0
Research Papers

Clocking Effects of Inlet Nonuniformities in a Fully Cooled High-Pressure Vane: A Conjugate Heat Transfer Analysis

[+] Author and Article Information
Duccio Griffini

Department of Industrial Engineering (DIEF),
University of Florence,
Via di S. Marta, 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: duccio.griffini@unifi.it

Massimiliano Insinna

Department of Industrial Engineering (DIEF),
University of Florence,
Via di S. Marta, 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: massimiliano.insinna@unifi.it

Simone Salvadori

Department of Industrial Engineering (DIEF),
University of Florence,
Via di S. Marta, 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: simone.salvadori@unifi.it

Francesco Martelli

Mem. ASME
Department of Industrial Engineering (DIEF),
University of Florence,
Via di S. Marta, 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: francesco.martelli@unifi.it

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received July 28, 2015; final manuscript received October 9, 2015; published online November 11, 2015. Editor: Kenneth C. Hall.

J. Turbomach 138(2), 021006 (Nov 11, 2015) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-15-1172; doi: 10.1115/1.4031864 History: Received July 28, 2015; Revised October 09, 2015

A high-pressure vane (HPV) equipped with a realistic film-cooling configuration has been studied. The vane is characterized by the presence of multiple rows of fan-shaped holes along pressure and suction side, while the leading edge (LE) is protected by a showerhead system of cylindrical holes. Steady three-dimensional Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes simulations have been performed. A preliminary grid sensitivity analysis with uniform inlet flow has been used to quantify the effect of spatial discretization. Turbulence model has been assessed in comparison with available experimental data. The effects of the relative alignment between combustion chamber and HPVs are then investigated, considering realistic inflow conditions in terms of hot spot and swirl. The inlet profiles used are derived from the EU-funded project TATEF2. Two different clocking positions are considered: the first in which hot spot and swirl core are aligned with passage; and the second in which they are aligned with the LE. Comparisons between metal temperature distributions obtained from conjugate heat transfer (CHT) simulations are performed, evidencing the role of swirl in determining both the hot streak trajectory within the passage and the coolant redistribution. The LE aligned configuration is determined to be the most problematic in terms of thermal load, leading to increased average and local vane temperature peaks on both suction side and pressure side with respect to the passage-aligned case. A strong sensitivity to both injected coolant mass flow and heat removed by heat sink effect has also been highlighted for the showerhead cooling system.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Schematic of the cooling system and (b) geometry of the experimental vane model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Computational mesh (solid and fluid domains)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Grid dependence of (a) spanwise averaged isentropic Mach number and (b) spanwise averaged wall heat flux

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Realistic hot spot and swirl inlet profiles: (a) passage-aligned configuration (referred to as “EOTDF+swirl01”) and (b) LE aligned configuration (referred to as “EOTDF+swirl02”)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Distribution of inlet yaw angle (deg) (derived from experimental measurements of Qureshi et al. [18])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Geometry of the realistic vane model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison between experiments and CFD: (a) spanwise averaged adiabatic effectiveness and (b) spanwise averaged wall heat flux

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Coolant mass flow distribution for each cooling row (numerical result obtained with the modified kTkLω turbulence model)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of measurements and prediction of isentropic Mach number for the uncooled configuration (50% of the span)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Streamlines of the hot spot migration: (a) EOTDF+swirl01 (passage aligned) and (b) EOTDF+swirl02 (LE aligned)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Isentropic Mach number distributions in the front part of the vane: (a) at 15% of the span and (b) at 85% of the span

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Thermal fields along vanes and end walls for the EOTDF+swirl01 case (passage aligned): (a) front view and (b) rear view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Thermal fields along vanes and end walls for the EOTDF+swirl02 case (LE aligned): (a) front view and (b) rear view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison among uniform, EOTDF+swirl01, and EOTDF+swirl02 cases in terms of showerhead performance: (a) thermal power exchanged by the showerhead holes by heat sink effect and (b) mass flow of the showerhead holes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Internal conductive fluxes of the S1 vane of the EOTDF+swirl02 case (LE aligned)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison between averaged distributions on vane sides and overall for the uniform and realistic inlet conditions: (a) averaged temperature and (b) averaged thermal power

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