0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Effect of Midpassage Gap, Endwall Misalignment, and Roughness on Endwall Film-Cooling

[+] Author and Article Information
N. D. Cardwell, N. Sundaram, K. A. Thole

Mechanical Engineering Department, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061

J. Turbomach 128(1), 62-70 (Feb 01, 2005) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2098791 History: Received October 01, 2004; Revised February 01, 2005

To maintain acceptable turbine airfoil temperatures, film cooling is typically used whereby coolant, extracted from the compressor, is injected through component surfaces. In manufacturing a turbine, the first stage vanes are cast in either single airfoils or double airfoils. As the engine is assembled, these singlets or doublets are placed in a turbine disk in which there are inherent gaps between the airfoils. The turbine is designed to allow outflow of high-pressure coolant rather than hot gas ingestion. Moreover, it is quite possible that the singlets or doublets become misaligned during engine operation. It has also become of interest to the turbine community as to the effect of corrosion and deposition of particles on component heat transfer. This study uses a large-scale turbine vane in which the following two effects are investigated: the effect of a midpassage gap on endwall film cooling and the effect of roughness on endwall film cooling. The results indicate that the midpassage gap was found to have a significant effect on the coolant exiting from the combustor-turbine interface slot. When the gap is misaligned, the results indicate a severe reduction in the film-cooling effectiveness in the case where the pressure side endwall is below the endwall associated with the suction side of the adjacent vane.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Directions of the coolant hole injection along with isovelocity contours and the midpassage gap location for mating two turbine vane platforms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Cross-section view (section AA, Fig. 1) of the midpassage gap plenum and accompanying seal strip (see Table 2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Side and upstream views of the three alignment modes for two adjacent vane platforms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Illustration of the wind tunnel facility

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Separate plenums for film cooling and upstream slot provided independent control of the flow through each of them

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Contours of adiabatic effectiveness for film-cooling cases (a) rough endwall with midpassage slot and (b) smooth endwall with no midpassage slot

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Plots of laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness on the film-cooling holes on the pressure side: (a) for 0.75% upstream slot flow and 0.5% film cooling and (b) 0.75% upstream slot flow and 0.75% film cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for 0.35%, 0. 5%, and 0.75% film-cooling flows for a rough endwall

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Contours of adiabatic effectiveness with a rough endwall with 0.75% slot flow for (a) 0.35% film cooling; (b) 0.5% film cooling; (c) 0.75% film cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Contours of adiabatic effectiveness on a rough endwall for the baseline film and slot cooling cases: (a) aligned, (b) dam, and (c) cascade endwall (note that U refers to raised side and D refers to lowered side)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Pitchwise-averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the baseline film and slot cooling cases: (a) along the suction side for the three endwall settings; (b) comparison between effectiveness on the suction and pressure side

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Nondimensionalized gap temperature profiles for the three endwall alignment modes and the velocity profile for an aligned gap

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Contours of adiabatic effectiveness on a rough endwall with cascade setting for different upstream slot flow rate with 0.5% film cooling: (a) 0.75% (I=0.08) slot flow; (b) 0.95% (I=0.12) slot flow; (c) 1.1% (I=0.16) slot flow

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