0
Research Papers

A New Loss and Deviation Model for Axial Compressor Inlet Guide Vanes

[+] Author and Article Information
Milan Banjac

e-mail: mbbanjac@mas.bg.ac.rs

Milan V. Petrovic

e-mail: mpetrovic@mas.bg.ac.rs
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Belgrade,
Belgrade, Serbia

Alexander Wiedermann

MAN Diesel & Turbo SE,
Oberhausen, Germany
e-mail: alexander.wiedermann@man.eu

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received September 13, 2013; final manuscript received October 15, 2013; published online January 2, 2014. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 136(7), 071011 (Jan 02, 2014) (13 pages) Paper No: TURBO-13-1217; doi: 10.1115/1.4025956 History: Received September 13, 2013; Revised October 15, 2013

This paper describes a new universal algebraic model for the estimation of flow deflection and losses in axial compressor inlet guide vane devices. The model deals with nominal flow and far-off-design operating conditions in connection with large stagger angle adjustments. The first part of the model considers deflection and losses in 2D cascades, taking into account the main cascade geometry parameters and operating conditions, such as Mach number and stagger adjustment. The second part of the model deals with additional deviation and losses due to secondary flow caused by the end wall viscous effects and by the trailing vortices. The model is developed for NACA65 airfoils, NACA63-A4K6 airfoils, and airfoils having an NACA65 thickness distribution on a circular-arc camber line. It is suitable for application in 1D or 2D through-flow calculations for design and analysis cases. The development of the method is based on systematic computational fluid dynamics (CFD) flow calculations for various cascade geometries and operating parameters. The comparison of correlation results with experimental data for several test cases shows good agreement.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Two-dimensional IGV cascade geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

MISES calculation grid for NACA65 cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Results of MISES calculations for the reference incidence—NACA65 airfoil cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Results of MISES calculations for the reference incidence—circular camber line airfoils with NACA65 thickness

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Deviation correction for blade thickness, NACA65 airfoil cascade with 40 deg camber angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

MISES calculation grid for NACA63 A4K6 cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Results of MISES calculations for the reference incidence—NACA63 A4K6 airfoil cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Additional deviations due to stagger angle adjustment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Grid for twisted IGV blades of the LUH three-stage compressor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

IGV exit flow angle of the LUH three-stage compressor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Grid for CFD 2D cascade flow calculations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Exit plane and blade circulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Single vortex filament ray and the model for a linear cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Exit plane nomenclature (left) and radius nomenclature (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Induced deviation for a row with an approximately constant exit flow angle over the span for IGVs of the Sulzer four-stage compressor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Induced deviation for a row with highly twisted blades and spanwise increase of blade circulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Model of a linear cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Basic distribution of the additional deviation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Correlation for secondary flow deviations applied to a 3D cascade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Deviation prediction: the developed correlation and CFD results for Sulzer four-stage compressor IGVs (test case 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison between the developed correlation and CFD results—LUH three-stage compressor IGV deviations (test case 2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Deviation prediction—the developed correlation and experimental data for IGVs consisting of thin sheet plates, test case 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Exit flow angle: comparison between the correlation and experimental data for test case 4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

IGV exit angle—comparison of the correlation and experimental data for test case 5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Loss coefficient for Sulzer four-stage compressor IGV, test case 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Loss coefficient for LUH three-stage compressor IGV, test case 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 27

Streamlines for induced secondary flow (a) and pitchwise distribution for the x component of induced velocity (b), H/s = 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 28

Velocity cxind; comparison between the local, trailing edge value and pitchwise averaged value. Cascade with H/s = 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 29

Variation of averaging and amplification factors together over the blade span

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