0
Journal of Turbomachinery | Volume 128 | Issue 1 | TECHNICAL PAPERS
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Multistage Aspects and Unsteady Effects of Stator and Rotor Clocking in an Axial Turbine With Low Aspect Ratio Blading

[+] Author and Article Information
T. Behr

Turbomachinery Laboratory, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 8092 Zurich, Switzerlandbehr@lsm.iet.mavt.ethz.ch

L. Porreca, T. Mokulys, A. I. Kalfas, R. S. Abhari

Turbomachinery Laboratory, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland

J. Turbomach 128(1), 11-22 (Jun 28, 2005) (12 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2101855 History: Received June 28, 2004; Revised June 28, 2005
Article
References
Figures
Tables
Citing Articles

This paper presents the outcome of a recent study in clocking-related flow features and multistage effects occurring in high-pressure turbine blade geometries. The current investigation deals with an experimentally based systematic analysis of the effects of both stator-stator and rotor-rotor clocking. Due to the low aspect ratio of the turbine geometry, the flow field is strongly three-dimensional and is dominated by secondary flow structures. The investigation aims to identify the flow interactions involved and the associated effects on performance improvement or degradation. Consequently a three-dimensional numerical analysis has been undertaken to provide the numerical background to the test case considered. The experimental studies were performed in a two-stage axial research turbine facility. The turbine provides a realistic multi-stage environment, in which both stator blade rows and the two rotors can be clocked relative to each other. All blade rows have the same blade number count, which tends to amplify clocking effects. Unsteady and steady measurements were obtained in the second stage using fast response aerodynamic probes and miniature pneumatic five-hole probes. The current comprehensive investigation has shown that multistage and unsteady flow effects of stator and rotor clocking in low aspect ratio turbines are combined in a nonlinear fashion caused by axial and radial redistribution of low energy fluid. The integral result of clocking on stage efficiency is compensated by competing loss generating mechanisms across the span.
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Jouini, D. B. M., Little, D., Bancalari, E., Dunn, M., Haldeman, C., and Johnson, P. D., 2003, “Experimental Investigation of Airfoil Wake Clocking Impacts on Aerodynamic Performance in a Two Stage Turbine Test Rig,” ASME Paper No. GT-2003–38872.
2
Huber, F. W., Johnson, P. D., Sharma, O. P., Staubach, J. B., and Gaddis, S. W., 1996, “Performance Improvement Through Indexing of Turbine Airfoiles: Part 1—Experimental Investigation,” J. Turbomach., 118 , pp. 630–635.
3
Reinmöller, U., Stephan, B., Schmidt, S., and Niehuis, R., 2002, “Clocking Effects in a 1.5 Stage Axial Turbine—Steady and Unsteady Experimental Investigations Supported by Numerical Simulations,” J. Turbomach.  [CrossRef], 124 , pp. 52–60.
4
Gombert, R., and Höhn, W., 2001, “Unsteady Aero-dynamical Blade Row Interactions in a New Multistage Research Turbine—Part I: Experimental Investigation,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0306.
5
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.
6
Tiedemann, M., and Kost, F., 2001, “Some Aspects of Wake-Wake Interactions Regarding Turbine Stator Clocking,” J. Turbomach.  [CrossRef], 123 , pp. 526–533.
7
Höhn, W., and Heinig, K., 2000, “Numerical and Experimental Investigation of Unsteady Flow Interaction in a Low-Pressure Multistage Turbine,” J. Turbomach.  [CrossRef], 122 , pp. 628–633.
8
Griffin, L. W., Huber, F. W., and Sharma, O. P., 1996, “Performance Improvement Through Indexing of Turbine Airfoiles: Part II—Numerical Simulation,” J. Turbomach., 118 , pp. 636–642.
9
Dorney, D. J., and Sharma, O. P., 1996, “A Study of Turbine Performance Increase Through Airfoil Clocking,” AIAA Paper No. 96–2816.
10
Dorney, D. J., and Sondak, D. L., 1996, “Three-Dimensional Simulation of Airfoil Clocking in a 1–1/2 Stage Turbine,” AIAA Paper No. 96–2816.
11
Sell, M., Schlienger, J., Pfau, A., Treiber, M., and Abhari, R. S., 2001, “The 2-stage Axial Turbine Test Facility LISA,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0492.
12
Hourmouziadis, J., 1989, “Aerodynamic Design of Low Pressure Turbines,” Lecture 8, AGARD LS-167.
13
Treiber, M., Kupferschmied, P., and Gyarmathy, G., 1998, “Analysis of the Error Propagation Arising from the Measurements with a Miniature Pneumatic 5-hole Probe,” XIVth Symposium on Measuring Techniques for Transonic and Supersonic Flows in Cascades and Turbomachines, Limerck.
14
Kupferschmied, P., Köppel, O., Gizzi, W. P., and Gyarmathy, G., 2000, “Time Resolved Flow Measurements with Fast Aerodynamic Probes in Turbomachinery,” Meas. Sci. Technol.  [CrossRef], 11 , pp. 1036–1054.
15
Pfau, A., Schlienger, J., Kalfas, A. I., and Abhari, R. S., 2002, “Virtual Four Sensor Fast Response Aerodynamic Probe (FRAP),” Proceedings of the XVIth Bi-Annual Symposium on Measuring Techniques in Transonic and Supersonic Flows in Cascades and Turbomachines , Cambridge, UK, September 23–24.
16
Dawes, W. N., BT0B3D, 1991, “A Computer Program for the Analysis of Three-Dimensional Viscous Compressible Flow in Tubomachinery Blade Rows,” Manual for BT0B3D.
17
Jameson, A., and Baker, T. J., 1984, “Multigrid Solutions of the Euler Equations for Aircraft Configurations,” AIAA Paper No. 84–0093.
18
Emunds, R., Jennions, I. K., Bohn, D., and Gier, J., 1997, “The Computation of Adjacent Blade-Row Effects in a 1.5 Stage Axial Flow Turbine,” ASME Paper No. 97-GT-81.
19
Spalart, P. R., and Allmaras, S. R., 1992, “A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows,” AIAA Report 92–0439.
20
Denton, J. D., 1993, “Loss Mechanisms in Turbomachines,” ASME J. Turbomach., 115 , pp. 621–656.
21
Saxer, A. P., and Giles, M. B., 1993, “Quasi-Three-Dimensional Nonreflecting Boundary Conditions for Euler Equations Calculations,” J. Propul. Power, 9 (2), pp. 263–271.
22
Haldeman, C., Dunn, M. G., J., Barter, J. W., Green, B. R., and Bergholz, R. F., 2004, “Experimental Investigation of Vane Clocking in a One and 1∕2 Stage High Pressure Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2004–53477.
23
Pfau, A., 2003, “Loss Mechanisms in Labyrinth Seals of Shrouded Axial Turbines.” ETH Ph.D. dissertation no. 15226.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
+CFD—static surface pressure distribution of stator 2 at 79% span for four different stator and rotor clocking cases
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
CFD—static surface pressure distribution of stator 2 at 79% span for four different stator and rotor clocking cases
Figure 12

