0
Research Papers

A Study of Deposition on a Turbine Vane With a Thermal Barrier Coating and Various Film Cooling Geometries

[+] Author and Article Information
F. Todd Davidson

e-mail: davidsonft@gmail.com

David A. Kistenmacher

e-mail: dkistenmacher@gmail.com

David G. Bogard

e-mail: dbogard@mail.utexas.edu
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, Texas 78712

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the Journal of Turbomachinery. Manuscript received June 2, 2013; final manuscript received June 23, 2013; published online September 26, 2013. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 136(4), 041009 (Sep 26, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-13-1089; doi: 10.1115/1.4024885 History: Received June 02, 2013; Revised June 23, 2013

Recent interest has been shown in using synthetic gaseous (syngas) fuels to power gas turbine engines. An important issue concerning these fuels is the potential for increased contaminant deposition that can inhibit cooling designs and expedite the material degradation of vital turbine components. The purpose of this study was to provide a detailed understanding of how contaminants deposit on the surface of a turbine vane with a thermal barrier coating (TBC). The vane model used in this study was designed to match the thermal behavior of real engine components by properly scaling the convective heat transfer coefficients as well as the thermal conductivity of the vane wall. Four different film cooling configurations were studied: round holes, craters, a trench, and a modified trench. The contaminants used in this study were small particles of paraffin wax that were sprayed into the mainstream flow of the wind tunnel. The wax particles modeled both the molten nature of contaminants in an engine as well as the particle trajectory by properly matching the expected range of Stokes number. This study found that the presence of film cooling significantly increased the accumulation of deposits. It was also found that the deposition behavior was strongly affected by the film cooling configuration that was used on the pressure side of the vane. The craters and trench performed the best in mitigating the accumulation of deposits immediately downstream of the film cooling configuration. In general, the presence of deposits reduced the film cooling performance on the surface of the TBC. However, the additional thermal insulation provided by the deposits improved the cooling performance at the interface of the TBC and vane wall.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of turbine vane test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Test airfoil schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Vane cross section and s/d locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematics of the various pressure side cooling hole designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Wax spray system schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Wax particle sizing micrograph

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Vane wall cross section with TBC and relative location of measurements of interest

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of ϕ with and without TBC for round holes with an active showerhead

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of laterally averaged surface effectiveness with and without TBC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Photographs of vane surface before and after deposition with no film cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Contour plots of τ for vane with no film cooling before and after deposition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Photographs before and after deposition for round holes at M=2.0 and MSH=2.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Contour plots of τ for round holes at M=2.0 with an active showerhead before and after deposition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Photographs before and after deposition for round holes at M=0.7 with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Contour plots of τ for round holes at M=0.7 before and after deposition with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Photographs before and after deposition for craters at M=2.0 with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Contour plots of τ for craters at M=2.0 before and after deposition with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Photographs before and after deposition for a modified trench at M=2.0 with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Contour plots of τ for a modified trench at M=2.0 before and after deposition with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Photographs before and after deposition for a trench at M=2.0 with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Contour plots of τ for a trench at M=2.0 before and after deposition with no showerhead cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Effect of deposition on τ for varying film cooling designs at M=2.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Effect of deposition on ϕ for varying film cooling designs at M=2.0

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