0
Research Papers

Experimental Evaluation of Large Spacing Compound Angle Full-Coverage Film Cooling Arrays: Adiabatic Film Cooling Effectiveness

[+] Author and Article Information
Greg Natsui

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
University of Central Florida,
Orlando, FL 32816
e-mail: gnatsui@knights.ucf.edu

Roberto Claretti

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
University of Central Florida,
Orlando, FL 32816
e-mail: Roberto1632@gmail.com

Mark A. Ricklick

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
University of Central Florida,
Orlando, FL 32816
e-mail: Mark.Ricklick@erau.edu

Jayanta S. Kapat

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
University of Central Florida,
Orlando, FL 32816
e-mail: Jayanta.Kapat@ucf.edu

Michael E. Crawford

Siemens Energy Inc.,
Orlando, FL 32826
e-mail: MichaelCrawford@Siemens.co

Glenn Brown

Siemens Energy Inc.,
Orlando, FL 32826
e-mail: Glenn.Brown@Siemens.com

Kenneth Landis

Florida Turbine Technology,
Jupiter, FL 33458
e-mail: Ken.Landis@Siemens.com

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received March 26, 2015; final manuscript received January 12, 2016; published online February 17, 2016. Assoc. Editor: David G. Bogard.

J. Turbomach 138(7), 071001 (Feb 17, 2016) (8 pages) Paper No: TURBO-15-1057; doi: 10.1115/1.4032538 History: Received March 26, 2015; Revised January 12, 2016

Adiabatic film cooling effectiveness contours are obtained experimentally with the use of temperature sensitive paint (TSP) on low thermal conductivity film cooled surfaces. The effects of blowing ratio, surface angle, and hole spacing are observed by testing four full-coverage arrays composed of cylindrical staggered holes all compounded at 45 deg, which parametrically vary the inclination angles, 30 deg and 45 deg, and the spacing of the holes 14.5 and 19.8 times the diameter. Local film cooling effectiveness is obtained throughout these largely spaced arrays to 23 rows for the 19.8 diameter spacing array and 30 rows for the 14.5 diameter spacing array. The coolant takes several rows to merge and begin to interact with lateral holes at these large spacings; however, at downstream rows the film merges laterally and provides high effectiveness in the gaps between injections. At low blowing, each individual jet remains discrete throughout the array. At higher blowing rates, the profile is far more uniform due to jets spreading as they reattach with the wall. Laterally averaged values of effectiveness approach 0.3 in most cases with some high blowing low spacing, even reaching 0.5.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

External flow tunnel for large film cooling array testing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Streamwise mean and RMS fluctuation velocity profiles at leading edge of test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Inner scaled mean velocity profile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Geometry definitions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Adiabatic film cooling effectiveness experimental setup schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Experimental validation with Mayle and Camarata [1], M = 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Local adiabatic film cooling effectiveness throughout FC.C (α = 45 deg, β = 45 deg, P/D = 14.5): (a) M = 0.4, (b) M = 0.8, and (c) M = 1.6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Laterally averaged film cooling effectiveness for the α = 30 deg cases; FC.A P/D = 14.5 and FC.B P/D = 19.8

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Laterally averaged film cooling effectiveness for the α = 45 deg cases; FC.C P/D = 14.5 and FC.D P/D = 19.8

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Varying pitch P/D, effect on laterally averaged effectiveness (FC.C and FC.D, α = 45 deg, β = 45 deg); (a) M = 0.4 and (b) M = 1.6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Varying inclination angle α, effect on laterally averaged effectiveness (FC.A RR and FC.C RR, P/D = 14.5; (a) M = 0.4, (b) M = 1.6 with FC.B and FC.D, P/D = 19.8; (c) M = 0.4, (d) M = 1.6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Pitch averaged adiabatic effectiveness as a function of NMse for all cases without RRs

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