0
Research Papers

Modeling and Measurements of Heat/Mass Transfer in a Linear Turbine Cascade

[+] Author and Article Information
F. Papa, R. J. Goldstein

Heat Transfer Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Minnesota,
111 Church Street SE,
Minneapolis, MN 55455

U. Madanan

Heat Transfer Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Minnesota,
111 Church Street SE,
Minneapolis, MN 55455
e-mail: madan016@umn.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received September 29, 2016; final manuscript received February 21, 2017; published online April 11, 2017. Assoc. Editor: David G. Bogard.

J. Turbomach 139(9), 091002 (Apr 11, 2017) (12 pages) Paper No: TURBO-16-1263; doi: 10.1115/1.4036106 History: Received September 29, 2016; Revised February 21, 2017

Measurements of the mass/heat transfer coefficients on the blade and end wall surfaces of a linear turbine cascade are compared to numerical predictions using the standard shear stress transport (SST) closure and the SST model in combination with the Reθγ transition model (SST-TRANS). Experiments were carried out in a wind tunnel test section composed of five large-scale turbine blades, using the naphthalene sublimation technique. Two cases were tested, with exit Reynolds number of 600,000 and inlet turbulence values of 0.2% and 4%, respectively. The main secondary flow features, consisting of the horseshoe vortex system, the passage vortex, and the corner vortices, are identified and their influence on heat/mass transfer is analyzed. Numerical simulations were carried out to match the conditions of the experiments. Results show that large improvements are obtained with the introduction of the Reθγ transition model. In particular, excellent agreement with the experiments is found, for the whole spanwise extension of the blade, on the pressure surface. On the suction surface, performance is very good in the highly three-dimensional region close to the end wall, but some weaknesses appear in predicting the location of transition in the two-dimensional region. On the end wall surface, the SST model in combination with the transition model produces satisfactory results, greatly improved compared to the standard SST model.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Secondary flows in a turbine blade passage [17]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic diagram of the test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Computational domain and mesh: (a) computational domain in the numerical simulations, (b) mesh detail in the blade end wall region, and (c) pressure boundary conditions shown on x–y plane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Secondary flows in the blade passage, predicted by the SST–TRANS model for Tu = 0.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Sherwood number contour on the blade suction surface at Tu = 0.2%: (a) experiment and (b) SST–TRANS simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Sherwood number lineplots on blade suction surface at Tu = 0.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sherwood number contour on the blade pressure surface at Tu = 0.2%: (a) experiment and (b) SST–TRANS simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Sherwood number lineplots on blade pressure surface at Tu = 0.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Sherwood number lineplots on end wall surface at Tu = 0.2%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Sherwood number contour on end wall surface at Tu = 0.2%: (a) experiment and (b) SST–TRANS simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Sherwood number contour on the blade suction surface at Tu = 4%: (a) experiment and (b) SST–TRANS simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Sherwood number lineplots on blade suction surface at Tu = 4%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Sherwood number contour on the blade pressure surface at Tu = 4%: (a) experiment and (b) SST–TRANS simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Sherwood number lineplots on blade pressure side at Tu = 4%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Sherwood number contour on end wall surface at Tu = 4%: (a) experiment and (b) SST–TRANS simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Sherwood number lineplots on end wall surface at Tu = 4%

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