0
Research Papers

Validation of Numerical Simulation for Rotating Stall in a Transonic Fan

[+] Author and Article Information
Minsuk Choi

Assistant Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Myongji University,
Yongin 449-728, South Korea
e-mail: mchoi@mju.ac.kr

Nigel H. S. Smith

Engineering Specialist
Aerodynamics,
Rolls-Royce plc,
Derby DE24 8BJ, UK
e-mail: nigel.h.s.smith@rolls-royce.com

Mehdi Vahdati

Principal Research Fellow
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Imperial College London,
London SW7 2BX, UK
e-mail: m.vahdati@imperial.ac.uk

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received November 23, 2011; final manuscript received December 9, 2011; published online November 1, 2012. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 135(2), 021004 (Nov 01, 2012) (8 pages) Paper No: TURBO-11-1246; doi: 10.1115/1.4006641 History: Received November 23, 2011; Accepted December 09, 2011

This paper addresses a comparison of numerical stall simulations with experimental data at 60% (subsonic) and 95% (supersonic) of the design speed in a modern transonic fan rig. The unsteady static pressures were obtained with high frequency Kulite transducers mounted on the casing upstream and downstream of the fan. The casing pressure variation was clearly visible in the measurements when a stall cell passed below the transducers. Numerical stall simulations were conducted using an implicit, time-accurate, 3D compressible Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) solver. The comparisons between the experiment and simulation mainly cover performance curves and time-domain pressure traces of Kulites during rotating stall. At two different fan speeds, the stall characteristics such as the number and rotating speed of the stall cells were well-matched to the experimental values. The mass flow rate and the loading parameter under the fully-developed rotating stall also showed good agreement with the experiment. In both the numerical and experimental results, a large stall cell was eventually formed after stall inception regardless of the fan speed. Based on the validation, the detailed flow has been evaluated to understand rotating stall in a transonic fan. In addition, it was found that the mass flow measurement using casing static pressure might be wrong during transient flow if the Kulites were mounted too close to the fan blade.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Computational domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Performance curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Static pressure time history at six numerical sensors located 50% axial chord upstream of the fan for 60% speed: (a) experiment, and (b) computation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Static pressure time history at six numerical sensors located 50% axial chord upstream of the fan for 95% speed: (a) experiment, and (b) computation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Static pressure time history at 60% speed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Static pressure distribution at 1.75 axial chord upstream of the fan in the rotating frame for 60% speed: (a) 1 revolution, (b) 5 revolutions, (c) 8 revolutions, and (d) 24 revolutions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Static pressure distribution at 1.75 axial chord upstream of the fan in the rotating frame for 95% speed: (a) 1 revolution, (b) 3 revolutions, (c) 5 revolutions, and (d) 20 revolutions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Entropy distribution and instantaneous stream lines inboard of the tip (99% span from hub) for 60% speed: (a) 1 revolution, (b) 2 revolutions, and (c) 3 revolutions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Entropy distribution and instantaneous stream lines inboard of the tip (99% span from hub) for 95% speed: (a) 1.5 revolutions, (b) 2 revolutions, and (c) 2.5 revolutions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Static pressure distribution inboard of the tip (99% span from hub) for 95% speed: (a) 2 revolutions and (b) 2.5 revolutions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Static pressure variation across the blade inboard of the tip for 95% speed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Fourier components of casing static pressure at the inlet before stall inception: (a) 60% speed, and (b) 95% speed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Blockage variation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Mass flow rate difference caused by the calculation method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Entropy distribution on the casing: (a) 60% speed, and (b) 95% speed

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