0
Research Papers

Effects of an Axisymmetric Contoured Endwall on a Nozzle Guide Vane: Adiabatic Effectiveness Measurements

[+] Author and Article Information
A. A. Thrift

Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16803aat142@psu.edu

K. A. Thole

Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16803kthole@psu.edu

S. Hada

Takasago Machinery Works, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Hyogo 676-8686, Japansatoshi_hada@mhi.co.jp

J. Turbomach 133(4), 041007 (Apr 20, 2011) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002965 History: Received June 30, 2010; Revised July 01, 2010; Published April 20, 2011; Online April 20, 2011

Gas turbine designs seek improved performance by modifying the endwalls of nozzle guide vanes in the engine hot section. Within the nozzle guide vanes, these modifications can be in the form of an axisymmetric contour as the area contracts from the combustor to the turbine. This paper investigates the effect of axisymmetric endwall contouring on the cooling performance of a film cooled endwall. Adiabatic effectiveness measurements were performed in a planar passage for comparison to a contoured passage, whereby the exit Reynolds numbers were matched. For the contoured passage, measurements were performed both on the flat endwall and on the contoured endwall. Fully expanded film cooling holes were distributed on the endwall surface preceded by a two-dimensional slot normal to the inlet axis. Results indicated that the coolant coverage from the upstream leakage slot was spread over a larger area of the contoured endwall in comparison to the flat endwall of the planar passage. Film cooling effectiveness on the flat endwall of the contoured passage showed minimal differences relative to the planar passage results. The contracting endwall of the contoured passage, however, showed a significant reduction with average film cooling effectiveness levels approximately 40% lower than the planar passage at low film cooling flow rates. In the case of all endwalls, increasing leakage and film cooling mass flow rates led to an increase in cooling effectiveness and coolant coverage.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
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

Depiction of the low speed, closed loop wind tunnel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic of the (a) planar passage, (b) contoured passage with contour on the ceiling, and (c) contoured passage with contour on the floor

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Schematic of the film cooling hole distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Midspan pressure distributions along the center vane for both the planar and contoured passages starting at the origin of the center vane

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Contours of local blowing ratio for the flat endwall of the planar passage: (a) 0.3% FC, (b) 0.5% FC, and (c) 0.7% FC, the flat endwall of the contoured passage: (d) 0.5% FC, and the contoured endwall of the contoured passage: (e) 0.5% FC

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison of adiabatic effectiveness contours between the three endwalls for (a) 0.3% FC and 0.3% leakage flow, (b) 0.3% FC and 0.5% leakage flow, and (c) 0.3% FC and 0.7% leakage flow

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Streamtrace predictions along the vane stagnation plane (x-z) with 0.75% leakage flow for the (a) flat endwall of the planar passage and (b) contoured endwall of the contoured passage

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of nondimensional leakage flow temperatures across the pitch of the upstream leakage slot at different leakage flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of predicted adiabatic effectiveness contours between the three endwalls for (a) 0.25% FC and (b) 0.75% FC

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of adiabatic effectiveness contours between the three endwalls for (a) 0.3% FC and 0.3% leakage flow, (b) 0.5% FC and 0.3% leakage flow, and (c) 0.7% FC and 0.3% leakage flow

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of adiabatic effectiveness levels between the three endwalls for 0.3% FC and 0.3% leakage flow, sampled along inviscid streamlines released from (a) 25% pitch and (b) 50% pitch

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Comparison of adiabatic effectiveness levels between the three endwalls for 0.5% FC and 0.3% leakage flow, sampled along inviscid streamlines released from (a) 25% pitch and (b) 50% pitch

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Comparison of adiabatic effectiveness levels between the three endwalls for 0.7% FC and 0.3% leakage flow, sampled along inviscid streamlines released from (a) 25% pitch and (b) 50% pitch

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