0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Comparison of Different Acceleration Techniques and Methods for Periodic Boundary Treatment in Unsteady Turbine Stage Flow Simulations

[+] Author and Article Information
Martin von Hoyningen-Huene, Alexander R. Jung

Siemens Power Generation (KWU), Gas Turbine Development, D-45466 Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany

J. Turbomach 122(2), 234-246 (Feb 01, 1999) (13 pages) doi:10.1115/1.555440 History: Received February 01, 1999
Copyright © 2000 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Davis, R. L., Shang, T., Buteau, J., and Hi, R. H., 1996, “Prediction of 3-D Unsteady Flow in Multi-Stage Turbomachinery Using an Implicit Dual Time-Step Approach,” AIAA Paper No. 96-2565.
Janssen, M., Zimmermann, H., Kopper, F., and Richardson, J., 1995, “Application of Aero-Engine Technology to Heavy Duty Gas Turbines,” ASME Paper No. 95-GT-133.
Zeschky,  J., and Gallus,  H. E., 1993, “Effects of Stator Wakes and Spanwise Nonuniform Inlet Conditions on the Rotor Flow of an Axial Turbine Stage,” ASME J. Turbomach., 115, pp. 128–136.
Merz, R., Krückels, J., Mayer, J. F., and Stetter, H., 1995, “Computation of Three-Dimensional Viscous Transonic Turbine Stage Flow Including Tip Clearance Effects,” ASME Paper No. 95-GT-76.
Merz, R., 1998, “Entwicklung eines Mehrgitterverfahrens zur numerischen Lösung der dreidimensionalen kompressiblen Navier–Stokes Gleichungen für mehrstufige Turbomaschinen,” Fortschritt-Berichte VDI, Reihe 7—Strömungstechnik, No. 342.
Jung, A. R., Mayer, J. F., and Stetter, H., 1996, “Simulation of 3D-Unsteady Stator/Rotor Interaction in Turbomachinery Stages of Arbitrary Pitch Ratio,” ASME Paper No. 96-GT-69.
Walraevens, R. E., Gallus, H. E., Jung, A. R., Mayer, J. F., and Stetter, H., 1998, “Experimental and Computational Study of the Unsteady Flow in a 1.5 Stage Axial Turbine With Emphasis on the Secondary Flow in the Second Stator,” ASME Paper No. 98-GT-254.
Merz, R., Meyer, J. F., and Stetter, H., 1997, “Three-Stage Steam Turbine Flow Analysis Using a Three-Dimensional Navier–Stokes Multigrid Approach,” 2nd European Conference on Turbomachinery—Fluid Dynamics and Thermodynamics, Antwerpen.
Jameson, A., Schmidt, W., and Turkel, E., 1981, “Numerical Solutions of the Euler Equations by Finite Volume Methods Using Runge–Kutta Time-Stepping Schemes,” AIAA Paper No. 81-1259.
Giles, M. B., 1991, “UNSFLO: A Numerical Method for the Calculation of Unsteady Flow in Turbomachinery,” GTL Report No. 205, MIT Gas Turbine Laboratory.
Giles, M. B., 1988, “Non-reflecting Boundary Conditions for the Euler Equations,” TR 88-1, MIT Computational Fluid Dynamics Laboratory.
Saxer, A. P., 1992, “A Numerical Analysis of 3-D Inviscid Stator/Rotor Interactions Using Non-reflecting Boundary Conditions,” GTL Report No. 209, MIT Gas Turbine Laboratory.
Jorgenson, P. C. E., and Chima, R. V., 1989, “An Unconditionally Stable Runge–Kutta Method for Unsteady Flows,” AIAA Paper No. 89-0295.
He, L., 1996, “Time-Marching Calculations of Unsteady Flows, Blade Row Interaction and Flutter,” von Kármán Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Lecture Series 1996-05, Rhode Saint Genèse, Belgium.
Jung, A. R., 1997, private notes.
Jameson, A., 1991, “Time Dependent Calculations Using Multigrid, With Applications to Unsteady Flows Past Airfoils and Wings,” AIAA Paper No. 91-1596.
von Hoyningen-Huene, M., and Hermeler, J., 1999, “Comparison of Three Approaches to Model Stator–Rotor Interaction in the Turbine Front Stage of an Industrial Gas Turbine,” Paper No. C 557-18, 3rd European Conference on Turbomachinery—Fluid Dynamics and Thermodynamics, London.
von Hoyningen-Huene, M., and Hermeler, J., 1999, “Time-Resolved Numerical Analysis of the Aerodynamics in the First Stage of an Industrial Gas Turbine for Different Vane-Blade Spacings,” ASME Paper No. 99-GT-102.
Arnone,  A., and Pacciani,  R., 1996, “Rotor–Stator Interaction Analysis Using the Navier–Stokes Equations and a Multigrid Method,” ASME J. Turbomach., 118, pp. 679–689.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Computational grid at midspan
Grahic Jump Location
Contour lines at eight equidistant instants in time; point of reference: t=0 at top left corner
Grahic Jump Location
Time-averaged static pressure distribution over the rotor (explicit calculation)
Grahic Jump Location
Instantaneous static pressure deviations (p−p̄) on the rotor blade at t=1/8T
Grahic Jump Location
Rotor blade pressure amplitude and phase at midspan as a function of the axial chord
Grahic Jump Location
Pressure amplitude and phase angle of the first harmonic on the stator as a function of the axial chord
Grahic Jump Location
Unsteady pressure fluctuations at one node downstream of the stator blade trailing edge (top) and one node downstream of the rotor trailing edge (bottom) during two blade passing periods. The height of each plot is chosen to correspond to 0.02.
Grahic Jump Location
Entropy distribution in the rotor along a grid line in pitchwise direction (near the interface)
Grahic Jump Location
Phase angle of the first and second entropy harmonic along a gridline in the pitchwise direction (near the interface), legend as in Fig. 8
Grahic Jump Location
Entropy contours at t=0. The unaccelerated calculation is depicted in black, the implicit calculation with 16 dual time-steps depicted in gray.
Grahic Jump Location
Time-averaged skin friction factor on the suction side (SS) and the pressure side (PS) of the rotor
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of the instantaneous skin friction factor at t=0 on the suction side (SS) and the pressure side (PS) of the rotor. The time-averaged skin friction factor from the reference solution is plotted in gray. The enlargement at the bottom shows the region on the suction side where the instantaneous fluctuations are the most pronounced.
Grahic Jump Location
Unsteady pressure fluctuations one node downstream of the stator trailing edge (top) and one node downstream of the rotor leading edge (bottom) during two blade passing periods
Grahic Jump Location
Pressure amplitudes on the rotor, comparison of the calculation with a blade count ratio of 80:80 with that using the original blade count ratio of 78:80
Grahic Jump Location
Phase of the first harmonic on the stator and the rotor, comparison of the calculation with a blade count ratio of 80:80 with that using the original blade count ratio of 78:80. TE: trailing edge, LE: leading edge, PS: pressure side, SS: suction side.
Grahic Jump Location
Entropy distribution in the rotor along a grid line in pitchwise direction (near the interface)
Grahic Jump Location
Phase angle of the first and second entropy harmonic along a gridline in the pitchwise direction (near the interface)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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