0
Research Papers

Loss Prediction in an Axial Compressor Cascade at Off-Design Incidences With Free Stream Disturbances Using Large Eddy Simulation

[+] Author and Article Information
John Leggett

Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics
Research Group,
Faculty of Engineering and the Environment,
University of Southampton,
Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
e-mail: j.leggett@soton.ac.uk

Stephan Priebe

GE Global Research,
Niskayuna, NY 12309

Aamir Shabbir

GE Aviation,
Cincinnati, OH 45215

Vittorio Michelassi

Baker-Hughes, a GE Company
Florence 50127, Italy

Richard Sandberg

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Melbourne,
Melbourne 3010, Australia

Edward Richardson

Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics
Research Group,
Faculty of Engineering and the Environment,
University of Southampton,
Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received December 2, 2017; final manuscript received March 4, 2018; published online June 14, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Li He.

J. Turbomach 140(7), 071005 (Jun 14, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-17-1228; doi: 10.1115/1.4039807 History: Received December 02, 2017; Revised March 04, 2018

Axial compressors may be operated under off-design incidences due to variable operating conditions. Therefore, a successful design requires accurate performance and stability limits predictions under a wide operating range. Designers generally rely both on correlations and on Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS), the accuracy of the latter often being questioned. The present study investigates profile losses in an axial compressor linear cascade using both RANS and wall-resolved large eddy simulation (LES), and compares with measurements. The analysis concentrates on “loss buckets,” local separation bubbles and boundary layer transition with high levels of free stream turbulence, as encountered in real compressor environment without and with periodic incoming wakes. The work extends the previous research with the intention of furthering our understanding of prediction tools and improving our quantification of the physical processes involved in loss generation. The results show that while RANS predicts overall profile losses with good accuracy, the relative importance of the different loss mechanisms does not match with LES, especially at off-design conditions. This implies that a RANS-based optimization of a compressor profile under a wide incidence range may require a thorough LES verification at off-design incidence.

