0
Research Papers

Effect of High Freestream Turbulence on Flowfields of Shaped Film Cooling Holes

[+] Author and Article Information
Robert P. Schroeder

Department of Mechanical
and Nuclear Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: rschroeder@sargentlundy.com

Karen A. Thole

Department of Mechanical
and Nuclear Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: kthole@psu.edu

1Present address: Sargent and Lundy, Chicago, IL 60603.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received November 20, 2015; final manuscript received December 13, 2015; published online April 5, 2016. Editor: Kenneth C. Hall.

J. Turbomach 138(9), 091001 (Apr 05, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: TURBO-15-1270; doi: 10.1115/1.4032736 History: Received November 20, 2015; Revised December 13, 2015

Shaped film cooling holes have become a standard geometry for protecting gas turbine components. Few studies, however, have reported flowfield measurements for moderately expanded shaped holes and even fewer have reported on the effects of high freestream turbulence intensity relevant to gas turbine airfoils. This study presents detailed flowfield and adiabatic effectiveness measurements for a shaped hole at freestream turbulence intensities of 0.5% and 13%. Test conditions included blowing ratios of 1.5 and 3 at a density ratio of 1.5. Measured flowfields revealed a counter-rotating vortex pair (CRVP) and high jet penetration into the mainstream at the blowing ratio of 3. Elevated freestream turbulence had a minimal effect on mean velocities and rather acted by increasing turbulence intensity around the coolant jet, resulting in increased lateral spreading of coolant.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the film cooling wind tunnel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Geometry of the shaped hole

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Measurement setups for (a) PIV in the centerline plane and (b) stereo PIV in the x/D = 4 crossplane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Approach boundary layers measured at x/D = −2.3 for low, moderate, and high freestream turbulence intensities

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Profiles of fluctuating streamwise velocity at x/D = −2.3 low, moderate, and high freestream turbulence intensities

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Contours of time-mean streamwise velocity and streamlines in the centerline plane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Contours of turbulence intensity and time-mean streamlines in the centerline plane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Contours of u′v′¯ turbulent shear stress in the centerline plane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Contours of mean streamwise velocity in the x/D = 4 crossplane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3. In-plane mean velocity is shown by arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Contours of turbulent shear stress in the x/D = 4 crossplane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3. In-plane mean velocity is shown by gray arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Contours of turbulence intensity in the x/D = 4 crossplane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3. In-plane mean velocity is shown by white arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Contours of adiabatic effectiveness for DR = 1.5, Tu = 0.5% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3.0 [14]. Gray dashed lines illustrate position of the two flowfield measurement planes.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Contours of mean streamwise velocity in the x/D = 4 crossplane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 13.2% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b)M = 3. In-plane mean velocity is shown by arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Contours of turbulent shear stress in the x/D = 4 crossplane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 13.2% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3. In-plane mean velocity is shown by gray arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Contours of turbulence intensity in the x/D = 4 crossplane for DR = 1.5, Tu = 13.2% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3. In-plane mean velocity is shown by white arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Profiles of mean streamwise velocity in the centerline plane at three streamwise positions, for both low and high freestream turbulence intensities

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Profiles of velocity fluctuations in the centerline plane at three streamwise positions, for M = 1.5 at both low and high freestream turbulence intensities

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Profiles of velocity fluctuations in the centerline plane at three streamwise positions, for M = 3.0 at both low and high freestream turbulence intensities. Legend is the same as in Fig.17.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Profiles of turbulent shear stress in the centerline plane at three streamwise positions, for both low and high freestream turbulence intensities. Legend is the same as in Fig. 16.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Contours of adiabatic effectiveness for DR = 1.5, Tu = 13.2% at (a) M = 1.5 and (b) M = 3.0. Dashed lines illustrate position of the two flowfield measurement planes.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Laterally averaged adiabatic effectiveness for DR = 1.5, M = 1.5 and 3, at three freestream turbulence intensities

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