our experimental findings by using sketches to show how boundary layers develop on compressor and turbine blading. Parts 2 and 3 present the detailed experimental results for the compressor and turbine, respectively. Part 4 presents computational analyses and discusses comparisons with experimental data. Readers not interested in experimental detail can go directly from Part 1 to Part 4. For both compressor and turbine blading, the experimental results show large extents of laminar and transitional flow on the suction surface of embedded stages, with the boundary layer generally developing along two distinct but coupled paths. One path lies approximately under the wake trajectory while the other lies between wakes. Along both paths the boundary layer clearly goes from laminar to transitional to turbulent. The wake path and the non-wake path are coupled by a calmed region, which, being generated by turbulent spots produced in the wake path, is effective in suppressing flow separation and delaying transition in the non-wake path. The location and strength of the various regions within the paths, such as wake-induced transitional and turbulent strips, vary with Reynolds number, loading level, and turbulence intensity. On the pressure surface, transition takes place near the leading edge for the blading tested. For both surfaces, bypass transition and separated-flow transition were observed. Classical Tollmien–Schlichting transition did not play a significant role. Comparisons of embedded and first-stage results were also made to assess the relevance of applying single-stage and cascade studies to the multistage environment. Although doing well under certain conditions, the codes in general could not adequately predict the onset and extent of transition in regions affected by calming. However, assessments are made to guide designers in using current predictive schemes to compute boundary layer features and obtain reasonable loss predictions.

Copyright © 1997 by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.





Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In