0
Research Papers

Analysis of the Effect of Multirow and Multipassage Aerodynamic Interaction on the Forced Response Variation in a Compressor Configuration—Part I: Aerodynamic Excitation

[+] Author and Article Information
Harald Schoenenborn

MTU Aero Engines AG,
Munich 80995, Germany
e-mail: Harald.Schoenenborn@mtu.de

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received August 21, 2017; final manuscript received October 24, 2017; published online February 28, 2018. Editor: Kenneth Hall.

J. Turbomach 140(5), 051004 (Feb 28, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-17-1126; doi: 10.1115/1.4038868 History: Received August 21, 2017; Revised October 24, 2017

The aeroelastic prediction of blade forcing is still a very important topic in turbomachinery design. Usually, the wake from an upstream airfoil and the potential field from a downstream airfoil are considered as the main disturbances. In recent years, it became evident that in addition to those two mechanisms, Tyler–Sofrin modes, also called scattered or spinning modes, may have a significant impact on blade forcing. It was recently shown in literature that in multirow configurations, not only the next but also the next but one blade row is very important as it may create a large circumferential forcing variation, which is fixed in the rotating frame of reference. In the present paper, a study of these effects is performed on the basis of a quasi three-dimensional (3D) multirow and multipassage compressor configuration. For the analysis, a harmonic balancing code, which was developed by DLR Cologne, is used for various setups and the results are compared to full-annulus unsteady calculations. It is shown that the effect of the circumferentially different blade excitation is mainly contributed by the Tyler–Sofrin modes and not to blade-to-blade variation in the steady flow field. The influence of various clocking positions, coupling schemes and number of harmonics onto the forcing is investigated. It is also shown that along a speed-line in the compressor map, the blade-to-blade forcing variation may change significantly. In addition, multirow flutter calculations are performed, showing the influence of the upstream and downstream blade row onto aerodynamic damping. The effect of these forcing variations onto random mistuning effects is investigated in the second part of the paper.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Silkowski, P. D. , and Hall, K. C. , 1998, “ A Coupled Mode Analysis of Unsteady Multistage Flows in Turbomachinery,” ASME J. Turbomach., 120(3), pp. 410–421. [CrossRef]
Li, H. D. , and He, L. , 2005, “ Blade Aerodynamic Damping Variation With Rotor-Stator Gap—A Computational Approach Using Single-Passage Approach,” ASME J. Turbomach., 127(3), pp. 573–579. [CrossRef]
Hall, K. C. , and Ekici, K. , 2005, “ Multistage Coupling for Unsteady Flows in Turbomachinery,” AIAA J., 43(3), pp. 624–632. [CrossRef]
Namba, M. , and Kubo, A. , 2008, “Aerodynamically Coupled Flutter of Multiple Blade Rows,” ASME Paper No. GT2008-50315.
Rahmati, M. T. , He, L. , and Li, Y. S. , 2014, “ Multi-Row Interference Effects on Blade Aeromechanics in Compressor and Turbine Stages,” 13th International Symposium on Unsteady Aerodynamics, Aeroacoustics and Aeroelasticity of Turbomachines (ISUAAAT), Tokyo, Japan, Sept. 11–14, Paper No. S9-5.
Vahdati, M. , Smith, N. , and Zhao, F. , 2015, “ Influence of Intake on Fan Blade Flutter,” ASME J. Turbomach., 137(8), p. 081002. [CrossRef]
Smith, N. R. , Murray, W. L., III , and Key, N. L. , 2015, “ Considerations for Measuring Compressor Aerodynamic Excitations Including Rotor Wakes and Tip Leakage Flows,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(3), p. 031008. [CrossRef]
Besem, F. , Kielb, R. E. , Key, N. L. , Galpin, P. , and Zori, L. , 2016, “ Mistuned Forced Response Predictions of an Embedded Rotor in a Multistage Compressor,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(6), p. 061003. [CrossRef]
Schrape, S. , Giersch, T. , Nipkau, J. , Stapelfeldt, S. , and Mück, B. , 2015, “ Tyler-Sofrin Modes in Axial High Pressure Compressor Forced Response Analyses,” 14th International Symposium on Unsteady Aerodynamics, Aeroacoustics and Aeroelasticity of Turbomachines (ISUAAAT), Stockholm, Sweden, Sept. 8–11, Paper No. S2-3.
Stummann, S. , Jeschke, P. , and Metzler, T. , 2015, “Circumferentially Non-Uniform Flow in the Rear Stage of a Multistage Compressor,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-42935.
Junge, L. , Ashcroft, G. , Jeschke, P. , and Frey, C. , 2015, “On the Application of Frequency-Domain Methods to Multistage Turbomachinery,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-42936.
