Research Papers

Application of Nonaxisymmetric Endwall Contouring to Conventional and High-Lift Turbine Airfoils

[+] Author and Article Information
E. A. Grover

Aerodynamics Group,
United Technologies,
Pratt & Whitney,
East Hartford, CT 06108

S. A. Sjolander

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Carleton University,
Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received March 21, 2011; final manuscript received January 28, 2013; published online September 13, 2013. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 135(6), 061006 (Sep 13, 2013) (8 pages) Paper No: TURBO-11-1045; doi: 10.1115/1.4024023 History: Received March 21, 2011; Revised January 28, 2013

Here, we report on the application of nonaxisymmetric endwall contouring to mitigate the endwall losses of one conventional and two high-lift low-pressure turbine airfoil designs. The design methodology presented combines a gradient-based optimization algorithm with a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) flow solver to systematically vary a free-form parameterization of the endwall. The ability of the CFD solver employed in this work to predict endwall loss modifications resulting from nonaxisymmetric contouring is demonstrated with previously published data. Based on the validated trend accuracy of the solver for predicting the effects of endwall contouring, the magnitude of predicted viscous losses forms the objective function for the endwall design methodology. This system has subsequently been employed to optimize contours for the conventional-lift Pack B and high-lift Pack D-F and Pack D-A low-pressure turbine airfoil designs. Comparisons between the predicted and measured loss benefits associated with the contouring for Pack D-F design are shown to be in reasonable agreement. Additionally, the predictions and data demonstrate that the Pack D-F endwall contour is effective at reducing losses primarily associated with the passage vortex. However, some deficiencies in predictive capabilities demonstrated here highlight the need for a better understanding of the physics of endwall loss-generation and improved predictive capabilities.

