Research Papers

Aerodynamic Performance of a Coolant Flow Off-Take Downstream of an Outlet Guide Vane

[+] Author and Article Information
A. D. Walker

Department of Aeronautical
and Automotive Engineering
Loughborough University, United Kingdom

Rolls-Royce plc
Derby, United Kingdom

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the Journal of Turbomachinery. Manuscript received July 11, 2011; final manuscript received August 2, 2011; published online October 18, 2012. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 135(1), 011006 (Oct 18, 2012) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-11-1115; doi: 10.1115/1.4006332 History: Received July 11, 2011; Revised August 02, 2011

Within the compression system of a gas turbine engine a significant amount of air is removed to fulfill various requirements associated with cooling, ventilation, and sealing. Flow is usually removed through off-takes located in regions where space is restricted, while the flow is highly complex containing blade wakes, secondary flows, and other flow features. This paper investigates the performance of a pitot style off-take aimed at providing a high pressure recovery in a relatively short length. For this to be achieved some prediffusion of the flow is required upstream of the off-take (i.e., by making the off-take larger than the captured streamtube). Although applicable to a variety of applications, the system is targeted at an intercooled aero-engine concept where the off-take would be located aft of the fan outlet guide vane (OGV) root and provide coolant flow to the heat exchangers. Measurements and numerical predictions are initially presented for a baseline configuration with no off-take present. This enabled the OGV near field region to be characterized and provided a datum, relative to which the effects of introducing an off-take could be assessed. With the off-take present a variety of configurations were investigated including different levels of prediffusion, prior to the off-take, and different off-take positions. For very compact systems of short length, such that the gap between the OGV and off-take is relatively small, the amount of prediffusion achievable is limited by the off-take pressure field and its impact on the upstream OGV row. This pressure field is also influenced by parameters such as the nondimensional off-take height and splitter thickness. The paper analyses the relative importance of these various effects in order to provide some preliminary design rules. For systems of increased length a significant amount of flow prediffusion can be achieved with little performance penalty. However, the prediffusion level is eventually limited by the increased distortion and pressure losses associated with the captured streamtube.

© 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Walker, A. D., Denman, P. A., and McGuirk, J. J., 2004, “Experimental and Computational Study of Hybrid Diffusers for Gas Turbine Combustors,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 126(4), pp. 717–725. [CrossRef]
Merchant, A., 2003, “Aerodynamic Design and Performance of Aspirated Airfoils,” ASME J. Turbomach., 125(1), pp. 141–148. [CrossRef]
ESDU, “Estimation of Spillage Drag for a Wide Range of Axisymmetric Intakes at M<1,” June 1984 ESDU Data sheet 84004a.
ESDU, “Drag and Pressure Recovery Characteristics of Auxiliary Air Inlets at Subsonic Speeds,” April 1983 ESDU Data sheet 86002.
Barker, A. G., and Carrotte, J. F., 2001, “‘Influence of Compressor Exit Conditions on Annular Diffusers Part I: Diffuser Performance,” J. Propul. Power, 17(3), pp. 678–686. [CrossRef]
Barker, A. G., and Carrotte, J. F., 2001, “Influence of Compressor Exit Conditions on Annular Diffusers Part II: Flow Redistribution,” J. Propul. Power, 17(3), pp. 687–694. [CrossRef]
Stevens, S. J., Harasgama, S. P., and Wray, A. P., 1984, “Influence of Blade Wakes on the Performance of Combustor Shortened Prediffusers,” J. Aircraft, 21(9), pp. 641–648. [CrossRef]
Wilfert, G., Sieber, J., Rolt, A., Baker, N., Touyeras, A., and Colantuoni, S., 2007, “New Environmental Friendly Aero Engine Core Concepts,” XVIII International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines (ISABE 2007), Beijing, China, September 2–7, Paper No. ISABE-2007-1120.
Rolt, A., and Baker, N., 2009, “Intercooled Turbofan Engine Design and Technology Research in the EU Framework 6 NEWAC Programme,” XIX International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines 2009 (ISABE 2009), Montreal, Canada, September 7–11, Paper No. ISABE-2009-1278.
Cumpsty, N. A., 1989, Compressor Aerodynamics, Longman Scientific and Technical, Harlow, UK.
Wray, A. P., and Carrotte, J. F., 1993, “The Development of a Large Annular Facility for Testing Gas Turbine Combustor Diffuser Systems,” Paper No. AIAA-93-2546.
Fishenden, C. R., and Stevens, S. J., 1997, “Performance of Annular Combustor-Dump Diffusers,” J. Aircraft, 14(1), pp. 60–67. [CrossRef]
Livesey, J. L., 1972, “Duct Performance Parameters Considering Spatially Non-Uniform Flows,” American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 10th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, San Diego, CA, January 17–19, Paper No. AIAA-1972-85.
Denton, J. D., 1993, “Loss Mechanisms in Turbomachinery,” ASME J. Turbomach., 115(4), pp. 621–656. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

NEWAC schematic of intercooled engine [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Off-take concept schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Test rig configurations: (a) parallel duct and (b) with off-take

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pressure loss development for various mass flows through datum duct

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Visualization of predicted capture streamtube and constant outer radius approximation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

OGV exit static pressure variation with off-take proximity (PR1.16)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

OGV exit static pressure variation with prediffusion (X/C = 0.49)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Normalized axial velocity contours at various downstream planes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Shear and pressure force comparison (X/C = 0.73)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Throat plane kinetic energy coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Throat plane total pressure losses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Throat plane total pressure losses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

OGV exit capture streamtube comparison

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

CFD total pressure contours at FOGV exit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Normalized axial velocity contours at OGV exit with varying blade hub gaps

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Whole plane pressure losses through system: (a) BHG 0.42% span and (b) no BHG

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Circumferentially averaged normalized velocity profiles at axial locations through duct

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Kinetic energy flux static pressure coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of CFD predictions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Potential flow model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Off-take location design envelope based on inner wall static pressure (Cp = 20%)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Off-take location design envelope based on stagnation streamline static pressure (Cp = 20%)



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