Research Papers

Test Rig for Applied Experimental Investigations of the Thermal Contact Resistance at the Blade-Rotor-Connection in a Steam Turbine

[+] Author and Article Information
Dennis Toebben

Institute of Power Plant Technology,
Steam and Gas Turbines,
RWTH Aachen University,
Templergraben 55,
Aachen 52064, Germany
e-mail: toebben@ikdg.rwth-aachen.de

Xavier E. R. de Graaf, Piotr Luczynski, Manfred Wirsum

Institute of Power Plant Technology,
Steam and Gas Turbines,
RWTH Aachen University,
Templergraben 55,
Aachen 52064, Germany

Wolfgang F. D. Mohr

General Electric (Switzerland) GmbH Brown,
Boveri Street 7,
Baden 5401, Switzerland

Klaus Helbig

General Electric Power AG,
Boveristr. 22,
Mannheim 68309, Germany

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received February 13, 2018; final manuscript received October 7, 2018; published online January 21, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Coutier-Delgosha Olivier.

J. Turbomach 141(2), 021007 (Jan 21, 2019) (8 pages) Paper No: TURBO-18-1025; doi: 10.1115/1.4041748 History: Received February 13, 2018; Revised October 07, 2018

Recent studies have shown that in a prewarming, respectively, warm-keeping operation of a steam turbine, the blades and vanes transport most of the heat to the thick-walled casing and rotor. Thereby, a thermal bottle-neck arises at the connection between the blade root and the rotor. The thermal contact resistance (TCR) at these interfaces affects the temperature distribution and thus the thermal stresses in the rotor. The present paper introduces an experimental setup, which is designed to quantify the TCR at the blade-rotor-connection of a steam turbine. An uncertainty analysis is presented, which proves that the average measurement uncertainties are less than one percent. The experiments especially focus on the investigation of the contact pressure, which is a function of the rotational speed. Therefore, the results of several steady-state measurements under atmospheric and evacuated atmosphere using a high temperature-resistant chromium-molybdenum steel are presented. For the evaluation of the TCR, a numerical model of the specimen is developed in addition to a simplified 1D approach. The results show a significantly increasing TCR with decreasing contact pressure, respectively, rotational speed.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Toebben, D. , Luczynski, P. , Diefenthal, M. , Wirsum, M. , Reitschmidt, S. , Mohr, W. , and Helbig, K. , 2017, “ Numerical Investigation of Heat Transfer and Flow Phenomena in an IP Steam Turbine in Warm-Keeping Operation With Hot Air,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-63555.
Pusch, D. , Voigt, M. , Vogeler, K. , Dumstorff, P. , and Almstedt, H. , 2016, “ Setup, Validation and Probabilistic Robustness Estimation of a Model for Prediction of LCF in Steam Turbine Rotors,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57321.
Fenech, H. , and Rohsenow, W. M. , 1963, “ Prediction of Thermal Conductance of Metallic Surfaces in Contact,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 85(1), pp. 15–24. [CrossRef]
Mikic, B. B. , and Rohsenow, W. M. , 1966, “ Thermal Contact Resistance,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, Technical Report No. 4542-41.
Yovanovich, M. M. , and Fenech, H. , 1966, “ Thermal Contact Conductance of Nominally Flat Rough Surfaces in a Vacuum Environment,” Thermophys. Temp. Control Spacecr. Entry Veh., pp. 773–794.
Cooper, M. G. , Mikic, B. B. , and Yovanovich, M. M. , 1969, “ Thermal Contact Conductance,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 12, pp. 279–300.
Yovanovich, M. M. , 2005, “ Four Decades of Research on Thermal Contact, Gap, and Joint Resistance in Microelectronics,” IEEE Trans. Compon. Packaging Technol., 28(2), pp. 182–206.
Madhusudana, C. V. , 2014, Thermal Contact Conductance (Mechanical Engineering Series), 2nd ed., Springer, Cham, Switzerland.
Burghold, E. M. , Frekers, Y. , and Kneer, R. , 2015, “ Determination of Time-Dependent Thermal Contact Conductance Through IR-Thermography,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., 98, pp. 148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2015.07.009
Ustinov, V. , Kneer, R. , Al-Sibai, F. , Schulz, S. , and El-Magd, E. , 2010, “ Influence of Surface Roughness on Contact Heat Transfer,” ASME Paper No. IHTC14-22288.
Ustinov, V. , Schulz, S. , Kneer, R. , and El-Magd, E. , 2011, “ Model Development for the Contact Pressure Dependent Heat Transfer,” Motortechnische Zeitschrift: MTZ, Springer Automotive Media, München, Germany.
Mar, J. , Litovsky, E. , and Kleiman, J. , 2008, “ Modeling and Database Development of Conductive and Apparent Thermal Conductivity of Moist Insulation Materials,” J. Building Phys., 32(1), pp. 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744259108092001
Working Group 1, 2008, “ Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement,” Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (JCGM), Technical Report No. JCGM 100:2008.
DIN Deutsches Institut fuer Normung e. V, 2013, “ Thermoelemente-Teil 1: Thermospannungen und Grenzabweichungen,” DKE Deutsche Kommission Elektrotechnik Elektronik Informationstechnik im DIN und VDE, Technical Report No. IEC60584-1:2013, DIN EN 60584-1.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Computer-aided design model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Installed specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Measurement positions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Conjugate heat transfer simulation with hexahedral mesh (left), hexahedral mesh (center), CI and AP (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Total heat transfer from blade to rotor regarding different heat transfer phenomena through the air pockets (CHT model THC=500 °C, TCool=30 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Heat transfer through the air pockets related to the contact heat transfer (CHT model THC=500 °C, TCool=30 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Temperature fluctuation over time between the measurement positions T4 and T5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Average dimensionless temperature differences ϑ at contact interface CI2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Temperature distribution, calculated with FEM model (pc = 4.8 MPa, vac, TH=150 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Incoming and outgoing heat fluxes for different measurement series

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of TCR calculated by 1D and FEM model (vac, TH=150 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of heat fluxes calculated by 1D and FEM model (vac, TH=150 °C)



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