CFD—static surface pressure distribution of stator 2 at 79% span for four different stator and rotor clocking cases

Grahic Jump Location
+Turning angle differences Δε across stator 2 of four clocking configurations (reference case is SS00RR00): (a) Experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Turning angle differences Δε across stator 2 of four clocking configurations (reference case is SS00RR00): (a) Experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD
Figure 13

Turning angle differences Δε across stator 2 of four clocking configurations (reference case is SS00RR00): (a) Experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD

Grahic Jump Location
+TC1—absolute flow angle differences Δϕ of four clocking configurations (reference case: SS00RR00) at stator 2 exit: (a) experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC1—absolute flow angle differences Δϕ of four clocking configurations (reference case: SS00RR00) at stator 2 exit: (a) experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD
Figure 14

TC1—absolute flow angle differences Δϕ of four clocking configurations (reference case: SS00RR00) at stator 2 exit: (a) experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—time distance diagram of flow yaw angle downstream of stator 2, pitchwise massaverages spanwise distribution versus time: (a) SS00 and (b) SS50 at RR00
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—time distance diagram of flow yaw angle downstream of stator 2, pitchwise massaverages spanwise distribution versus time: (a) SS00 and (b) SS50 at RR00
Figure 15

TC2—time distance diagram of flow yaw angle downstream of stator 2, pitchwise massaverages spanwise distribution versus time: (a) SS00 and (b) SS50 at RR00

