0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Oil and Gas Applications

Compressor Fouling Modeling: Relationship Between Computational Roughness and Gas Turbine Operation Time

[+] Author and Article Information
Francesco Melino

IMEM, CNR, Parma, Italy

Mirko Morini

MechLav,  Università di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy

Antonio Peretto

DIEM, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Michele Pinelli, Pier Ruggero Spina

Dipartimento di Ingegneria,  Università di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 134(5), 052401 (Mar 05, 2012) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004739 History: Received June 24, 2011; Revised July 01, 2011; Published March 05, 2012; Online March 05, 2012

Gas turbine axial compressor performance is heavily influenced by blade fouling. As a result, the gas turbines efficiency and producible power output decrease. Performance degradation of an axial compressor stage due to fouling can be analyzed by means of simulation through computational fluid dynamics (CFD) codes. Usually these methods reproduce the deteriorated blades by increasing their surface roughness and thickness. Another approach is the scaling of compressor stage performance maps. A model based on stage-by-stage techniques was presented in a previous work. This model is able to estimate the modifications of the overall compressor performance map as a function of the operating hours. The aim of the present study is to combine these two different approaches in order to relate the increase of blade computational surface roughness with compressor operating hours.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Modeled geometry and numerical grid for NASA Stage 37

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Influence of fouling coefficients (γΨ , γφ , γη ) on the stage pressure coefficient curve (SF = 0: subsonic stage)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Influence of fouling coefficients (γΨ , γφ , γη ) on the stage efficiency curve (SF = −0.5)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Comparison between literature data and IN.FO.G.T.E. calculation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Fouling coefficient as function of time

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison between the change of NASA Stage 37 performance curve (pressure coefficient versus flow coefficient) due to fouling as evaluated by CFD method and scaling method

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison between the change of NASA Stage 37 performance curve (total to total isentropic efficiency versus pressure to flow coefficient ratio) due to fouling as evaluated by CFD method and scaling method

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Equivalent sand grain roughness as function of operating hours

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Equivalent sand grain roughness for the different compressor stages

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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