0
Research Papers

A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study of Circumferential Groove Casing Treatment in a Transonic Axial Compressor

[+] Author and Article Information
Haixin Chen

e-mail: chenhaixin@tsinghua.edu.cn

Song Fu

School of Aerospace Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China

Scott C. Morris

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
University of Notre Dame,
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Aspi Wadia

GE Aviation,
Cincinnati, OH 45215

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received October 8, 2012; final manuscript received April 29, 2013; published online September 26, 2013. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 136(3), 031003 (Sep 26, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-12-1201; doi: 10.1115/1.4024651 History: Received October 08, 2012; Revised April 29, 2013

Numerical investigations were conducted to predict the performance of a transonic axial compressor rotor with circumferential groove casing treatment. The Notre Dame Transonic Axial Compressor (ND-TAC) was simulated at Tsinghua University with an in-house computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code (NSAWET) for this work. Experimental data from the ND-TAC were used to define the geometry, boundary conditions, and data sampling method for the numerical simulation. These efforts, combined with several unique simulation approaches, such as nonmatched grid boundary technology to treat the periodic boundaries and interfaces between groove grids and the passage grid, resulted in good agreement between the numerical and experimental results for overall compressor performance and radial profiles of exit total pressure. Efforts were made to study blade level flow mechanisms to determine how the casing treatment impacts the compressor's stall margin and performance. The flow structures in the passage, the tip gap, and the grooves as well as their mutual interactions were plotted and analyzed. The flow and momentum transport across the tip gap in the smooth wall and the casing treatment configurations were quantitatively compared.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Smoothed grid with unmatched periodical boundary

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Grid blocks for tip gap

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Grid for CGCT grooves with unmatched interface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Straight H grid (99% span). (b) Contours of Mach number demonstrating unphysical solution with “smearing” of the passage shock (99% span).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Sketch of the test rig

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) Speed curves of CGCT configuration: total pressure ratio. (b) Speed curves of CGCT configuration: adiabatic efficiency.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Total pressure contours on both sides of the groove-passage unmatched interfaces (red lines: passage side; green lines: groove side)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Mass flow convergence history at different back pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) Speed curves of SW configuration: total pressure ratio. (b) Speed curves of SW configuration: adiabatic efficiency.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Spanwise profiles of exit total pressure ratio (SW)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Contours of relative Mach number (m· = 9.897 kg/s, 99% span)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Sketches of surfaces investigated for momentum transport through tip gap

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

(a) PS cut plane (SW) the blade-casing-groove interaction (m· = 8.780 kg/s). (b) PS cut plane (CGCT) the blade-casing-groove interaction (m· = 8.780 kg/s). (c) SS cut plane (SW) the blade-casing-groove interaction (m· = 8.780 kg/s). (d) SS cut plane (CGCT) the blade-casing-groove interaction (m· = 8.780 kg/s).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Distribution of axial momentum injected into passage from grooves (m· = 8.780 kg/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Spanwise profiles of exit total pressure ratio (CGCT)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Sketch of the backward momentum transport through tip gap (a picture from Ref. [17])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Distribution of axial momentum injected into passage through tip gap (m· = 8.780 kg/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

(a) SW static pressure contours (red lines) and streamlines (black lines with arrows) (m· = 8.780 kg/s, 99% span). (b) CGCT: static pressure contours (red lines) and streamlines (black lines with arrows) (m· = 8.780 kg/s, 99% span).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

(a) SW entropy contour near casing (m· = 8.780 kg/s, 99% span). (b) CGCT entropy contour near casing (m· = 8.780 kg/s, 99% span).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

(a) SW entropy contours (colored field) and streamlines (black lines with arrows) (m· = 8.780 kg/s). (b) CGCT entropy contours (colored field) and streamlines (black lines with arrows) (m· = 8.780 kg/s).

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