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—measured static entropy difference across the second stator of (a) SS00 and (b) SS50 positions (both at RR00) and (c) corresponding pitchwise averaged spanwise distributions
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—measured static entropy difference across the second stator of (a) SS00 and (b) SS50 positions (both at RR00) and (c) corresponding pitchwise averaged spanwise distributions
Figure 16

TC2—measured static entropy difference across the second stator of (a) SS00 and (b) SS50 positions (both at RR00) and (c) corresponding pitchwise averaged spanwise distributions

Grahic Jump Location
+Relative turning angle differences Δε across rotor 2 of four clocking configurations (reference case is SS00RR00): (a) experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Relative turning angle differences Δε across rotor 2 of four clocking configurations (reference case is SS00RR00): (a) experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD
Figure 17

Relative turning angle differences Δε across rotor 2 of four clocking configurations (reference case is SS00RR00): (a) experiment (TC1) and (b) CFD

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2, CFD—relative thermodynamic efficiency difference to the reference case of three characteristic clocking configurations: (a) stage 1, (b) stage 2, and (c) turbine
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2, CFD—relative thermodynamic efficiency difference to the reference case of three characteristic clocking configurations: (a) stage 1, (b) stage 2, and (c) turbine
Figure 18

TC2, CFD—relative thermodynamic efficiency difference to the reference case of three characteristic clocking configurations: (a) stage 1, (b) stage 2, and (c) turbine

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—spanwise distribution of turbine relative thermodynamic efficiency difference to the reference case of three characteristic clocking configurations
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—spanwise distribution of turbine relative thermodynamic efficiency difference to the reference case of three characteristic clocking configurations
Figure 19

TC2—spanwise distribution of turbine relative thermodynamic efficiency difference to the reference case of three characteristic clocking configurations

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—total-to-total mechanic efficiency of the second stage at eight stator and two rotor clocking positions
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—total-to-total mechanic efficiency of the second stage at eight stator and two rotor clocking positions
Figure 20

TC2—total-to-total mechanic efficiency of the second stage at eight stator and two rotor clocking positions

Grahic Jump Location
+CFD—overall aerodynamic loss deviation from reference case SS00 RR00
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
CFD—overall aerodynamic loss deviation from reference case SS00 RR00
Figure 21

CFD—overall aerodynamic loss deviation from reference case SS00 RR00

Grahic Jump Location
+CFD—aerodynamic loss deviation from reference case 0-0 clocking for each blade row: (a)) 2D and (b) 3D
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
CFD—aerodynamic loss deviation from reference case 0-0 clocking for each blade row: (a)) 2D and (b) 3D
Figure 22

CFD—aerodynamic loss deviation from reference case 0-0 clocking for each blade row: (a)) 2D and (b) 3D

Grahic Jump Location
+“LISA” Two stages axial turbine facility
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
“LISA” Two stages axial turbine facility
Figure 1

“LISA” Two stages axial turbine facility

Grahic Jump Location
+Relative circumferential stator-stator (SS) and rotor-rotor (RR) clocking positions in percent of circumferential chord. Position of measurement planes
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Relative circumferential stator-stator (SS) and rotor-rotor (RR) clocking positions in percent of circumferential chord. Position of measurement planes
Figure 2

Relative circumferential stator-stator (SS) and rotor-rotor (RR) clocking positions in percent of circumferential chord. Position of measurement planes

Grahic Jump Location
+CFD—Mesh of “LISA” two-stage axial turbine configuration
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
CFD—Mesh of “LISA” two-stage axial turbine configuration
Figure 3

CFD—Mesh of “LISA” two-stage axial turbine configuration

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—total pressure coefficient Cpt [−] downstream of Rotor 1 at eight different stator-stator positions at RR00 (coarse grid measurement, pneumatically averaged). (a) SS00, (b) SS12.5, (c) SS25, (d) SS37.5, (e) SS50, (f) SS62.5, (g) SS75, and (h) SS87.5.
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—total pressure coefficient Cpt [−] downstream of Rotor 1 at eight different stator-stator positions at RR00 (coarse grid measurement, pneumatically averaged). (a) SS00, (b) SS12.5, (c) SS25, (d) SS37.5, (e) SS50, (f) SS62.5, (g) SS75, and (h) SS87.5.
Figure 4

TC2—total pressure coefficient Cpt [−] downstream of Rotor 1 at eight different stator-stator positions at RR00 (coarse grid measurement, pneumatically averaged). (a) SS00, (b) SS12.5, (c) SS25, (d) SS37.5, (e) SS50, (f) SS62.5, (g) SS75, and (h) SS87.5.