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


Sjolander, S. A., 1975, “The Endwall Boundary Layer in an Annular Cascade of Turbine Nozzle Guide Vanes,” Carleton University, Dept. of Mech. and Aeron. Engrg., Ottawa, Canada, Report No. TR ME/A 75-4.
Langston, L. S., Nice, M. L., and Hooper, R. M., 1976, “Three-Dimensional Flow Within a Turbine Cascade Passage,” ASME Paper No. 76-GT-50.
Sieverding, C. H., 1985, “Recent Progress in the Understanding of Basic Aspects of Secondary Flows in Turbine Blade Passages,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 107, pp. 248–252. [CrossRef]
Sharma, O. P., and Butler, T. L., 1987, “Predictions of Endwall Losses and Secondary Flows in Axial Flow Turbine Cascades,” ASME J. Turbomach., 109, pp. 229–236. [CrossRef]
Haselbach, F., Schiffer, H. P., Horsman, M., Dressen, S., Harvey, N., and Read, S., 2001, “The Application of Ultra-High Lift Blading in the BR715 LP Turbine,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0436.
Devenport, W. J., and Simpson, R. L., 1990, “Time-Dependent and Time-Averaged Turbulence Structure Near the Nose of a Wing-Body Junction,” J. Fluid Mech., 210, pp. 23–55. [CrossRef]
Zess, G. A., and Thole, K. A., 2001, “Computational Design and Experimental Evaluation of Using a Leading Edge Fillet on a Gas Turbine Vane,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0404.
Becz, S., Majewski, M. S., and Langston, L. S., 2004, “An Experimental Investigation of Contoured Leading Edges for Secondary Flow Loss Reduction,” ASME Paper No. GT2004-53964. [CrossRef]
Chung, J. T., and Simon, T. W., 1993, “Effectiveness of the Gas Turbine Endwall Fences in Secondary Flow Control at Elevated Free Stream Turbulence Levels,” ASME Paper No. 93-GT-51.
Aunapu, N. V., Volino, R. J., Flack, K. A., and Stoddard, R. M., 2000, “Secondary Flow Measurements in a Turbine Passage With Endwall Flow Modification,” ASME J. Turbomach., 122, pp. 651–658. [CrossRef]
Harvey, N. W., Rose, M. G., Taylor, M. D., Shahpar, S., Hartland, J. C., and Gregory-Smith, D. G., 2000, “Nonaxisymmetric Turbine End Wall Design—Part I: Three-Dimensional Linear Design System,” ASME J. Turbomach., 122, pp. 278–285. [CrossRef]
Hartland, J. C., Gregory-Smith, D. G., Harvey, N. W., and Rose, M. G., 2000, “Nonaxisymmetric Turbine End Wall Design—Part II: Experimental Validation,” ASME J. Turbomach., 122, pp. 286–293. [CrossRef]
Yan, J., Gregory-Smith, D. G., and Walker, P. J., 1999, “Secondary Flow Reduction in a Nozzle Guide Vane by Non-Axisymmetric End-Wall Contouring,” ASME Paper No. 99-GT-339.
Brennan, G., Harvey, N. W., Rose, M. G., Fomison, N., and Taylor, M. D., 2001, “Improving the Efficiency of the Trent 500 HP Turbine Using Non-Axisymmetric End Walls—Part I: Turbine Design,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0444.
Rose, M. G., Harvey, N. W., Seaman, P., Newman, D. A., and McManus, D., 2001, “Improving the Efficiency of the Trent 500 HP Turbine Using Non-Axisymmetric End Walls—Part II: Experimental Validation,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0505.
Harvey, N. W., Brennan, G., Newman, D. A., and Rose, M. G., 2002, “Improving Turbine Efficiency Using Non-Axisymmetric End Walls: Validation in the Multi-Row Environment and With Low Aspect Ratio Blading,” ASME Paper No. GT2002-30337. [CrossRef]
Ingram, G. L., Gregory-Smith, D. G., Rose, M. G., Harvey, N. W., and Brennan, G., 2002, “The Effect of End-Wall Profiling on Secondary Flow and Loss Development in a Turbine Cascade,” ASME Paper No. GT2002-30339. [CrossRef]
Torre, D., Vazquez, R., de la Rosa Blanco, E., and Hodson, H. P., 2006, “A New Alternative For the Reduction of Secondary Flows in Low Pressure Turbines,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-91002. [CrossRef]
Saha, A. K., Mahmood, G. I., and Acharya, S., 2006, “The Role of Leading-Edge Contouring on End-Wall Flow and Heat Transfer: Computations and Experiments,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90390. [CrossRef]
Ingram, G., Gregory-Smith, D. G., and Harvey, N. W., 2004, “Investigation of a Novel Secondary Flow Feature in a Turbine Cascade With End Wall Profiling,” ASME Paper No. GT2004-53589. [CrossRef]
Nagel, M. G., and Baier, R. D., 2003, “Experimentally Verified Numerical Optimization of a 3D-Parameterized Turbine Vane With Non-Axisymmetric End Walls,” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38624. [CrossRef]
Popovic, I., and Sjolander, S. A., 2004, private communication.
Popovic, I., Zhu, J., Dai, W., Sjolander, S. A., Praisner, T. J., and Grover, E. A., 2006, “Aerodynamics of a Family of Three Highly Loaded Low-Pressure Turbine Airfoils: Measured Effects of Reynolds Number and Turbulence Intensity in Steady Flow,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-91271. [CrossRef]
Praisner, T. J., Grover, E. A., Rice, M. J., and Clark, J. P., 2007, “Predicting Transition in Turbomachinery—Part II: Model Validation and Benchmarking,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129, pp. 14–22. [CrossRef]
Zoric, T., Popovic, I., Sjolander, S. A., Praisner, T. J., and Grover, E. A., 2007, “Comparative Investigation of Three Highly Loaded LP Turbine Airfoils—Part I: Measured Profile and Secondary Losses at Design Incidence,” ASME Paper No. GT2007-27537. [CrossRef]
Zoric, T., and Sjolander, S. A., 2004, private communication.
Weiss, A. P., and Fottner, L., 1995, “The Influence of Load Distribution on Secondary Flow in Straight Turbine Cascades,” ASME J. Turbomach., 117, pp. 133–141. [CrossRef]
Ni, R. H., 1982, “A Multiple-Grid Scheme for Solving the Euler Equations,” AIAA J., 20(11), pp. 1565–1571. [CrossRef]
Ni, R. H., and Bogoian, J. C., 1989, “Prediction of 3-D Multistage Turbine Flowfield Using a Multiple-Grid Euler Solver,” AIAA Paper No. 89-0203. [CrossRef]
Davis, R. L., Shang, T., Buteau, J., and Ni, R. H., 1996, “Prediction of 3-D Unsteady Flow in Multi-Stage Turbomachinery Using an Implicit Dual Time-Step Approach,” AIAA Paper No. 96-2565. [CrossRef]
Wilcox, D. C., 1998, Turbulence Modeling for CFD, 2nd ed., DCW Industries, La Canada, CA.
Baldwin, B. S., and Lomax, H., 1978, “Thin-Layer Approximations and Algebraic Model for Separated Turbulent Flows,” AIAA Paper No. 78-257. [CrossRef]
Praisner, T. J., and Clark, J. P., 2007, “Predicting Transition in Turbomachinery—Part I: A Review and New Model Development,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129, pp. 1–13. [CrossRef]
Becz, S., and Langston, L., 2003, private communication.
Praisner, T. J., and Smith, C. R., 2006, “The Dynamics of the Horseshoe Vortex and Associated Endwall Heat Transfer—Part I: Temporal Behavior,” ASME J. Turbomach., 128, pp. 747–754. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparisons of span-wise loss characteristics for the Pack B and high-lift Pack D airfoil designs (data is from Zoric and Sjolander [26])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Loading distributions for the Pack B, D-A, and D-F airfoil designs (data from Popovic and Sjolander [22])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Comparisons of the Pack B and high-lift Pack D airfoil designs. The Pack D designs generate 25% more lift per airfoil than the Pack B design.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Prototypical endwall flow topology in a row of turbine airfoils. Inlet boundary layer velocity vectors are shown in yellow, while the passage vortex is marked both by streamlines and by an isosurface of TKE (see online version for color).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparisons of predicted and measured span-wise loss characteristics for the Pack B and high-lift Pack D airfoil designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparisons of predicted and measured exit-plane loss distributions for the Langston cascade with and without contouring. Data is from Becz and Langston [34].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Example distribution of control points applied to a low-pressure turbine airfoil

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Root-section loadings for the Pack B and high-lift Pack D-F airfoil designs with and without endwall contouring

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Predicted results displaying exit-plane total pressure loss distributions as well as the passage vortex marked by an isosurface of TKE. The same TKE level is used in both the flat and contoured realizations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pack D-F exit-plane total pressure loss distributions from, at top, experimentation and predictions below. Axial location is 1.4Cx downstream of leading edge.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Measured and predicted mass-averaged span-wise loss distributions for Pack D-F with flat and contoured endwalls

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Optimized endwall shapes for Pack B, D-A, and D-F airfoils




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