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

References

Adamczyk, J. J. , Hansen, J. L. , and Prahst, P. S. , 2007, “ A Post Test Analysis of a High-Speed Two-Stage Axial Flow Compressor,” ASME Paper No. GT2007-28057.
Lübcke, H. , Schmidt, S. T. , Rung, T. , and Thiele, F. , 2001, “ Comparison of LES and RANS in Bluff-Body Flows,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 89(14–15), pp. 1471–1485. [CrossRef]
Yao, Y. F. , Savill, A. M. , Sandham, N. D. , and Dawes, W. N. , 2002, “ Simulation and Modelling of Turbulent Trailing-Edge Flow,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 68(4), pp. 313–333. [CrossRef]
Michelassi, V. , Chen, L.-W. , Pichler, R. , and Sandberg, R. D. , 2015, “ Compressible Direct Numerical Simulation of Low-Pressure Turbines Part II: Effect of Inflow Disturbances,” ASME J. Turbomach., 137(5), pp. 71005–71012. [CrossRef]
Pichler, R. , Sandberg, R. D. , Michelassi, V. , and Bhaskaran, R. , 2016, “ Investigation of the Accuracy of RANS Models to Predict the Flow Through a Low-Pressure Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(12), p. 121009. [CrossRef]
Michelassi, V. , Chen, L. , Pichler, R. , Sandberg, R. , and Bhaskaran, R. , 2016, “ High-Fidelity Simulations of Low-Pressure Turbines: Effect of Flow Coefficient and Reduced Frequency on Losses,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(11), p. 111006. [CrossRef]
Cumpsty, N. A. , Dong, Y. , and Li, Y. S. , 1995, “ Compressor Blade Boundary Layers in the Presence of Wakes,” ASME Paper No. 95-GT-443.
Adamczyk, J. J. , Celestina, M. L. , and Chen, J. P. , 1996, “ Wake-Induced Unsteady Flows: Their Impact on Rotor Performance and Wake Rectification,” ASME J. Turbomach., 118(1), pp. 88–95. [CrossRef]
Leggett, J. , Priebe, S. , Sandberg, R. , Michelassi, V. , and Shabbir, A. , 2016, “ Detailed Investigation of RANS and LES Predictions of Loss Generation in an Axial Compressor Cascade at Off Design Incidences,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57972.
Leipold, R. , Boese, M. , and Fottner, L. , 2000, “ The Influence of Technical Surface Roughness Caused by Precision Forging on the Flow Around a Highly Loaded Compressor Cascade,” ASME J. Turbomach., 122(3), pp. 416–425. [CrossRef]
Hilgenfeld, L. , and Pfitzner, M. , 2004, “ Unsteady Boundary Layer Development Due to Wake Passing Effects on a Highly Loaded Linear Compressor Cascade,” ASME J. Turbomach., 126(4), pp. 493–500. [CrossRef]
Sandberg, R. D. , Michelassi, V. , Pichler, R. , Chen, L. , and Johnstone, R. , 2015, “ Compressible Direct Numerical Simulation of Low-Pressure Turbines—Part I: Methodology,” ASME J. Turbomach., 137(5), p. 051011. [CrossRef]
Kennedy, C. A. , Carpenter, M. H. , and Lewis, R. M. , 2000, “ Low-Storage, Explicit Runge-Kutta Schemes for the Compressible Navier-Stokes Equations,” Appl. Numer. Math., 35(3), pp. 177–219. [CrossRef]
Kim, J. W. , and Lee, D. J. , 2003, “ Characteristic Interface Conditions for Multiblock High-Order Computation on Singular Structured Grid,” AIAA J., 41(12), pp. 2341–2348. [CrossRef]
Sandberg, R. D. , and Sandham, N. D. , 2006, “ Nonreflecting Zonal Characteristic Boundary Condition for Direct Numerical Simulation of Aerodynamic Sound,” AIAA J., 44(2), pp. 402–405. [CrossRef]
Kennedy, C. , and Gruber, A. , 2008, “ Reduced Aliasing Formulations of the Convective Terms Within the Navier-Stokes Equations for a Compressible Fluid,” J. Comp. Phys., 227(3), pp. 1676–1700. [CrossRef]
Nicoud, F. , and Ducros, F. , 1999, “ Subgrid-Scale Stress Modelling Based on the Square of the Velocity Gradient Tensor,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 62(3), pp. 183–200. [CrossRef]
Sandberg, R. D. , 2012, “ Numerical Investigation of Turbulent Supersonic Axisymmetric Wakes,” J. Fluid Mech., 702, pp. 488–520. [CrossRef]
Sandberg, R. D. , Sandham, N. D. , and Suponitsky, V. , 2012, “ DNS of Compressible Pipe Flow Exiting Into a Coflow,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 35, pp. 33–44. [CrossRef]
Klein, M. , Sadiki, A. , and Janicka, J. , 2003, “ A Digital Filter Based Generation of Inflow Data for Spatially Developing Direct Numerical or Large Eddy Simulations,” J. Comp. Phys., 186(2), pp. 652–665. [CrossRef]
Johnstone, R. , Chen, L. , and Sandberg, R. D. , 2015, “ A Sliding Characteristic Interface Condition for Direct Numerical Simulations,” Comp. Fluids, 107, pp. 165–177. [CrossRef]
Prasad, A. , 2005, “ Calculation of the Mixed-Out State in Turbomachine Flows,” ASME J. Turbomach., 127(3), pp. 564–572. [CrossRef]
Iseler, J. , Hilgenfeld, L. , and Pfitzner, M. , 2006, “ Investigations of the Boundary Layer on a Highly Loaded Compressor Cascade With Wake-Induced Transition,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90665.
Walraevens, R. E. , and Cumpsty, N. A. , 1995, “ Leading Edge Separation Bubbles on Turbomachine Blades,” ASME J. Turbomach., 117(1), pp. 115–125. [CrossRef]
Wheeler, A. P. S. , Sandberg, R. D. , Sandham, N. D. , Pichler, R. , Michelassi, V. , and Laskowski, G. , 2016, “ Direct Numerical Simulations of a High-Pressure Turbine Vane,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(7), p. 071003. [CrossRef]
Denton, J. D. , 1993, “ The 1993 IGTI Scholar Lecture: Loss Mechanisms in Turbomachines,” ASME J. Turbomach., 115(4), pp. 621–656. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the NACA 65 linear compressor cascade used here, based on outline in Hilgenfeld and Pfitzner [11]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Boundary conditions and multi-block layout of the linear cascade. Moving bar mesh shown by light gray dashed lines.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Comparison of experimental loading from Ref. [10] and LES without moving bars at 40 deg, Re = 300,000, and Mach 0.67

