Toward Intra-Row Gap Optimization for One and Half Stage Transonic Compressor

[+] Author and Article Information
H. D. Li

School of Engineering, University of Durham, Durham DH1 3LE, UKhaidong.li@durham.ac.uk

L. He

School of Engineering, University of Durham, Durham DH1 3LE, UKli.he@durham.ac.uk

J. Turbomach 127(3), 589-598 (Jan 10, 2005) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1928934 History: Received April 30, 2004; Revised January 10, 2005

Multistage effects on both aerodynamics and aeromechanics have been identified as significant. Thus, design optimizations for both aerodynamic performance and aeromechanical stability should be done in the unsteady multistage environment. The key issue preventing such a procedure to be carried out is the enormous computing time cost of multistage unsteady simulations. In this paper, a methodology based on the single-passage shape-correction method integrated with an interface disturbance truncation technique has been developed. The capability, efficiency, and accuracy of the developed methodology have been demonstrated for a one and a half stage quasi-three-dimensional transonic compressor with realistic blade counts. Furthermore, the interface disturbance truncation technique enables us to separate multirow interaction effects from the upstream and the downstream, which makes it possible to superimpose different rotor upstream gap effects and rotor downstream gap effects on the middle row rotor aerodynamic damping. In addition, a gap influence coefficient approach has been developed for investigation of all the possible gap spacing combinations of M upstream stator-rotor gaps and N downstream rotor-stator gaps. Then the number of cases that need to be computed has been reduced from M×N to M+N, which saved substantial computing time. The optimization analysis shows significant damping variation (300%) within the chosen intrarow gap design space. The intrarow gap spacing could have either stabilizing or destabilizing effects so that the stabilizing axial spacing could be utilized to increase flutter-free margin in aeromechanical designs. The current approach also can be used for setting aeromechanical constraints for aerodynamic performance optimizations.

Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Amplitude of the first-harmonic pressure on the rotor suction surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Phase angles of the first-harmonic pressure on the rotor suction surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Phase angles of the first-harmonic pressure on the rotor pressure surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Variation of the rotor aerodynamic damping

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Variation of the stage performance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Rotor aerodynamic damping map (Log_dec %)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Sketch diagram of IGV-rotor-stator interactions (a) single passage and (b) multipassage

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Computational domains (IGV-rotor gap=rotor-stator gap=50%rotor chord). (a ) Single-passage reconstructed solution and (b ) multipassage solution.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Instantaneous pressure contours of IGV-rotor-stator interactions (IGV-rotor gap=rotor-stator gap=50%rotor chord)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Time traces of the tangential force on the rotor blade (IGV-rotor-stator configuration)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Time traces of the tangential force on the rotor blade (IGV-rotor-stator configuration with rotor in vibration)



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