0
Research Papers

The Relative Performance of External Casing Impingement Cooling Arrangements for Thermal Control of Blade Tip Clearance

[+] Author and Article Information
Myeonggeun Choi

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
e-mail: myeonggeun.choi@eng.ox.ac.uk

David M. Dyrda

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK

David R. H. Gillespie

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
e-mail: david.gillespie@eng.ox.ac.uk

Orpheas Tapanlis

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
e-mail: orpheas.tapanlis@gmail.com

Leo V. Lewis

Rolls-Royce plc,
P.O. Box 31,
Derby DE24 8BJ, UK
e-mail: leo.lewis@rolls-royce.com

1Current address: Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4035.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received July 31, 2015; final manuscript received October 21, 2015; published online December 15, 2015. Editor: Kenneth C. Hall.

J. Turbomach 138(3), 031005 (Dec 15, 2015) (12 pages) Paper No: TURBO-15-1174; doi: 10.1115/1.4031907 History: Received July 31, 2015; Revised October 21, 2015

As a key way of improving jet engine performance, a thermal tip clearance control system provides a robust means of manipulating the closure between the casing and the rotating blade tips, reducing undesirable tip leakage flows. This may be achieved using an impingement cooling scheme on the external casing. Such systems can be optimized to increase the contraction capability for a given casing cooling flow. Typically, this is achieved by changing the cooled area and local casing features, such as the external flanges or the external cooling geometry. This paper reports the effectiveness of a range of impingement cooling arrangements in typical engine casing closure system. The effects of jet-to-jet pitch, number of jets, and inline and staggered alignment of jets on an engine representative casing geometry are assessed through comparison of the convective heat transfer coefficient distributions as well as the thermal closure at the point of the casing liner attachment. The investigation is primarily numerical, however, a baseline case has been validated experimentally in tests using a transient liquid crystal technique. Steady numerical simulations using the realizable k–ε, k–ω SST, and EARSM turbulence models were conducted to understand the variation in the predicted local heat transfer coefficient distribution. A constant mass flow rate was used as a constraint at each engine condition, approximately corresponding to a constant feed pressure when the manifold exit area is constant. Sets of local heat transfer coefficient data generated using a consistent modeling approach were then used to create reduced order distributions of the local cooling. These were used in a thermomechanical model to predict the casing closure at engine representative operating conditions.

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

References

Choi, M. G. , Tapanlis, O. , Gillespie, D. R. H. , Lewis, L. V. , and Ciccomascalo, C. , 2014, “ The Effect of Impingement Jet Heat Transfer on Casing Contraction in a Turbine Case Cooling System,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-26749.
Andreini, A. , Da Soghe, R. , Facchini, B. , Maiuolo, F. , Tarchi, L. , and Coutandin, D. , 2013, “ Experimental and Numerical Analysis of Multiple Impingement Jet Arrays for an Active Clearance Control System,” ASME J. Turbomach., 135(3), p. 031016. [CrossRef]
Da Soghe, R. , and Andreini, A. , 2013, “ Numerical Characterization of Pressure Drop Across the Manifold of Turbine Casing Cooling System,” ASME J. Turbomach., 135(3), p. 031017. [CrossRef]
Ahmed, F. , Tucholke, R. , Weigand, B. , and Meier, K. , 2011, “ Numerical Investigation of Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop Characteristics for Different Hole Geometries of a Turbine Casing Impingement Cooling System,” ASME Paper No. GT2011-45251.
Ahmed, F. , Weigand, B. , and Meier, K. , 2010, “ Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop Characteristics for a Turbine Casing Impingement Cooling System,” ASME Paper No. IHTC14-22817.
Kawecki, E. J. , 1979, “ Thermal Response Turbine Shroud Study,” Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Group, West Palm Beach, FL, Technical Report No. AFAPL-TR-79-2087.
Dann, A. G. , Thorpe, S. J. , Lewis, L. V. , and Ireland, P. T. , 2014, “ Innovative Measurement Techniques for a Cooled Turbine Case Operating at Engine Representative Thermal Conditions,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-26092.
Knipser, C. , Horn, W. , and Staudacher, S. , 2009, “ Aircraft Engine Performance Improvement by Active Clearance Control in Low Pressure Turbines,” ASME Paper No. GT2009-59301.
Amiot, D. , Arraitz, A. , Fachat, T. , Gendraud, A. , Lefebvre, P. , and Roussin-Moynier, D. , 2007, “ Gas Turbine Clearance Control Devices,” U.S. Patent No. 7,287,955.
Wiseman, M. W. , and Guo, T. , 2001, “ An Investigation of Life Extending Control Techniques for Gas Turbine Engines,” American Control Conference (ACC), Arlington, VA, June 25–27, Vol. 5, pp. 3706–3707.
Rolls-Royce, 2013, “  HPT Casing Configuration on a Typical Large Civil Engine,” Rolls-Royce plc, London, http://www.rolls-royce.com, accessed Sept. 10, 2013.
Bunker, R. S. , and Metzger, D. E. , 1990, “ Local Heat Transfer in Internally Cooled Turbine Airfoil Leading Edge Regions-Part 1: Impingement Cooling Without Film Coolant Extraction,” ASME J. Turbomach., 112(3), pp. 451–458. [CrossRef]
Zuckerman, N. , and Lior, N. , 2005, “ Impingement Heat Transfer: Correlations and Numerical Modeling,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 127(5), pp. 544–552. [CrossRef]
Chambers, A. C. , Gillespie, D. R. H. , Ireland, P. T. , and Dailey, G. M. , 2003, “ A Novel Transient Liquid Crystal Technique to Determine Heat Transfer Coefficient Distributions and Adiabatic Wall Temperature in a Three-Temperature Problem,” ASME J. Turbomach., 125(3), pp. 538–546. [CrossRef]
Gillespie, D. R. H. , Wang, Z. , and Ireland, P. T. , 2001, “ Heating Element,” U.S. Patent No. 6,181,874.
McGilvray, M. , and Gillespie, D. R. H. , 2011, “ THTAC: Transient Heat Transfer Analysis Code,” Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, Technical Report No. OUEL2011-05.
Ireland, P. T. , and Jones, T. V. , 2000, “ Liquid Crystal Measurements of Heat Transfer and Surface Shear Stress,” Meas. Sci. Technol., 11(7), pp. 969–986. [CrossRef]
Ryley, J. C. , McGilvray, M. , and Gillespie, D. R. H. , 2014, “ Calculation of Heat Transfer Coefficient Distribution on 3D Geometries From Transient Liquid Crystal Experiments,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-26973.
Shultz, D. L. , and Jones, T. V. , 1973, “ Heat Transfer Measurements in Short-Duration Hypersonic Test Facilities,” Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, AGARDograph No. 165.
Moffat, R. J. , 1982, “ Contributions to the Theory of Single Sample Uncertainty Analysis,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 104(2), pp. 250–258. [CrossRef]
Florschuetz, L. W. , Truman, C. R. , and Metzger, D. E. , 1981, “ Streamwise Flow and Heat Transfer Distributions for Jet Array Impingement With Crossflow,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 103(2), pp. 337–342. [CrossRef]
Van Treuren, K. W. , Wang, Z. , Ireland, P. T. , and Kohler, S. T. , 1996, “ Comparison and Prediction of Local and Average Heat Transfer Coefficients Under an Array of Inline and Staggered Impinging Jets,” ASME Paper No. 96-GT-163.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

