0
Research Papers

Assessment of URANS and DES for Prediction of Leading Edge Film Cooling

[+] Author and Article Information
Toshihiko Takahashi

Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 2-6-1 Nagasaka, Yokosuka, Kanagawa 240-0196, Japantosihiko@criepi.denken.or.jp

Ken-ichi Funazaki

 Iwate University, 4-3-5, Ueda, Morioka, Iwate 020-8551, Japanfunazaki@iwate-u.ac.jp

Hamidon Bin Salleh

 University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, 86400 Parit Raja, Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysiahamidon@uthm.edu.my

Eiji Sakai

Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 2-6-1 Nagasaka, Yokosuka, Kanagawa 240-0196, Japane-sakai@criepi.denken.or.jp

Kazunori Watanabe

Planning Group, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 1-6-1 Ohtemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8126, Japankazunori@criepi.denken.or.jp

J. Turbomach 134(3), 031008 (Jul 14, 2011) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003054 History: Received June 28, 2010; Revised July 23, 2010; Published July 14, 2011; Online July 14, 2011

This paper describes the assessment of CFD simulations for the film cooling on the blade leading edge with circular cooling holes in order to contribute durability assessment of the turbine blades. Unsteady RANS applying a k-ε-v2-f turbulence model and the Spalart and Allmaras turbulence model and detached-eddy simulation (DES) based on the Spalart and Allmaras turbulence model are addressed to solve thermal convection. The CFD calculations were conducted by simulating a semicircular model in the wind tunnel experiments. The DES and also the k-ε-v2-f model evaluate explicitly the unsteady fluctuation of local temperature by the vortex structures, so that the predicted film cooling effectiveness is comparatively in agreement with the measurements. On the other hand, the predicted temperature fields by the Spalart and Allmaras model are less diffusive than the DES and the k-ε-v2-f model. In the present turbulence modeling, the DES only predicts the penetration of main flow into the film cooling hole but the Spalart and Allmaras model is not able to evaluate the unsteadiness and the vortex structures clearly, and overpredict film cooling effectiveness on the partial surface.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Leading edge model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Computational domain: (a) whole domain and (b) primary domain (extracted from the whole domain)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Outlines of CFD mesh (surface mesh): (a) mesh of the primary domain and (b) mesh around the leading edge (expanded)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Variations of predicted effectiveness with mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Locations of temperature measurement by TC: (a) measured planes and (b) measurement points in each plane

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Fraction of blowing ratio for each cooling hole

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Time-averaged local adiabatic effectiveness: (a) DES, (b) V2F, and (c) SA

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Measured distributions of adiabatic effectiveness: (a) measurements with TCs and (b) measurements with thermochromatic LQ (black area is due to nonreaction of the liquid crystal)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Time-averaged distributions of spanwise-averaged film cooling effectiveness: (a) BR∼1 and (b) BR∼2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Time-averaged local temperature on normal planes to model surfaces and spanwise profiles of film cooling effectiveness on the surfaces (a) BR∼1 and (b) BR∼2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Time-averaged local temperature on normal planes to model surfaces and spanwise profiles of film cooling effectiveness on the surfaces (a) BR∼1 and (b) BR∼2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Instantaneous local temperature on normal planes to the surface BR∼1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Instantaneous vortex structures (Q=−3×106), colored by local nondimensional temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Instantaneous iso-surfaces of nondimensional temperature η=0.4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Iso-surfaces of nondimensional temperature η=0.4, BR∼1, views from the bottom of the model: (a) time-averaged view and (b) instantaneous view

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