0
Research Papers

Effects of Obstructions and Surface Roughness on Film Cooling Effectiveness With and Without a Transverse Trench

[+] Author and Article Information
Ruwan P. Somawardhana, David G. Bogard

Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712

J. Turbomach 131(1), 011010 (Oct 17, 2008) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2950063 History: Received June 20, 2007; Revised October 17, 2007; Published October 17, 2008

Recent studies have shown that film cooling with holes embedded in a shallow trench significantly improves cooling performance. In this study, the performance of shallow trench configurations was investigated for simulated deteriorated surface conditions, i.e., increased surface roughness and near-hole obstructions. Experiments were conducted on the suction side of a scaled-up simulated turbine vane. Results from the study indicated that as much as 50% degradation occurred with upstream obstructions, but downstream obstructions actually enhanced film cooling effectiveness. However, the transverse trench configuration performed significantly better than the traditional cylindrical holes, both with and without obstructions and almost eliminated the effects of both surface roughness and obstructions.

Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of the simulated turbine vane cascade test section

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic of test vane in detail

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Photograph of coolant holes showing sandpaper placement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Isometric view of shape 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness comparison of high and low turbulence levels on the base line configuration with a rough wall

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Spatially averaged adiabatic effectiveness comparison of the base line case with smooth and rough walls

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Spatially averaged adiabatic effectiveness of the base line case with smooth or rough walls and varying obstruction configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness of the base line case with a rough wall and upstream obstructions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness of the base line case with a rough wall and downstream obstructions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Contour plots of adiabatic effectiveness for the base line case at M=0.6 with a rough wall and (a) no obstructions and (b) downstream obstructions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness of the base line case with a rough wall and both upstream and downstream obstructions simultaneously

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Contour plots of adiabatic effectiveness for the base line case at M=1.2 with a rough wall and (a) no obstructions and (b) both upstream and downstream obstructions simultaneously

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Spatially averaged adiabatic effectiveness of both base line and trench cases with both smooth and rough surfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Spatially averaged adiabatic effectiveness of the trench case with a rough wall and various obstruction configurations normalized by the rough wall trench case with no obstructions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Spatially averaged adiabatic effectiveness of the trench case with a rough wall with and without obstructions normalized by the maximum base line value for each obstruction configuration

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