Research Papers

Film-Cooling Performance of Antivortex Hole on a Flat Plate

[+] Author and Article Information
Srinath Ekkad

Heat, Energy, Fluid Transport Laboratory (HEFT),
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Virginia Tech University,
Blacksburg, VA 24060
e-mail: chrisnl@vt.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received May 4, 2011; final manuscript received September 25, 2012; published online September 13, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Je-Chin Han.

J. Turbomach 135(6), 061009 (Sep 13, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-11-1074; doi: 10.1115/1.4023436 History: Received May 04, 2011; Revised September 25, 2012

Improved film cooling performance and coolant flow usage have a significant effect on overall engine performance. In the current study, film cooling performance of an improved antivortex or tripod hole geometry is evaluated on a flat plate surface with steady-state IR (infrared thermography) technique and compared to traditional baseline geometry. The baseline geometry is a simple cylindrical hole design inclined at 30 deg from the surface with pitch-to-diameter ratio of 3.0. The proposed improvement is a tripod design where the two side holes, also of the same diameter, branch out from the root of the main hole at 15 deg angle with a larger pitch-to-diameter ratio of 6.0 between the main holes. The third geometry studied is the same tripod design embedded in a trench to enhance two-dimensional film performance. The mainstream Reynolds number is 3110 based on the coolant hole inlet diameter. Two secondary fluids, air and carbon dioxide, were used to study the effects of coolant-to-mainstream density ratio (DR = 0.95 and 1.45) on film cooling effectiveness. Several blowing ratios in the range 0.5–4.0 were investigated independently at the two density ratios. Results indicate significant improvement in effectiveness with the tripod holes compared to cylindrical holes at all the blowing ratios studied. The trenched design shows improved effectiveness in the trench region and reduced effectiveness in the downstream region. At any given blowing ratio, the tripod hole designs use 50% less coolant and provide at least 30%–40% overall averaged higher cooling effectiveness. The use of relatively dense secondary fluid improves effectiveness immediately downstream of the antivortex holes but leads to poor performance downstream.

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


Goldstein, R. J., Eckert, E. R. G., and Burggraf, F., 1973, “Effects of Hole Geometry and Density on Three-Dimensional Film Cooling,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 17, pp. 595–607. [CrossRef]
Pedersen, D. R., Eckert, E. R. G., and Goldstein, R. J., 1977, “Film Cooling With Large Density Differences Between Mainstream and the Secondary Fluid Measured by the Heat-Mass Transfer Analogy,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 99, pp. 620–627. [CrossRef]
Sinha, A. K., Bogard, D. G., and Crawford, M. E., 1991, “Film- Cooling Effectiveness Downstream of a Single Row of Holes With Variable Density Ratio,” ASME J. Turbomach., 113, pp. 442–449. [CrossRef]
Ligrani, P. M., Wigle, J. M., Ciriello, S., and Jackson, S. W., 1994(a), “Film-Cooling From Holes With Compound Angle Orientations: Part 1—Results Downstream of Two Staggered Row of Holes With 3D Spanwise Spacing,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 116, pp. 341–352. [CrossRef]
Schmidt, D. L., Sen, B., and Bogard, D. G., 1994, “Film Cooling With Compound Angle Holes: Adiabatic Effectiveness,” IGTI Turbo Expo, The Hague, Netherlands, ASME Paper No. 94-GT-312.
Leylek, J. H., and Zerkle, R. D., 1994, “Discrete-Jet Film Cooling: A Comparison of Computational Results With Experiments,” ASME J. Turbomach., 116, pp. 358–368. [CrossRef]
Gritsch, M., Schulz, A., and Wittig, S., 1997, “Adiabatic Wall Effectiveness Measurements of Film-Cooling Holes With Expanded Exits,” IGTI Conference, Orlando, ASME Paper No. 97-GT-164.
Han, J. C., Dutta, S., and Ekkad, S., 2000, Gas Turbine Heat Transfer and Cooling Technology, Taylor and Francis, New York.
Bunker, R. S., 2005, “A Review of Shaped Hole Turbine Film-Cooling Technology,” ASME J. Heat Transf., 127, pp. 441–453. [CrossRef]
Shih, T. I.-P., Lin, Y.-L., Chyu, M. K., and Gogineni, S., 1999, “Computations of Film Cooling From Holes With Struts,” ASME Paper No. 99–GT–282.
Papell, S. S., 1984, “Vortex Generating Flow Passage Design for Increased Film-Cooling Effectiveness and Surface Coverage,” 22nd National Heat Transfer Conference, Niagara Falls, NY, August 5–8.
Zaman, K. B. M. Q., and Foss, J. K., 1997, “The Effects of Vortex Generators on a Jet in Crossflow,” Phys. Fluids, 9, pp. 106–114. [CrossRef]
Bunker, R. S., 2002, “Film Cooling Effectiveness Due to Discrete Holes Within a Transverse Surface Slot,” ASME Paper No. GT2002-30178. [CrossRef]
Lu, Y., Faucheaux, D., and Ekkad, S. V., 2005, “Film Cooling Measurements for Novel Hole Configurations,” ASME Paper No. HT2005-72396. [CrossRef]
Kusterer, K., Bohn, D., Sugimoto, T., and Tanaka, R., 2007, “Double-Jet Ejection of Cooling Air for Improved Film Cooling,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129, pp. 809–815. [CrossRef]
Liu, J. S., Malak, M. F., Tapia, L. A., Crites, D. C., Ramachandran, D., Srinivasan, B., Muthiah, G., and Venkataramanan, J., 2010, “Enhanced Film Cooling Effectiveness With New Shaped Holes,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-22774. [CrossRef]
Heidmann, J. D., and Ekkad, S. V., 2008, “A Novel Antivortex Turbine Film-Cooling Hole Concept,” ASME J. Turbomach., 130(3), p. 031020. [CrossRef]
Dhungel, S., Lu, Y., Phillips, W., Ekkad, S. V., and Heidmann, J. D., 2009, “Film Cooling From a Row of Holes Supplemented With Antivortex Holes,” ASME J. Turbomach., 131(2), p. 021007. [CrossRef]
Coleman, H. W., and Steele, W. G., 1989, Experimentation and Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers, John Wiley & Sons, New York, Chaps. 3–4.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Film cooling hole geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Adiabatic film cooling effectiveness distribution for the three geometries, DR = 0.95

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Computational grid for the AV hole case (side view)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison of the three hole geometries operating at the same blowing ratios and density ratios

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of the three hole geometries operating at the same flow rate and density ratios

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of AV holes versus shaped holes at selected flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

CFD flow visualization, cylindrical hole (CY) and antivortex hole (AV)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Effect of blowing ratio and density ratio for each geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Overall effectiveness as a function of modified momentum flux ratio



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