0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Comparison of Turbine Tip Leakage Flow for Flat Tip and Squealer Tip Geometries at High-Speed Conditions

[+] Author and Article Information
Nicole L. Key, Tony Arts

 Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, B1640 Rhode Saint Genèse, Belgium

J. Turbomach 128(2), 213-220 (Mar 01, 2004) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2162183 History: Received October 01, 2003; Revised March 01, 2004

The tip leakage flow characteristics for flat and squealer turbine tip geometries are studied in the von Karman Institute Isentropic Light Piston Compression Tube facility, CT-2, at different Reynolds and Mach number conditions for a fixed value of the tip gap in a nonrotating, linear cascade arrangement. To the best knowledge of the authors, these are among the very few high-speed tip flow data for the flat tip and squealer tip geometries. Oil flow visualizations and static pressure measurements on the blade tip, blade surface, and corresponding endwall provide insight to the structure of the two different tip flows. Aerodynamic losses are measured for the different tip arrangements, also. The squealer tip provides a significant decrease in velocity through the tip gap with respect to the flat tip blade. For the flat tip, an increase in Reynolds number causes an increase in tip velocity levels, but the squealer tip is relatively insensitive to changes in Reynolds number.

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

Instrumented blade

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Surface velocities at high M, high Re

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Comparison of CFD and experimental results for flat tip at 97.3% span

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Flat and squealer tip comparison of 97.3% span surface velocity distributions at high Re, high M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Flow visualization of inner squealer pressure side rim near leading edge

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Pressure ratios on squealer groove at 97.3% span for high Re, high M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Flow visualization on squealer (a) and flat (b) tip blades

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Flow visualization of separation vortices due to entrance (a) and Exit (b) effects

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of tip and endwall camber line pressure ratios for flat tip blade at high M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of tip and endwall pressure ratio over squealer tip blade at high M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Endwall pressure ratios for flat (a) and squealer (b) at high Re, high M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Loss distribution on flat tip blade at low M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Loss distribution comparison between flat and squealer tip at low Re, low M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Loss distribution comparison between flat and squealer tip at high Re, low M

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Flow visualization of suction side (flat tip)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Flow visualization of suction side (squealer tip)

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