0
Research Papers

A Combined Experimental and Numerical Study of the Turbine Blade Tip Film Cooling Effectiveness Under Rotation Condition

[+] Author and Article Information
Mohsen Rezasoltani, Kun Lu

Turbomachinery Performance and
Flow Research Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77843-3123

Meinhard T. Schobeiri

Turbomachinery Performance and
Flow Research Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77843-3123
e-mail: tschobeir@tamu.edu

Je-Chin Han

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77843-3123

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received August 21, 2014; final manuscript received September 8, 2014; published online November 26, 2014. Editor: Ronald Bunker.

J. Turbomach 137(5), 051009 (May 01, 2015) (12 pages) Paper No: TURBO-14-1213; doi: 10.1115/1.4028745 History: Received August 21, 2014; Revised September 08, 2014; Online November 26, 2014

Detailed numerical and experimental investigations of film cooling effectiveness were conducted on the blade tips of the first rotor row pertaining to a three-stage research turbine. Four different blade tip ejection configurations were utilized to determine the impact of the hole arrangements on the film cooling effectiveness. Plane tip with tip hole cooling, squealer tip with tip hole cooling, plane tip with pressure side (PS) edge compound angle hole cooling, and squealer tip with PS-edge compound angle hole cooling. To avoid rotor imbalance, every pair is installed radially. Film cooling effectiveness measurements were performed for three blowing ratios (M) of 0.75, 1.25, and 1.75. Film cooling data was also obtained for three rotational speeds; 3000 rpm (reference condition), 2550 rpm and 2000 rpm. Film cooling measurements were performed using pressure sensitive paint (PSP) technique. In a parallel effort, extensive numerical investigations of the above configurations were performed to give a better view of flow behavior using a commercially available code. The experimental investigations were performed in the three-stage multipurpose turbine research facility at the Turbomachinery Performance and Flow Research Laboratory (TPFL), Texas A&M University.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Four different rotor blade tip configurations: plane tip with tip hole cooling (top-left), plane tip with PS-edge compound angle hole cooling (top-right), squealer tip with tip hole cooling (bottom-left) and squealer tip with PS-edge compound angle hole cooling (bottom-right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Optical setup for PSP data acquisition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Computational domain and boundary conditions for mainstream

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Detailed grid distribution of different configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Film cooling effectiveness measured for the blade tip at 3000 rpm for different blowing ratio. (a) Plane tip with tip hole cooling, (b) squealer tip with tip hole cooling, (c) plane tip with PS hole cooling, and (d) squealer tip with PS hole cooling.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Streamlines based on the relative velocity (CFD results) at 3000 rpm. (a) Plane tip with tip hole cooling, (b) squealer tip with tip hole cooling, (c) plane tip with PS hole cooling, and (d) squealer tip with PS hole cooling.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Distribution of the static pressure (CFD results) at: (a) plane tip with tip hole cooling, (b) squealer tip with tip hole cooling, (c) plane tip with PS hole cooling, and (d) squealer tip with PS hole cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Turbine components with two independent cooling loops

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of the blade tip film cooling system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Velocity triangles and relative inlet and exit flow angles for design speed and off-design rotating speeds

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Effect of rotation on film cooling effectiveness measured for M = 1.25. (a) Plane tip with tip hole cooling, (b) squealer tip with tip hole cooling, (c) plane tip with PS hole cooling, and (d) squealer tip with PS hole cooling.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Pitch streamlines based on the relative velocity (CFD results) at different rpm. (a) Plane tip with tip hole cooling, (b) squealer tip with tip hole cooling, (c) plane tip with PS hole cooling, and (d) squealer tip with PS hole cooling.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of CFD results (top row) and experimental results (bottom row) at 3000 rpm, M = 1.25. ((a) and (e)) plane tip with tip hole cooling, ((b) and (f)) squealer tip with tip hole cooling, ((c) and (g)) plane tip with PS hole cooling, and ((d) and (h)) squealer tip with PS hole cooling.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Pitchwise-average film cooling effectiveness measured for four different configurations: different blowing ratio at 3000 rpm (top), different rpm at M = 1.25 (bottom)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Area-averaged film cooling effectiveness versus rotational speed at the blade tip region at M = 1.25

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Area-averaged film cooling effectiveness versus blowing ratio at the blade tip region

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