Research Papers

Time-Accurate Predictions for a Fully Cooled High-Pressure Turbine Stage—Part II: Methodology for Quantifications of Prediction Quality

[+] Author and Article Information
C. W. Haldeman, M. G. Dunn, S. A. Southworth, J.-P. Chen

 The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210

G. Heitland, J. Liu

 Honeywell Aerospace, Phoenix AZ 85072

J. Turbomach 131(3), 031004 (Apr 07, 2009) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2985076 History: Received April 25, 2007; Revised February 15, 2008; Published April 07, 2009

The aerodynamics of a fully cooled, axial, single stage high-pressure turbine operating at design corrected conditions of corrected speed, flow function, and stage pressure ratio has been investigated experimentally and computationally and presented in Part I of this paper. In that portion of the paper, flow-field predictions obtained using the computational fluid dynamics codes Numeca’s FINE/TURBO and the code TURBO were obtained using different design methodologies that approximated the fully-cooled turbine stage in different ways. These predictions were compared to measurements obtained using the Ohio State University Gas Turbine Laboratory Turbine Test Facility, in a process that was essentially a design methodology validation study, instead of a computational methodology optimization study. The difference between the two is that the designers were given one chance to use their codes (as a designer would normally do) instead of using the existing data to fine-tune their grids/methodologies by doing grid studies and changes in the turbulence models employed. Part I of this paper showed differing results from the two solvers, which appeared to be mainly dependent on the differences in grid resolution and/or modeling features selected by the code users. Examining these occurrences points to places where the design methodology could be improved, but it became clear that metrics were needed to compare overall performance of each approach. In this part of the paper, three criteria are proposed for measuring overall prediction quality of the unsteady predictions, which include the unsteady envelope size, envelope shape, and power spectrum. These measures capture the main characteristics of the unsteady data and allow designers to use the criteria of most interest to them. In addition, these can be used to track how well predictions improve over time as grid resolutions and modeling techniques change.

Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Turbine cooling paths

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Blade 50% span, ESC versus wetted distance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Blade 50% span, EQC versus wetted distance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Blade 50% span, PSC versus wetted distance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Blade 50% span, ESI based on reading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Blade 50% span, EQI based on reading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Tip shroud, ESC as function of axial blade chord

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Tip shroud, EQC as function of axial blade chord

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Shroud ESI based on reading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Tip shroud EQI based on reading




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