0
Research Papers

Simulations of Multiphase Particle Deposition on a Nonaxisymmetric Contoured Endwall With Film-Cooling

[+] Author and Article Information
Seth A. Lawson

e-mail: seth.lawson@netl.doe.gov

Stephen P. Lynch

e-mail: lynchsp@utrc.utc.com

Karen A. Thole

e-mail: kthole@engr.psu.edu
The Pennsylvania State University,
Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering,
136 Reber Building,
University Park, PA 16802

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received July 11, 2012; final manuscript received July 31, 2012; published online March 25, 2013. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 135(3), 031032 (Mar 25, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-12-1137; doi: 10.1115/1.4007598 History: Received July 11, 2012; Revised July 31, 2012

Designing turbine components for maximum aerodynamic performance with adequate cooling is a critical challenge for gas turbine engineers, particularly at the endwall of a turbine, due to complex secondary flows. To complicate matters, impurities from the fuel and intake air can deposit on film-cooled components downstream of the combustor. Deposition-induced roughness can reduce cooling effectiveness and aerodynamic performance dramatically. One method commonly used for reducing the effects of secondary flows on aerodynamic performance is endwall contouring. The current study evaluates deposition effects on endwall contouring given the change to the secondary flow pattern. For the current study, deposition was dynamically simulated in a turbine cascade to determine its effects on film-cooling with and without endwall contouring. Computationally predicted impactions were in qualitative agreement with experimental deposition simulations, showing that contouring reduced deposition around strategically placed film-cooling holes. Deposition reduced cooling effectiveness by 50% on a flat endwall and 40% on an identically cooled contoured endwall. Although 40% is still a dramatic reduction in effectiveness, the method of using the endwall contouring to alter deposition effects shows promise.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Illustration of wind tunnel facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic of the Pack-B flat endwall configuration with passage 2 expanded

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Isometric view of Pack-B nonaxisymmetric contoured endwall

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic of turbulence grid with wax injection system developed by Lawson and Thole [1]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Area-averaged effectiveness and effectiveness reduction for the flat endwall at M = 1.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Effectiveness contours and corresponding deposition photographs at M = 1.0 and TSP = 0.3 (a) before deposition and (b) after 900 g of wax injection

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Effectiveness contours and corresponding deposition photographs at M = 2.0 and TSP = 0.3 (a) before deposition and (b) after 900 g of wax injection

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Adiabatic effectiveness contours and corresponding deposition photographs (a) before deposition, (b) after 300 g, (c) after 600 g, and (d) after 900 g of wax injection

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Area-averaged effectiveness plotted with respect to blowing ratio for flat and contoured endwalls before deposition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Centerline and laterally averaged effectiveness for hole 3 on the contoured endwall at M = 1.0 compared with data obtained by Lynch et al. [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Centerline and laterally averaged effectiveness for hole 3 on the flat endwall at M = 1.0 compared with data obtained by Lynch et al. [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Baseline adiabatic effectiveness contours for the flat endwall at (a) M = 1.0 and (b) M = 2.0 and the contoured endwall at (c) M = 1.0 and (d) M = 2.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Particle size distributions as measured by the Malvern particle analyzer and as modeled using the Rosin–Rammler method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Depictions of (a) the computational domain and boundary conditions, (b) the flat endwall grid, (c) the contoured endwall grid, and (d) a top view of the flat endwall grid [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Accretion rates predicted by the discrete phase model in FLUENT for the Pack-B (a) flat endwall and (b) contoured endwall with M = 1.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Area-averaged effectiveness plotted with respect to blowing ratio for flat and contoured endwalls before and after deposition (900 g) with TSP = 0.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Effectiveness contours and deposition photographs for the flat and contoured endwalls at M = 1.0 with (a) TSP = 0.3 and (b) TSP = 1.1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Area-averaged effectiveness plotted relative to TSP for flat and contoured endwalls at M = 1.0

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