Research Papers

Analysis of Unsteady Tip and Endwall Heat Transfer in a Highly Loaded Transonic Turbine Stage

[+] Author and Article Information
Vikram Shyam

 NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH 44135

Ali Ameri

 NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH 44135; Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 44135

Jen-Ping Chen

Aerospace Engineering, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 44135

J. Turbomach 134(4), 041022 (Jul 25, 2011) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003719 History: Revised September 12, 2010; Received November 02, 2010; Published July 25, 2011; Online July 25, 2011

In a previous study, vane-rotor shock interactions and heat transfer on the rotor blade of a highly loaded transonic turbine stage were simulated. The geometry consists of a high pressure turbine vane and a downstream rotor blade. This study focuses on the physics of flow and heat transfer in the rotor tip, casing, and hub regions. The simulation was performed using the unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes code MSU-TURBO . A low Reynolds number k-ε model was utilized to model turbulence. The rotor blade in question has a tip gap height of 2.1% of the blade height. The Reynolds number of the flow is approximately 3×106/m. Unsteadiness was observed at the tip surface that results in intermittent “hot spots.” It is demonstrated that unsteadiness in the tip gap is governed by inviscid effects due to high speed flow and is not strongly dependent on pressure ratio across the tip gap contrary to published observations that have primarily dealt with subsonic tip flows. The high relative Mach numbers in the tip gap lead to a choking of the leakage flow that translates to a relative attenuation of losses at higher loading. The efficacy of new tip geometry is discussed to minimize heat flux at the tip while maintaining choked conditions. In addition, an explanation is provided that shows the mechanism behind the rise in stagnation temperature on the casing to values above the absolute total temperature at the inlet. It is concluded that even in steady (in a computational sense) mode, work transfer to the near tip fluid occurs due to relative shearing by the casing. This is believed to be the first such explanation of the work transfer phenomenon in the open literature. The difference in pattern between steady and time-averaged heat fluxes at the hub is also explained.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical EngineersThe United States Government retains, and by accepting the article for publication, the publisher acknowledges that the United States Government retains, a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allows others to do so, for United States Government purposes.
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Rotor blade surface and hub surface mesh (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Boundary conditions for unsteady simulation (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Grid in the tip region of rotor

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Grid in the tip region of rotor

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Tip Stanton number comparison between CFD and experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Time-averaged tip Stanton number

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Plane 1 on the tip surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Zoomed in view of separated zone in Fig. 7

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Plane 2 on the tip surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Compressions and expansions in the tip gap (on Plane 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Discovery of unsteady hot spot (snapshot of video)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Tip gap during hot spot

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Tip gap before hot spot

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Streamlines through the tip gap before (top) and during (bottom) the hot spot

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Hub Stanton number for steady (top) and time-averaged (bottom) simulations (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Hub Stanton number: comparison between CFD and experiment (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Hub boundary layer shape at the rotor inlet, characterized by vorticity magnitude (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Stanton number on rotor casing for steady (top) and time-averaged (bottom) unsteady simulations (12)




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