0
Research Papers

Separation Control of Axial Compressor Cascade by Fluidic-Based Excitations

[+] Author and Article Information
Xinqian Zheng

State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Yangjun Zhang

State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, Chinazhengxq@tsinghua.edu.cn

Weidong Xing, Junyue Zhang

 National Key Laboratory of Diesel Engine Turbocharging Technology, Datong, Shanxi 037036, China

J. Turbomach 133(4), 041016 (Apr 21, 2011) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002407 History: Received October 03, 2007; Revised February 12, 2010; Published April 21, 2011; Online April 21, 2011

Flow separation control was investigated on a compressor cascade using three types of fluidic-based excitations: steady suction, steady blowing, and synthetic jet. By solving unsteady Reynolds–averaged Navier–Stokes equations, the effect of excitation parameters (amplitude, angle, and location) on performance was addressed. The results show that the separated flow can be controlled by the fluidic-based actuators effectively and the time-averaged performance of the flow field can be improved remarkably. Generally, the improvement can be enhanced when the amplitude of excitation is increased. The optimal direction varies with each type of excitations and is related to physical mechanisms underlying the separation control. For two types of steady excitations, the most effective jet location is at a distance upstream of the time-averaged separation point and the synthetic jet is just at the separation point.

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

Comparisons of static pressure distribution on profile surface between the measurements and the simulation results

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Cascade geometry and excitations parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The loss coefficient for different relative steady suction amplitude (α=−90 deg, l¯=15.6%)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Instantaneous contour plots for Ma, and vorticity plus streamlines. Steady suction (A¯=8%, α=90 deg, l¯=15.6%).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Instantaneous contour plots for Ma, and vorticity plus streamlines. Steady blowing for (A¯=75%, α=2 deg, l¯=15.6%).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The loss coefficient for different steady suction direction (A¯=8%)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Loss coefficient for different steady suction location (A¯=8%, α=−90 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Loss coefficient for different relative steady blowing amplitude at three locations (α=2 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Loss coefficient for steady blowing direction (A¯=90%, l¯=26.2%)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Loss coefficient for different steady blowing location (A¯=90%, α=2 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Loss coefficient for different synthetic jet amplitude (f¯=1, α=90 deg, l¯=26.2%)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Loss coefficient for different synthetic jet direction (f¯=1, l¯=26.2%, A¯=40%)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Loss coefficient versus synthetic jet location (f¯=1, A¯=30%, α=90 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Instantaneous contour plots for Ma, and total pressure plus streamlines. Baseline flow.

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