0
Research Papers

Experimental Investigation of Purge Flow Effects on a High Pressure Turbine Stage

[+] Author and Article Information
K. Regina

Laboratory for Energy Conversion,
Department of Mechanical
and Process Engineering,
ETH Zurich,
Sonneggstrasse 3,
Zurich CH-8092, Switzerland
e-mail: regina@lec.mavt.ethz.ch

A. I. Kalfas

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,
Thessaloniki GR-54124, Greece
e-mail: akalfas@auth.gr

R. S. Abhari

Laboratory for Energy Conversion,
Department of Mechanical
and Process Engineering,
ETH Zurich,
Sonneggstrasse 3,
Zurich CH-8092, Switzerland
e-mail: abhari@lec.mavt.ethz.ch

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received August 6, 2014; final manuscript received August 14, 2014; published online October 28, 2014. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 137(4), 041006 (Oct 28, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: TURBO-14-1197; doi: 10.1115/1.4028432 History: Received August 06, 2014; Revised August 14, 2014

In the present paper, an experimental investigation of the effects of rim seal purge flow on the performance of a highly loaded axial turbine stage is presented. The test configuration consists of a one-and-a-half stage, unshrouded, turbine, with a blading representative of high pressure (HP) gas turbines. Efficiency measurements for various purge flow injection levels have been carried out with pneumatic probes at the exit of the rotor and show a reduction of isentropic total-to-total efficiency of 0.8% per percent of injected mass flow. For three purge flow conditions, the unsteady aerodynamic flow field at rotor inlet and rotor exit has been measured with the in-house developed fast response aerodynamic probe (FRAP). The time-resolved data show the unsteady interaction of the purge flow with the secondary flows of the main flow and the impact on the radial displacement of the rotor hub passage vortex (HPV). Steady measurements at off-design conditions show the impact of the rotor incidence and of the stage flow factor on the resulting stage efficiency and the radial displacement of the rotor HPV. A comparison of the effect of purge flow and of the off-design conditions on the rotor incidence and stage flow factor shows that the detrimental effect of the purge flow on the stage efficiency caused by the radial displacement of the rotor HPV is dominated by the increase of stage flow factor in the hub region rather than by the increase of negative rotor incidence.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kobayashi, N., Matsumato, M., and Shizuya, M., 1984, “An Experimental Investigation of a Gas Turbine Disk Cooling System,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 106(1), pp. 136–141. [CrossRef]
Chew, J. W., Dadkhah, S., and Turner, A. B., 1992, “Rim Sealing of Rotor–Stator Wheelspaces in the Absence of External Flow,” ASME J. Turbomach., 114(2), pp. 433–438. [CrossRef]
Dadkhah, S., Turner, A. B., and Chew, J. W., 1992, “Performance of Radial Clearance Rim Seals in Upstream and Downstream Rotor–Stator Wheelspaces,” ASME J. Turbomach., 114(2), pp. 439–445. [CrossRef]
Bohn, D., Rudzinski, B., Sürken, N., and Gärtner, W., 2000, “Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the Influence of Rotor Blades on Hot Gas Ingestion Into the Upstream Cavity of an Axial Turbine Stage,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-0284. [CrossRef]
Gentilhomme, O., Hills, N. J., Turner, A. B., and Chew, J. W., 2003, “Measurement and Analysis of Ingestion Through a Turbine Rim Seal,” ASME J. Turbomach., 125(3), pp. 505–512. [CrossRef]
Bohn, D. E., Decker, A., Ohlendorf, N., and Jakoby, R., 2006, “Influence of an Axial and Radial Rim Seal Geometry on Hot Gas Ingestion Into the Upstream Cavity of a 1.5-Stage Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90453. [CrossRef]
Jakoby, R., Zierer, T., Lindblad, K., Larsson, J., deVito, L., Bohn, D. E., Funcke, J., and Decker, A., 2004, “Numerical Simulation of the Unsteady Flow Field in an Axial Gas Turbine Rim Seal Configuration,” ASME Paper No. GT2004-53829. [CrossRef]
Cao, C., Chew, J. W., Millington, P. R., and Hogg, S. I., 2003, “Interaction of Rim Seal and Annulus Flows in an Axial Flow Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38368. [CrossRef]
Hunter, S. D., and Manwaring, S. R., 2000, “Endwall Cavity Flow Effects on Gaspath Aerodynamics in an Axial Flow Turbine: Part I—Experimental and Numerical Investigation,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-0651. [CrossRef]
Schrewe, S., Linker, C., Krichbaum, A., and Schiffer, H.-P., 2011, “Measurements of Rim Seal Mixing Processes in an Axial Two Stage Turbine,” 20th International Symposiumm on Air Breathing Engines (ISABE 2011), Gothenburg, Sweden, Sept. 12–16, Paper No. ISABE-2011-1720.
