0
Journal of Turbomachinery | Volume 136 | Issue 4 | research-article
Research Papers

Influence of Purge Flow Injection Angle on the Aerothermal Performance of a Rotor Blade Cascade

[+] Author and Article Information
G. Barigozzi

e-mail: giovanna.barigozzi@unibg.it

G. Franchini

e-mail: giuseppe.franchini@unibg.it

A. Perdichizzi

e-mail: antonio.perdichizzi@unibg.it
Dipartimento di Ingegneria,
Università degli Studi di Bergamo,
Viale Marconi 5,
Dalmine (BG) 24044, Italy

M. Maritano

e-mail: maritano@aen.ansaldo.it

R. Abram

e-mail: Roberto.Abram@aen.ansaldo.it
Hot Gas Path Engineering,
Ansaldo Energia S.p.A.,
Via N. Lorenzi 8,
Genova 16152, Italy

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received June 13, 2013; final manuscript received June 27, 2013; published online September 26, 2013. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 136(4), 041012 (Sep 26, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: TURBO-13-1097; doi: 10.1115/1.4025168 History: Received June 13, 2013; Revised June 27, 2013
Article
References
Figures
Tables
Citing Articles

This paper is focused on the influence of stator-rotor purge flow injection angle on the aerodynamic and thermal performance of a rotor blade cascade. Tests were performed in a seven-blade cascade of a high-pressure gas turbine rotor at low Mach number (Ma2is = 0.3) under different blowing conditions. A number of fins were installed inside the upstream slot to simulate the effect of rotation on the seal flow exiting the gap in a linear cascade environment. The resulting coolant flow is ejected with the correct angle in the tangential direction. Purge flow injection angle and blowing conditions were changed in order to identify the best configuration in terms of end wall thermal protection and secondary flows reduction. The 3D flow field was surveyed by traversing a five-hole miniaturized pressure probe in a downstream plane. Secondary flow velocities, loss coefficient, and vorticity distributions are presented for the most significant test conditions. Film cooling effectiveness distributions on the platform were obtained by thermochromic liquid crystals (TLC) technique. Results show that purge flow injection angle has an impact on secondary flows development and, thus, on the end wall thermal protection, especially at high injection rates. Passage vortex is enhanced by a negative injection angle, which simulates the real counter rotating purge flow direction.
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Owen, J. M., 1988, “Air-Cooled Gas-Turbine Discs: A Review of Recent Research,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 9, pp. 354–365. [CrossRef]
2
Blair, M. F., 1974, “An Experimental Study of Heat Transfer and Film Cooling on Large-Scale Turbine Endwalls,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 96, pp. 524–529. [CrossRef]
3
Roy, R. P., Squires, K. D., Gerendas, M., Song, S., Howe, W. J., and Ansari, A., 2000, “Flow and Heat Transfer at the Hub Endwall of Inlet Vane Passages—Experiments and Simulations,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-198.
4
Burd, S. W., and Simon, T. W., 2000, “Effects of Slot Bleed Injection Over a Contoured End Wall on Nozzle Guide Vane Cooling Performance: Part I—Flow Field Measurements,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-199.
5
Burd, S. W., Satterness, C. J., and Simon, T. W., 2000, “Effects of Slot Bleed Injection Over a Contoured End Wall on Nozzle Guide Vane Cooling Performance: Part II—Thermal Measurements,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-200.
6
Oke, R. A., Simon, T. W., Burd, S. W., and Vahlberg, R., 2000, “Measurements in a Turbine Cascade Over a Contoured Endwall: Discrete Hole Injection of Bleed Flow,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-214.
7
Kost, F., and Nicklas, M., 2001, “Film-Cooled Turbine Endwall in a Transonic Flow Field: Part I—Aero-Dynamic Measurements,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0145.
8
Nicklas, M., 2001, “Film-Cooled Turbine Endwall in a Transonic Flow Field: Part II—Heat Transfer and Film-Cooling Effectiveness,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0146.
9
Oke, R. A., and Simon, T. W., 2002, “Film Cooling Experiments With Flow Introduced Upstream of a First Stage Nozzle Guide Vane Through Slots of Various Geometries,” ASME Paper No. GT2002-30169. [CrossRef]
10