Li, H. , and He, L. , 2003, “ Blade Count and Clocking Effects on Three-Blade row Interactions in a Transonic Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 125(4), pp. 632–640. [CrossRef]
Vilmin, S. , Lorrain, E. , Debrabandere, F. , Tartinville, B. , Capron, A. , and Hirsch, C. , 2013, “The Nonlinear Harmonic Method Applied to the Combined Effects of Multi-Row Unsteady Flows,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94847.
Subramanian, V. , Custer, C. H. , Weiss, J. M. , and Hall, K. C. , 2013, “Unsteady Simulation of a Two-Stage Cooled High Pressure Turbine Using an Efficient Non-Linear Harmonic Balance Method,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94574.
Porter, C. , Orkwis, P. D. , Goerig, T. , Wood, T. , and Wojno, J. , 2016, “In-Duct Assessment of a Linearized Unsteady Navier-Stokes Scheme for Compressor Tone Noise,” AIAA Paper No. 2016-2843.
Miyazawa, H. , Furusawa, T. , Yamamoto, S. , Sasao, Y. , and Ooyama, H. , 2016, “Unsteady Force on Multi-Stage and Multi-Passage Turbine Long Blade Rows Induced by Wet-Steam Flows,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56360.
Gross, J. , Krack, M. , and Schoenenborn, H. , 2017, “Analysis of the Effect of Multi-Row and Multipassage Aerodynamic Interaction on the Forced Response Variation in a Compressor Configuration—Part II: Effects of Additional Structural Mistuning,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-63019.
Eulitz, F. , Engel, K. , Nuernberger, D. , Schmitt, S. , and Yamamoto, K. , 1998, “ On Recent Advances of a Parallel Time-Accurate Navier–Stokes Solver for Unsteady Turbomachinery Flow,” Fourth ECCOMAS, Athens, Greece, Sept. 7–11, pp. 252–258.
Nuernberger, D. , Eulitz, F. , Schmitt, S. , and Zachcial, A. , 2001, “Recent Progress in the Numerical Simulation of Unsteady Viscous Multistage Turbomachinery Flow,” International Society of Air Breathing Engines (ISABE), Gothenburg, Sweden, Sept. 12–16, Paper No. ISABE-2001-1081.
Engel, K. , Zscherp, C. , Wolfrum, N. , Nuernberger, D. , and Kuegeler, E. , 2009, “CFD Simulations of the TP400 IPC in Off-Design Operating Conditions,” ASME Paper No. GT2009-60324.
Frey, C. , Ashcroft, G. , Kersken, H.-P. , and Voigt, C. , 2014, “A Harmonic Balancing Technique for Multistage Turbomachinery Applications,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-25230.
Frey, C. , Ashcroft, G. , and Kersken, H.-P. , 2015, “Simulations of Unsteady Blade Row Interactions Using Linear and Non-Linear Frequency Domain Methods,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-43453.
Tyler, J. M. , and Sofrin, T. G. , 1962, “ Axial Flow Compressor Noise Studies,” SAE Paper No. 620532.
Schoenenborn, H. , and Ashcroft, G. , 2014, “Comparison of Non-Linear and Linearized CFD Analysis of the Stator-Rotor Interaction of a Compressor Stage,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-25256.
Morfey, C. L. , 1971, “ Sound Transmission and Generation in Ducts With Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 14(1), pp. 37–55. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Superposition of Tyler–Sofrin modes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Computational setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Vibration mode shape

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Steady Mach number flow field

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Cumulative influence of perturbations on R1 aerodynamic work

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Influence number of harmonics

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Influence of rotor 2 position

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Influence of harmonic 0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Wave decomposition and cutoff ratio outlet R1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Cumulative influence of perturbations on R2 aerodynamic work

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Influence number of harmonics

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Influence of rotor 2 position

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Influence of harmonic 0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Wave decomposition and cutoff ratio outlet R2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Difference plot steady flow solution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Operating point variation rotor 1 and rotor 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Configurations for flutter calculations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Flutter curves rotor 1

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