0
Research Papers

Evaluation of Superposition Predictions for Showerhead Film Cooling on a Vane

[+] Author and Article Information
Joshua B. Anderson

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: mranderson@utexas.edu

James R. Winka

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: jwinka@gmail.com

David G. Bogard

Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: dbogard@mail.utexas.edu

Michael E. Crawford

Fellow ASME
Siemens Energy,
Orlando, FL 32826
e-mail: michaelcrawford@siemens.com

1Presently at GE Global Research.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received September 12, 2014; final manuscript received September 22, 2014; published online November 26, 2014. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 137(4), 041010 (Apr 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: TURBO-14-1237; doi: 10.1115/1.4028708 History: Received September 12, 2014; Revised September 22, 2014; Online November 26, 2014

The leading edge of a turbine vane is subject to some of the highest temperature loading within an engine, and an accurate understanding of leading edge film coolant behavior is essential for modern engine design. Although there have been many investigations of the adiabatic effectiveness for showerhead film cooling of a vane leading edge region, there have been no previous studies in which individual rows of the showerhead were tested with the explicit intent of validating superposition models. For the current investigation, a series of adiabatic effectiveness experiments were performed with a five-row and three-row showerhead. The experiments were repeated separately with each individual row of holes active. This allowed evaluation of superposition methods on both the suction side of the vane, which was moderately convex, and the pressure side of the vane, which was mildly concave. Superposition was found to accurately predict performance on the suction side of the vane at lower momentum flux ratios, but not at higher momentum flux ratios. On the pressure side of the vane, the superposition predictions were consistently lower than measured values, with significant errors occurring at the higher momentum flux ratios. Reasons for the underprediction by superposition analysis are presented.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Sellers, J. P., 1963, “Gaseous Film Cooling With Multiple Injection Stations,” AIAA J., 1(9), pp. 2154–2156. [CrossRef]
Witteveld, V. C., Polanka, M. D., and Bogard, D. G., 1999, “Film Cooling Effectiveness in the Showerhead Region of a Gas Turbine Vane—Part II: Stagnation Region and Near Suction Side,” ASME Paper No. 99-GT-049.
Polanka, M. D., Witteveld, V. C., and Bogard, D. G., 1999, “Film Cooling Effectiveness in the Showerhead Region of a Gas Turbine Vane—Part I: Stagnation Region and Near Pressure Side,” ASME Paper No. 99-GT-048.
Cutbirth, J. M., and Bogard, D. G., 2002, “Thermal Field and Flow Visualization Within the Stagnation Region of a Film Cooled Turbine Vane,” ASME J. Turbomach., 124(2), pp. 200–206. [CrossRef]
Nathan, M. L., Dyson, T. E., Bogard, D. G., and Bradshaw, S. D., 2013, “Adiabatic and Overall Effectiveness for the Showerhead Film Cooling of a Turbine Vane,” ASME J. Turbomach., 136(3), p. 031005. [CrossRef]
Albert, J. E., and Bogard, D. G., 2013, “Measurements of Adiabatic Film and Overall Cooling Effectiveness on a Turbine Vane Pressure Side With a Trench,” ASME J. Turbomach., 135(5), p. 051007. [CrossRef]
Hylton, L. D., Milhec, M. S., Turner, E. R., Nealy, D. A., and York, R. E., 1983, “Analytical and Experimental Evaluation of the Heat Transfer Distribution Over the Surface of Turbine Vanes,” NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH, Contractor Report No. 168015.
Dees, J. E., Ledezma, G. A., Bogard, D. G., Laskowski, G. M., and Tolpadi, A. K., 2012, “Experimental Measurements and Computational Predictions for an Internally Cooled Simulated Turbine Vane,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134(6), p. 061005. [CrossRef]
Pichon, Y., 2009 “Turbulence Field Measurements for the Large Windtunnel,” The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, TTCRL Internal Report No. 2009.
Ethridge, M. I., Cutbirth, J. M., and Bogard, D. G., 2001, “Scaling of Performance for Varying Density Ratio Coolants on an Airfoil With Strong Curvature and Pressure Gradient Effects,” ASME J. Turbomach., 123(2), pp. 231–237. [CrossRef]
Moffat, R. J., 1988, “Describing the Uncertainties in Experimental Results,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 1(1), pp. 3–17. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

TTCRL wind tunnel and test section plan view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Pressure distribution around the model vane with measurements compared the CFD prediction of Dees et al. [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Diagram of the internal cooling passages of the model vane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Diagram of the coolant piping system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Diagram of test facility with camera locations shown

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Plan view of C3X vane showing showerhead cooling hole positions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

The approximate imaging areas used for this study on the suction and pressure sides of the model vane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Varying film flow rates based on nominal showerhead momentum flux ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness—pressure side (a) and suction side (b) for the center row of holes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Contour plots of the center rows of coolant holes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the inside two rows of holes on the pressure side (a) and suction side (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Contour plots of the inside two rows of coolant holes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the outside two rows on the pressure side (a) and suction side (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Contour plots of the outside two rows of coolant holes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for all five rows for (a) pressure side and (b) suction side

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Contour plots of the five-row showerhead configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the three-row showerhead configuration (a) pressure side and (b) suction side

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Contour plots of the three-row showerhead configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the five-row showerhead, I* = 1.88, (a) pressure side and (b) suction side

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the five-row showerhead, I* = 7.50, (a) pressure side and (b) suction side

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the three-row showerhead, I* = 1.88, (a) pressure side and (b) suction side

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for the three-row showerhead, I*=7.50, (a) pressure side and (b) suction side

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