Thole, K. A., and Knost, D. G., 2005, “Heat Transfer and Film Cooling for the Endwall of a First Stage Turbine Vane,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 48, pp. 5255–5269. [CrossRef]
11
Knost, D. G., and Thole, K. A., 2005, “Adiabatic Effectiveness Measurements of Endwall Film-Cooling for a First Stage Vane,” ASME J. Turbomach., 127, pp. 297–305. [CrossRef]
12
Thrift, A. A., Thole, K. A., and Hada, S., 2012, “Effects of Orientation and Position of the Combustor-Turbine Interface on the Cooling of a Vane Endwall,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134, p. 061019. [CrossRef]
13
Gao, Z., Narzary, D., and Han, J.-C., 2009, “Turbine Blade Platform Film Cooling With Typical Stator-Purge Flow and Discrete-Hole Film Cooling,” ASME J. Turbomach., 131, p. 041004. [CrossRef]
14
Narzary, D., 2009, “Experimental Study of Gas Turbine Blade Film Cooling and Heat Transfer,” Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
15
Papa, M., Srinivasan, V., and Goldstein, R. J., 2012, “Film Cooling Effect of Rotor-Stator Purge Flow on Endwall Heat/Mass Transfer,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134, p. 041014. [CrossRef]
16
Suryanarayanan, A., Mhetras, S., Schobeiri, M. T., and Han, J. C., 2009, “Film Cooling Effectiveness on a Rotating Blade Platform,” ASME J. Turbomach., 131, p. 011014. [CrossRef]
17
Suryanarayanan, A., Ozturk, B., Schobeiri, M. T., and Han, J. C., 2010, “Film-Cooling Effectiveness on a Rotating Turbine Platform Using Pressure Sensitive Paint Technique,” ASME J. Turbomach., 132, p. 041001. [CrossRef]
18
Pau, M., Paniagua, G., Delhaye, D., de la Loma, A., and GinibreP., 2010, “Aerothermal Impact of Stator-Rim Purge Flow and Rotor-Platform Film Cooling on a Transonic Turbine Stage,” ASME J. Turbomach., 132, p. 021006. [CrossRef]
19
Schuepbach, P., Abhari, R. S., Rose, M. G., and Gier, J., 2011, “Influence of Rim Seal Purge Flow on Performance of an Endwall-Profiled Axial Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133, p. 021011. [CrossRef]
20
Green, B. R., Mathison, R. M., and Dunn, M. G., 2012, “Time-Averaged and Time-Accurate Aerodynamic Effects of Rotor Purge Flow for a Modern, One and One-Half Stage High-Pressure Turbine—Part II: Analytical Flow Field Analysis,” ASME Paper No. GT2012-69939. [CrossRef]
21
Reid, K., Denton, J., Pullan, G., Curtis, E., and Longley, J., 2006, “The Effect of Stator-Rotor Hub Sealing Flow on the Mainstream Aerodynamics of a Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90838. [CrossRef]
22
BindonJ. P., 1980, “Exit Plane and Suction Surface Flows in an Annular Turbine Cascade With a Skewed Inlet Boundary Layer,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 2, pp. 57–66. [CrossRef]
23
Boletis, E., Sieverding, C. H., and Van HoveW., 1983, “Effect of Skewed Inlet Endwall Boundary Layer on the 3D-Flowfield in an Annular Cascade,” Paper No. AGARD-CP-351.
24
Walsh, J. A., and Gregory-Smith, D. G., 1987, “The Effect of Inlet Skew on the Secondary Flows and Losses in a Turbine Cascade,” IMechE Paper No. C275/87.
25
Barigozzi, G., Franchini, G., and Perdichizzi, A., 2007, “Inlet Turbulence Intensity Effect on Endwall Film Cooling,” Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Turbomachinery Fluid Dynamics and Thermodynamics, Athens, Greece, March 5–9, pp. 1105–1116.
26
Gregory-Smith, D. G., Graves, C. P., and Walsh, J. A., 1988, “Growth of Secondary Losses and Vorticity in an Axial Turbine Cascade,” ASME J Turbomach., 110, pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
27
Barigozzi, G., Fontaneto, F., Franchini, G., Perdichizzi, A., Maritano, M., and Abram, R., 2012, “Influence of Coolant Flow Rate on Aero-Thermal Performance of a Rotor Blade Cascade With Endwall Film Cooling,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134, p. 051038. [CrossRef]
28
Camci, C., Kim, K., and Hippensteele, S. A., 1992, “A New Hue Capturing Technique for the Quantitative Interpretation of Liquid Crystal Images Used in Convective Heat Transfer Studies,” ASME J. Turbomach., 114, pp. 765–775. [CrossRef]
29
Kost, F. H., and Holmes, A. T., 1985, “Aerodynamic Effect of Coolant Ejection in the Rear Part of Transonic Rotor Blades,” Paper No. AGARD-CP-390.
30
Mee, D. J., 1992, “Techniques for Aerodynamic Loss Measurement of Transonic Turbine Cascade With Trailing-Edge Region Coolant Ejection,” ASME Paper No. 92-GT-157.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Blade Mach number distribution