Jenny, P., Abhari, R. S., Rose, M. G., Brettschneider, M., Gier, J., and Engel, K., 2011, “Low-Pressure Turbine End Wall Design Optimisation and Experimental Verification in the Presence of Purge Flow,” 20th International Symposiumm on Air Breathing Engines (ISABE 2011), Gothenburg, Sweden, Sept. 12–16, Paper No. ISABE-2011-1717.
McLean, C., Camci, C., and Glezer, B., 2001, “Mainstream Aerodynamic Effects Due to Wheelspace Coolant Injection in a High-Pressure Turbine Stage: Part I—Aerodynamic Measurements in the Stationary Frame,” ASME J. Turbomach., 123(4), pp. 687–696. [CrossRef]
Paniagua, G., Dénos, R., and Almeida, S., 2004, “Effect of the Hub Endwall Cavity Flow on the Flow-Field of a Transonic High-Pressure Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 126(4), pp. 578–586. [CrossRef]
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]
Ong, J. H. P., Miller, R. J., and Uchida, S., 2006, “The Effect of Coolant Injection on the Endwall Flow of a High Pressure Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-91060. [CrossRef]
Schuepbach, P., Abhari, R. S., Rose, M. G., Germain, T., Raab, I., and Gier, J., 2010, “Effects of Suction and Injection Purge-Flow on the Secondary Flow Structures of a High-Work Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 132(2), p. 021021. [CrossRef]
Schuepbach, P., Abhari, R. S., Rose, M. G., and Gier, J., 2011, “Influence of Rim Seal Purge Flow on the Performance of an Endwall-Profiled Axial Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133(2), p. 021011. [CrossRef]
Behr, T., Kalfas, A. I., and Abhari, R. S., 2007, “Unsteady Flow Physics and Performance of a One-and-1/2-Stage Unshrouded High Work Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129(2), pp. 348–359. [CrossRef]
Kupferschmied, P., Köppel, P., Gizzi, W., Roduner, C., and Gyarmathy, G., 2000, “Time-Resolved Flow Measurements With Fast-Response Aerodynamic Probes in Turbomachines,” Meas. Sci. Technol.11(7), pp. 1036–1054. [CrossRef]
Pfau, A., Schlienger, J., Kalfas, A. I., and Abhari, R. S., 2003, “Unsteady 3-Dimensional Flow Measurement Using a Miniature Virtual 4 Sensor Fast Response Aerodynamic Probe (FRAP),” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38128. [CrossRef]
Porreca, L., Hollenstein, M., Kalfas, A. I., and Abhari, R. S., 2007, “Turbulence Measurements and Analysis in a Multistage Axial Turbine,” J. Propul. Power, 23(1), pp. 227–234. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Tested rotor geometry isometric view (left) and profile at 6% span (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematics of the purge flow path [16] (not to scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Time-averaged rms of p1′ (Pa) in stationary FOR at plane R in (a) IR1 = −0.1% and (b) IR3 = 1.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Time-averaged and circumferentially mass averaged rms of p1' (Pa) at plane R in

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Time-resolved rms of p1' (Pa) at 6% span in stationary FOR at plane R in (a) IR1 = −0.1% and (b) IR3 = 1.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Time-averaged and circumferentially mass averaged relative flow yaw angle (deg) at plane R in

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Time-resolved relative flow yaw angle (deg) at 6% span in stationary FOR at plane R in (a) IR1 = −0.1% and (b) IR3 = 1.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Time-averaged normalized relative total pressure in rotating FOR at plane R ex (a) IR1 = −0.1% and (b) IR3 = 1.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Time-resolved rms of p1′ (Pa) in stationary FOR at plane R ex for IR3, locations where the interaction with the NGV 1 secondary flow features is (a) low and (b) high

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Time-averaged and circumferentially mass averaged isentropic total-to-total stage efficiency at plane R ex

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Sensitivity of the isentropic total-to-total stage efficiency toward the IR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Time-averaged and circumferentially mass averaged isentropic total-to-total stage efficiency at plane R ex

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Time-averaged and circumferentially mass averaged relative flow yaw angle (deg) at plane R ex

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Time-averaged and circumferentially mass averaged flow coefficient (a) due to variation of purge flow and (b) due to variation of overall operating point

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