Research Papers

The Effects of Unsteadiness and Compressibility on the Interaction Between Hub Leakage and Mainstream Flows in High-Pressure Turbines

[+] Author and Article Information
Ivan Popović

e-mail: ivan.popovic@cantab.net

Howard P. Hodson

Whittle Laboratory,
University of Cambridge,
Cambridge, UK

Torsten Wolf

Rolls-Royce Deutschland,
Dahlewitz, Germany

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received April 29, 2012; final manuscript received January 28, 2013; published online September 13, 2013. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Turbomach 135(6), 061015 (Sep 13, 2013) (10 pages) Paper No: TURBO-12-1038; doi: 10.1115/1.4024636 History: Received April 29, 2012; Revised January 28, 2013

This paper investigates the effects of compressibility and unsteadiness due to the relative blade row motion and their importance in the interaction between hub leakage (purge) and mainstream flows. First, the challenges associated with the blade redesign for low-speed testing are described. The effects of Mach number are then addressed by analyzing the experiments in the low-speed linear cascade equipped with the secondary airflow system and computations performed on the low- and high-speed blade profiles. These results indicate that the compressibility does not significantly affect the interaction between the leakage and mainstream flows despite a number of compromises made during the design of the low-speed blade. This was due to the fact that the leakage–mainstream interaction takes place upstream of the blade throat where the local Mach numbers are still relatively low. The analysis is then extended to the equivalent full-stage unsteady computations. The periodic unsteadiness resulting from the relative motion of the upstream vanes appreciably affected the way in which the leakage flow is injected and the rotor flow field in general. However, the time-average flow field was still found to be dominated by the rotor blade's potential field. For the present test arrangement, the unsteady effects were not very detrimental and caused less than a 10% increase in the losses due to the leakage injection relative to the steady calculations.