+Blade Mach number distribution
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Blade Mach number distribution
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Cascade geometry

+Cascade geometry
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Cascade geometry
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The wind tunnel

+The wind tunnel
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The wind tunnel
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Reference cascade local ζ (a) and Ω (b) distributions at X/cax = 108%

+Reference cascade local ζ (a) and Ω (b) distributions at X/cax = 108%
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Reference cascade local ζ (a) and Ω (b) distributions at X/cax = 108%
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Slot geometry and details of coolant supply system

+Slot geometry and details of coolant supply system
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Slot geometry and details of coolant supply system
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Local ζ distributions for variable MFR at X/cax = 108% (no fins)

+Local ζ distributions for variable MFR at X/cax = 108% (no fins)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Local ζ distributions for variable MFR at X/cax = 108% (no fins)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Local Ω distributions with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% (no fins)

+Local Ω distributions with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% (no fins)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Local Ω distributions with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% (no fins)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Local ζ distributions at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 1.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)

+Local ζ distributions at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 1.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Local ζ distributions at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 1.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Local ζ distributions at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)

+Local ζ distributions at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Local ζ distributions at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Local Ω distribution with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)

+Local Ω distribution with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Local Ω distribution with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with variable fins angle (–10 deg and 10 deg)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Local ζ and Ω distributions with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with α = –10 deg

+Local ζ and Ω distributions with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with α = –10 deg
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Local ζ and Ω distributions with secondary velocity vectors at X/cax = 108% for MFR = 2.0% with α = –10 deg
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Pitch averaged film cooling effectiveness distributions

+Pitch averaged film cooling effectiveness distributions
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Pitch averaged film cooling effectiveness distributions
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Area averaged η distributions versus MFR

+Area averaged η distributions versus MFR
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Area averaged η distributions versus MFR
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Mixed out kinetic energy loss coefficients versus MFR

+Mixed out kinetic energy loss coefficients versus MFR
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Mixed out kinetic energy loss coefficients versus MFR
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Film cooling effectiveness distributions for variable injection conditions

+Film cooling effectiveness distributions for variable injection conditions
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Film cooling effectiveness distributions for variable injection conditions
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Pitch averaged ζ and Δβ distributions for variable injection angles (MFR = 1.0% and 2.0%)

+Pitch averaged ζ and Δβ distributions for variable injection angles (MFR = 1.0% and 2.0%)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Pitch averaged ζ and Δβ distributions for variable injection angles (MFR = 1.0% and 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
Introduction
Turbine Aerodynamics: Axial-Flow and Radial-Flow Turbine Design and Analysis> Chapter 1
Two-Dimensional Analysis of the Flow in the Blade-to-Blade Plane
Turbine Aerodynamics: Axial-Flow and Radial-Flow Turbine Design and Analysis> Chapter 13
Quasi-Three-Dimensional Blade Passage Flow Field Analysis
Turbine Aerodynamics: Axial-Flow and Radial-Flow Turbine Design and Analysis> Chapter 14
Aerodynamic Performance Analysis
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 9
Quasi-Three-Dimensional Blade Passage Flow Field Analysis
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 12
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