0
Research Papers

Uncertainty Analysis of Heat Transfer Predictions Using Statistically Modeled Data From a Cooled 1-1/2 Stage High-Pressure Transonic Turbine

[+] Author and Article Information
Harika S. Kahveci

GE Power & Water,
Greenville, SC 29615
e-mail: harika.kahveci@ge.com

Kevin R. Kirtley

GE Power & Water,
Greenville, SC 29615
e-mail: kevin.kirtley@ge.com

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received September 8, 2013; final manuscript received September 18, 2013; published online December 4, 2013. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 136(6), 061020 (Dec 04, 2013) (13 pages) Paper No: TURBO-13-1208; doi: 10.1115/1.4025764 History: Received September 08, 2013; Revised September 18, 2013

This paper compares predictions from a 3D Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes code and a statistical representation of measurements from a cooled 1-1/2 stage high-pressure transonic turbine to quantify predictive process sensitivity. A multivariable regression technique was applied to both the inlet temperature measurements obtained at the inlet rake, the wall temperature, and heat transfer measurements obtained via heat-flux gauges on the blade airfoil surfaces. By using the statistically modeled temperature profiles to generate the inlet boundary conditions for the computational fluid dynamics analysis, the sensitivity of blade heat transfer predictions due to the variation in the inlet temperature profile and uncertainty in wall temperature measurements and surface roughness is calculated. All predictions are performed with and without cooling. Heat transfer predictions match reasonably well with the statistical representation of the data, both with and without cooling. Predictive precision for this study is driven primarily by inlet profile uncertainty followed by surface roughness and gauge position uncertainty.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Rake locations across the turbine stage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Set of gauges used in comparisons

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Grid used for the high-pressure turbine blade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

y+ levels for blade-alone CFD results for cooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Inlet temperature profiles used for CFD analysis: (a) uncooled case; (b) cooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Absolute temperature contours at the inlet and exit of the blade: (a) uncooled case; (b) cooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Profile migration through HP turbine: (a) uncooled case; (b) cooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Heat flux on the blade surface for uncooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Frequency distribution histogram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Surface roughness sensitivity for uncooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Uncertainty in blade heat flux for cooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Heat flux on the blade surface for cooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Uncertainty in blade heat flux for uncooled case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Stanton number distribution for baseline case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Total uncertainty in Stanton number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Percent variation from the baseline case

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