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Inlet velocity trace normalized with free stream velocity showing deficit produced by the moving bars

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Boundary layer velocity trace at 1.14% chord normal from the suction surface at 65% axial chord for moving bar case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of suction surface boundary layer momentum thickness at 97% axial chord for moving bar case. Normalized using the LES case at 44 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Spanwise instantaneous vorticity for negative incidence case (a), positive incidence case (b), and wake case (c). Vorticity contour limits [−10,10] based on nondimensional velocity normalized by inlet reference.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Turbulent kinetic energy for off-design incidences: 37 deg (a), 49 deg (b), and time statistics for the wake case (c). TKE contour limits [0,0.2] normalized by inlet velocity.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Isentropic Mach number for off-design LES and RANS cases. RANS (dashed) and LES (solid).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Suction surface skin friction for off-design LES and RANS cases. RANS (dashed) and LES (solid).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pressure surface skin friction for off-design LES and RANS cases. RANS (dashed) and LES (solid).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Suction surface wall normal TKE profiles. At streamwise positions, x/C = 0.64, 0.76, 0.99, normalized with U∞2. Profiles are offset by 0.05 along the x-axis: Profiles use color scheme introduced in Fig. 9. RANS (dashed) and LES (solid).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Suction surface wall normal tangential velocity profiles at the same stream wise locations as Fig. 12, normalized with the local free stream velocity. Profiles are offset by 1.5 along the x-axis: Profiles use color scheme introduced in Fig. 9. RANS (dashed) and LES (solid).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Total pressure wake profile taken 2% chord downstream of the trailing edge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Total pressure wake profile taken 10% chord downstream of the trailing edge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Momentum thickness of the pressure surface for 37 deg, 40 deg, 44 deg, and 49 deg with RANS (dashed) and LES (solid). Profiles use color scheme introduced in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Momentum thickness of the suction surface for 37 deg, 40 deg, 44 deg, and 49 deg with RANS (dashed) and LES (solid). Profiles use color scheme introduced in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Mixed out loss bucket for off-design incidence cases. The total losses are shown as solid lines, while the total Denton loss breakdown is shown by dashed lines.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Loss breakdown for off-design cases showing percentage of loss attributed to each term

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Carpet plot showing the coalescing of wake-induced turbulence and separation turbulence in the instantaneous tangential velocity. The plot is a plane yn/C=9e−5 from suction surface with zero velocity contour in white.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Contour plots of phase lock averages showing the velocity difference between the phase averages and full statistics, ||Uphase||−||Ufull||, corresponding to the phases shown in Fig. 20. The contours limits are [−0.1,0.1] with zero limit shown in black.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Isentropic Mach number for incident wake case and off-design case. Phase lock average extremes shown in gray.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Suction surface skin friction for off-design and incident wake cases. Phase lock average extremes shown in gray.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Pressure surface skin friction for off-design and incident wake cases. Phase lock average extremes shown in gray.

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