0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

# Experimental and Computational Comparisons of Fan-Shaped Film Cooling on a Turbine Vane Surface

[+] Author and Article Information
W. Colban, K. A. Thole

Mechanical Engineering Department,  Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA

M. Haendler

Siemens Power Generation, Muelheim a. d. Ruhr, Germany

J. Turbomach 129(1), 23-31 (Jan 29, 2006) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2370747 History: Received January 12, 2006; Revised January 29, 2006

## Abstract

The flow exiting the combustor in a gas turbine engine is considerably hotter than the melting temperature of the turbine section components, of which the turbine nozzle guide vanes see the hottest gas temperatures. One method used to cool the vanes is to use rows of film-cooling holes to inject bleed air that is lower in temperature through an array of discrete holes onto the vane surface. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the row-by-row interaction of fan-shaped holes as compared to the performance of a single row of fan-shaped holes in the same locations. This study presents adiabatic film-cooling effectiveness measurements from a scaled-up, two-passage vane cascade. High-resolution film-cooling measurements were made with an infrared camera at a number of engine representative flow conditions. Computational fluid dynamics predictions were also made to evaluate the performance of some of the current turbulence models in predicting a complex flow such as turbine film-cooling. The renormalization group (RNG) $k‐ε$ turbulence model gave a closer prediction of the overall level of film effectiveness, while the $v2‐f$ turbulence model gave a more accurate representation of the flow physics seen in the experiments.

<>

## Figures

Figure 2

Contoured end-wall surface definition

Figure 3

Schematic of experimental test section

Figure 4

Fan-shaped cooling hole detailed geometry

Figure 5

Test matrix of blowing ratios for each case

Figure 17

Comparison of multirow and single-row data on the suction side at nominal conditions

Figure 19

Suction-side comparison of laterally averaged film effectiveness with computations

Figure 20

Streamlines near the leading edge for (a) RNG k‐ε and (b) v2‐f models at nominal conditions

Figure 18

CFD contours for the suction side

Figure 1

Schematic of the low-speed recirculating wind tunnel facility

Figure 6

2D view of the CFD domain (the RNG k‐ε model featured the entire span and contour, whereas the v2‐f prediction featured only a 6cm spanwise periodic section)

Figure 7

Computational grid sample of (a) the RNG k‐ε surface mesh, (b) the v2‐f boundary layer mesh, and (c) the v2‐f surface mesh

Figure 8

Comparison of results to previously published data

Figure 9

Pressure side experimental results

Figure 10

Experimental laterally averaged adiabatic film-cooling effectiveness on the pressure side

Figure 11

Comparison of multirow and single-row data on the pressure side at nominal conditions

Figure 12

CFD contours for the pressure side

Figure 13

Pressure-side comparison of laterally averaged film effectiveness with computations

Figure 14

Streamlines near the leading edge for (a) RNG k‐ε and (b) v2‐f models at nominal conditions

Figure 15

Experimental results on the suction side

Figure 16

Experimental laterally averaged adiabatic film-cooling effectiveness on the suction side

## 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.

Topic Collections