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


McLean, C., Camci, C., and Glezer, B., 2001, “Mainstream Aerodynamic Effects Due to Wheelspace Coolant Injection in a High-Pressure Turbine Stage: Part I—Aerodynamic Measurements in the Stationary Frame,” ASME J. Turbomach., 123, pp. 687–696. [CrossRef]
Schuepbach, P., Abhari, R. S., Rose, M. G., and Gier, J.2009, “Influence of Rim Seal Purge Flow on Performance of an Endwall-Profiled Axial Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2009-59653. [CrossRef]
Wang, C. Z., de Jong, F., Johnson, B. V., and VashistT. K., 2007, “Comparison of Flow Characteristics in Axial-Gap Seals for Close- and Wide-Spaced Turbine Stages,” ASME Paper No. GT2007-27909. [CrossRef]
Bayley, F. J., and Owen, J. M., 1970, “The Fluid Dynamics of a Shrouded Disk System With a Radial Outflow of Coolant,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbine Power, 92, pp. 335–341. [CrossRef]
Chew, J. W., Dadkhah, S., and Turner, A. B., 1991, “Rim Sealing of Rotor-Stator Wheelspaces in the Absence of External Flow,” ASME J. Turbomach., 114, pp. 439–445. [CrossRef]
Bunker, R. S., Laskowski, G. M., Bailey, J. C., Palafox, P., Kapetanovic, S., Itzel, G. M., Sullivan, M. A., and Farrell, T. R., 2009, “An Investigation of Turbine Wheelspace Cooling Flow Interactions With a Transonic Hot Gas Path—Part 1: Experimental Measurements,” ASME Paper No. GT2009-59237. [CrossRef]
Owen, M., 2009, “Prediction of Ingestion Through Turbine Rim Seals—Part 1: Rotationally Induced Ingress,” ASME Paper No. GT2009-59121. [CrossRef]
Hills, N. J., Chew, J. W., and Turner, A. B., 2002, “Computational and Mathematical Modeling of Turbine Rim Seal Ingestion,” ASME J. Turbomach., 124, pp. 795–803. [CrossRef]
Johnson, B. V., Jakoby, R., Bohn, D. E., and Cunat, D., 2009, “A Method for Estimating the Influence of Time-Dependent Vane and Blade Pressure Fields on Turbine Rim Seal Ingestion,” ASME J. Turbomach., 131, p. 021005. [CrossRef]
O’Mahoney, T. S. D., Hills, N. J., Chew, J. W., and Scanlon, T., 2010, “Large-Eddy Simulation of Rim Seal Ingestion,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-22962. [CrossRef]
Reid, K., Denton, J., Pullan, G., Curtis, E., and Longley, J., 2006, “The Effect of Stator-Rotor Hub Sealing Flow on the Mainstream Aerodynamics of a Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90838. [CrossRef]
de la Rosa Blanco, E., HodsonH. P., and Vazques, R., 2006, “Effect of the Leakage Flows and the Upstream Platform Geometry on the Endwall Flows of a Turbine Cascade,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90767. [CrossRef]
Wright, L. M., Gao, Z., Yang, H., and Han, J. C., 2006, “Film Cooling Effectiveness Distribution on a Gas Turbine Blade Platform With Inclined Slot Leakage and Discrete Film Hole Flows,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90375. [CrossRef]
Gao, Z., Narzary, D., and Han, J., 2008, “Turbine Blade Platform Film Cooling With Typical Stator-Rotor Purge Flow and Discrete-Hole Film Cooling,” ASME Paper No. GT2008-50286. [CrossRef]
Popović, I., and Hodson, H. P., 2010, “Aerothermal Impact of the Interaction Between Hub Leakage and Mainstream Flows in Highly-Loaded HP Turbine Blades,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-22311. [CrossRef]
Schuler, P., Kurz, W., Dullenkopf, K., and Bauer, H. J., 2010, “The Influence of Different Rim Seal Geometries on Hot-Gas Ingestion and Total Pressure Loss in a Low-Pressure Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-22205. [CrossRef]
Haselbach, F., and Schiffer, H. P., 2004, “Aerothermal Investigations on Turbine Endwalls and Blades (AITEB),” ASME Paper No. GT2004-53078. [CrossRef]
Janke, E., and Wolf, T., 2010, “Aerothermal Research for Turbine Components—An Overview of the European AITEB-2 Project,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-23511. [CrossRef]
Brear, M. J., Hodson, H. P., Gonzalez, P., and Harvey, N. W., 2002, “Pressure Surface Separations in Low-Pressure Turbines—Part 2: Interactions With the Secondary Flow,” ASME J. Turbomach., 124, pp. 393–401. [CrossRef]
Brown, L. E., 1972, “Axial Flow Compressor and Turbine Loss Coefficients: A Comparison of Several Parameters,” ASME Paper No. 72-GT-18.
Horlock, J. H., 1973, Axial Flow Turbines, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, New York.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

HP stage and rim seal configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Computational mesh for high-speed stage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The axial view of test section and predicted velocity profiles downstream of the low-speed blades

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Predicted isentropic Mach number distributions for the low- and high-speed T120 versions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Predicted limiting streamlines on hub end wall

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Predicted spanwise distributions of energy loss coefficient and yaw angle deviation from profile values

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Low-speed linear cascade with secondary airflow injector used for experimental validation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Measured and predicted isentropic Mach number distributions for the low-speed profile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Rim seal aerothermodynamics at LF = 1.0% in terms of streamlines in meridional plane: midpitch plane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Measured and predicted sealing effectiveness

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Predicted isentropic Mach number distributions at 15%Cx upstream of the blade row on the hub

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Instantaneous leakage fraction out of rim seal for full-stage unsteady calculations at LF = 1.0%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Instantaneous sealing effectiveness for full-stage unsteady conditions and corresponding steady values

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Radial velocity normalized by the blade speed at the seal exit plane and limiting streamlines on hub end wall for full-stage unsteady calculations for LF = 1.0%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Penetration depth at blade trailing edge for full-stage unsteady calculations for LF = 1.0%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

End wall aerodynamics

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Flood contours of streamwise vorticity superimposed over line contours of total pressure coefficient at plane 50%Cx downstream of rotor blades for LF = 1.0%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Mixed-out losses due to leakage injection



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