High-pressure turbine casing configuration on (a) a typical large civil engine [11] and (b) a radial cross section through a typical manifold [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Computational domain for standalone casing external heat transfer prediction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Grid independent solution achieved

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Idealized representation of casing FE model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic diagrams of the main components of the test rig

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Local htc/htcref(=H2.peak.relizable kε.OP1) distributions, experimental case Re = 6000, equivalent to OP1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Local htc/htcref(=H2.peak.relizable kε.OP1) distributions with different turbulence models employed, OP1 condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Relative performance of spanwise-averaged htc/htcref(=H2.peak.span.relizable kε.OP1), at OP1 and OP2, for the changing turbulence model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Relative performance of (a) patch area averaged htc/htcref(=H2.patch.relizable kε.OP1) and (b) overall area averaged htc/htcref(=H2.avg.relizable kε.OP1) at OP1 and OP2 for the change in turbulence model employed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Local htc/htcref(=H2.peak.relizable kε.OP1) distributions of the variation in jet-to-jet pitch at OP1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Spanwise-averaged htc/htcref(=H2.peak.span.relizable kε.OP1) distributions at OP1 and OP2, for the variation in jet-to-jet pitch

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Relative performance of overall area averaged htc/htcref(=H2.avg.relizable kε.OP1) at OP1 and OP2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Local htc/htcref(=H2.peak.relizable kε.OP1) distributions, for different number of rows of jets, OP1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Spanwise-averaged htc/htcref(=H2.peak.span.relizable kε.OP1) distributions at OP1 and OP2, for different number of jet rows

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Local htc/htcref (=H2.peak.relizable kε.OP1) distributions of inline and staggered arrays of jets at OP1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Spanwise-averaged htc/htcref (=H2.peak.span.relizable kε.OP1) distributions at OP1 and OP2, for the inline and staggered arrays of jets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Predicted casing temperature (K) and thermal radial displacement (r, mm), baseline H2 cooling scheme at OP1 and OP2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Predicted casing temperature (K) and closure (mm) versus coolant mass flow rate, at liner attachment point for jet-to-jet pitch variation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Predicted casing temperature (K) and closure (mm) versus coolant mass flow rate, at liner attachment point, for the different number of jets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Predicted casing temperature (K) and closure (mm) versus coolant mass flow rate, at liner attachment point, for the inline and staggered arrays of jets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Relative performance of casing temperature drop at the liner attachment point by internal hooks, compared to baseline H2 scheme at OP1 and OP2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Relative performance of casing closure at the liner attachment point by internal hooks, compared to baseline H2 scheme at OP1 and OP2

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