Research Papers

A Technological Effect Modeling on Complex Turbomachinery Applications With an Overset Grid Numerical Method

[+] Author and Article Information
Lionel Castillon, Gilles Billonnet

ONERA—The French Aerospace Lab,
Meudon F-92190, France

Jacques Riou

Villaroche 77550, France

Stéphanie Péron, Christophe Benoit

ONERA—The French Aerospace Lab,
Châtillon F-92320, France

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received December 6, 2013; final manuscript received July 7, 2014; published online July 29, 2014. Assoc. Editor: John Clark.

J. Turbomach 136(10), 101005 (Jul 29, 2014) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-13-1271; doi: 10.1115/1.4027997 History: Received December 06, 2013; Revised July 07, 2014

This paper presents an overview of numerical simulations performed at ONERA on turbomachinery configurations which include technological effects, such as tip clearance, hub disk leakage, circumferential and noncircumferential casing treatments (CTs), blade fillets, and cooling holes. An overset grid approach (Chimera technique) is used to simulate these geometrical effects with ONERA's structured computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver elsA. Calculations performed on the different configurations enable to quantify the impact of these technological effects on the flow solution.

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



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Meridian view of a compressor stage with technological effects [1]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Cooled gas turbine stage (figure extracted from Ref. [2])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Illustration of the Chimera approach on a jet in a cross flow configuration; (a) geometry to compute, (b) coincident matching grid, (c) Chimera overset grids, and (d) Chimera overset grids with buffer intermediate grid

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Detailed view of NASA 37 forward center body and rotor disk interface [22]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

View of the Chimera grids used for hub disk leakage simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

View of the relative Mach number in the interaction zone between the primary flow and the cavity jet

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Effect of hub disk leakage injection on the radial distribution of downstream pitchwise averaged total pressure and temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Streamlines emanating from the cavity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

View of patch grid approach for tip leakage simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Compression rate and isentropic efficiency as a function of the mass-flow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Radial (95% span height) and axial slices of relative Mach number contour in the tip zone

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Meridian view of the grid used for the CTs configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Impact of CTs on the compressor map

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Radial velocity at blade tip (red: Vr > 0, blue: Vr < 0)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Cross-sectional view of the test section (left), and sketch of the slot type CT (Lin et al. [27])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Left: BUAA overset grids. Right: snapshot of the radial velocity distribution near the casing.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig 17

Experimental and computed compressor maps

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

View of the computational grid

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Impact of the blade fillet on the entropy distribution downstream of the rotor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

View of the vane geometry with cooling row locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

View of the mesh in the cooling zone (black: grid of the channel, red: buffer grids, and blue: cooling hole grids). Top: 3D view, bottom: blade to blade view.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Plane normal to the wall on suction side. Static temperature distribution. (a) No buffer grid, (b) buffer grid 1, and (c) buffer grid 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Spanwise averaged heat transfer coefficients

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Comparison between Chimera approach and generalized boundary conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Comparison of Chimera approach and boundary conditions (left—B.C., right—Chimera)




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