0
Research Papers

Understanding Effects of Wet Compression on Separated Flow Behavior in an Axial Compressor Stage Using CFD Analysis

[+] Author and Article Information
Lanxin Sun

 Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, Chinasunlanxin@yahoo.com.cn

Qun Zheng

 Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, Chinazhengqun@hrbeu.edu.cn

Yijin Li

 Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China

Rakesh Bhargava

Foster Wheeler USA Corporation

J. Turbomach 133(3), 031026 (Feb 28, 2011) (14 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003003 History: Received December 22, 2008; Revised May 25, 2009; Published February 28, 2011; Online February 28, 2011

The effects of wet compression on the flow field within a compressor stage, particularly in the presence of the separated flow region, are not fully understood. Numerical simulations of 3D compressible separated flows within a wet compression compressor stage are carried out using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) program. Numerical computations of flow fields in a compressor cascade with wet compression assume that a separated region exist in the corner of the rotor blade suction surface and hub surface in the case of dry compression. Under different operating conditions and with wet compression, this study presents the changes in the extent of separated region on the flow channel surfaces, compression efficiency, pressure ratio and specific compression work, etc. Also, effects of factors such as droplet size, droplet temperature, and injected water flow rate on the compressor stage performance and flow field within compressor stage passage have been investigated. The results show that wet compression could weaken and eliminate the flow separation and then the efficiency and pressure ratio maintain a high level.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Heat, mass, and momentum transfer between the droplet and the continuous phase

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Stage configuration, mesh, and spraying surface location

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Comparison of limiting streamlines on rotor channel surfaces between dry and wet compressions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Comparison of inlet flow rate of dry and wet compressions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Comparison of outlet total temperature dry and wet compressions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison of pressure ratio dry and wet compressions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Internal heat transfer and compression work of the wet compression system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Efficiency of different droplet temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 26

Outlet total temperature of different droplet temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 27

Inlet mass flow rate of different droplet temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Limiting streamlines on rotor suction surface (droplet diameter 3 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Specific work of different droplet diameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Outlet total temperature of different droplet diameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Pressure and flow rate ratio of different droplet diameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Efficiency of different droplet diameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Comparison of droplet trajectory (colored by residence time (s) at different droplet diameters (fogging flow rate 0.02 kg/s))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Comparison of temperature (K) contour on surfaces of rotor hub at different droplet diameters (fogging flow rate 0.02 kg/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Comparison of streamlines on surfaces of rotor hub at different droplet diameters (fogging flow rate 0.02 kg/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Comparison of limiting streamlines on rotor suction surfaces at different droplet diameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Outlet total temperature of different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Pressure ratio and flow rate ratio of different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Specific work of different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Efficiency of different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of total temperature (K) contour on surfaces of rotor hub under different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of streamlines on surfaces of rotor hub under different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of limiting streamlines on rotor blade suction surfaces under different fogging flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of efficiency dry and wet compressions

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