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—pitchwise distribution of absolute flow yaw angle downstream of rotor 1 at (a) 79% and (b) 23% span (eight stator clocking positions at RR00)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—pitchwise distribution of absolute flow yaw angle downstream of rotor 1 at (a) 79% and (b) 23% span (eight stator clocking positions at RR00)
Figure 5

TC2—pitchwise distribution of absolute flow yaw angle downstream of rotor 1 at (a) 79% and (b) 23% span (eight stator clocking positions at RR00)

Grahic Jump Location
+TC2—time resolved pitchwise distribution of absolute flow yaw angle downstream of rotor 1 at 79% span (a) SS00RR00 and (b) SS50RR00
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC2—time resolved pitchwise distribution of absolute flow yaw angle downstream of rotor 1 at 79% span (a) SS00RR00 and (b) SS50RR00
Figure 6

TC2—time resolved pitchwise distribution of absolute flow yaw angle downstream of rotor 1 at 79% span (a) SS00RR00 and (b) SS50RR00

Grahic Jump Location
+Flow yaw angle distribution downstream of rotor 1 at (a) 0% and (b) 50% stator clocking (RR00)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Flow yaw angle distribution downstream of rotor 1 at (a) 0% and (b) 50% stator clocking (RR00)
Figure 7

Flow yaw angle distribution downstream of rotor 1 at (a) 0% and (b) 50% stator clocking (RR00)

Grahic Jump Location
+Difference of flow yaw angles between 50% and 0% Stator clocking (RR00) downstream of rotor 1. (a) Pitchwise distribution and (b) circumferentially massaveraged and spanwise distribution
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Difference of flow yaw angles between 50% and 0% Stator clocking (RR00) downstream of rotor 1. (a) Pitchwise distribution and (b) circumferentially massaveraged and spanwise distribution
Figure 8

Difference of flow yaw angles between 50% and 0% Stator clocking (RR00) downstream of rotor 1. (a) Pitchwise distribution and (b) circumferentially massaveraged and spanwise distribution

Grahic Jump Location
+Difference between 50% and 0% rotor clocking in flow yaw angle distribution downstream of rotor 1 at (a) SS00 and (b) SS50
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Difference between 50% and 0% rotor clocking in flow yaw angle distribution downstream of rotor 1 at (a) SS00 and (b) SS50
Figure 9

Difference between 50% and 0% rotor clocking in flow yaw angle distribution downstream of rotor 1 at (a) SS00 and (b) SS50

Grahic Jump Location
+Spanwise total pressure distribution downstream of rotor 1—comparison of CFD and experiment
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Spanwise total pressure distribution downstream of rotor 1—comparison of CFD and experiment
Figure 10

Spanwise total pressure distribution downstream of rotor 1—comparison of CFD and experiment

Grahic Jump Location
+TC1, CFD—comparison of total pressure coefficient distribution of experiment and CFD downstream of rotor 1 at RR00. (a) SS00 (Exp.), (b) SS00 (CFD), (c) SS50 (Exp.), and (d) SS50 (CFD)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
TC1, CFD—comparison of total pressure coefficient distribution of experiment and CFD downstream of rotor 1 at RR00. (a) SS00 (Exp.), (b) SS00 (CFD), (c) SS50 (Exp.), and (d) SS50 (CFD)
Figure 11

TC1, CFD—comparison of total pressure coefficient distribution of experiment and CFD downstream of rotor 1 at RR00. (a) SS00 (Exp.), (b) SS00 (CFD), (c) SS50 (Exp.), and (d) SS50 (CFD)

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
Introduction
Turbine Aerodynamics: Axial-Flow and Radial-Flow Turbine Design and Analysis> Chapter 1
Other Components and Variations
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 13
Control and Operational Performance
Closed-Cycle Gas Turbines> Chapter 5
Outlook
Closed-Cycle Gas Turbines> Chapter 11
Regression Based Neural Network for Studying the Vibration Control of the Rotor Blade for Micro-Unmanned Helicopter
International Conference on Mechanical and Electrical Technology, 3rd, (ICMET-China 2011), Volumes 1–3
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