0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

Coupled Thermomechanical Fatigue Tests for Simulating Load Conditions in Cooled Turbine Parts

[+] Author and Article Information
Roland Mücke, Klaus Rau

 Alstom Power, Baden CH-54010, Switzerland

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 134(5), 052508 (Mar 01, 2012) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004731 History: Received June 16, 2011; Revised June 27, 2011; Published March 01, 2012; Online March 01, 2012

Modern heavy-duty gas turbines operate under hot gas temperatures that are much higher than the temperature capability of nickel superalloys. For that reason, advanced cooling technology is applied for reducing the metal temperature to an acceptable level. Highly cooled components, however, are characterized by large thermal gradients resulting in inhomogeneous temperature fields and complex thermomechanical load conditions. In particular, the different rates of stress relaxation due to the different metal temperatures on hot gas and cooling air exposed surfaces lead to load redistributions in cooled structures, which have to be considered in the lifetime prediction methodology. In this context, the paper describes coupled thermomechanical fatigue (CTMF) tests for simultaneously simulating load conditions on hot and cold surfaces of cooled turbine parts (Beck , 2001, “Experimental Analysis of the Interaction of Hot and Cold Volume Elements During Thermal Fatigue of Cooled Components Made From AISI 316 L Steel,” Z. Metallkunde, 92 , pp. 875–881 and Rau , 2003, “Isothermal Thermo-mechanical and Complex Thermo-mechanical Fatigue Tests on AISI 316 L Steel—A Critical Evaluation,” Mater. Sci. Eng., A345 , pp. 309–318). In contrary to standard thermomechanical fatigue (TMF) testing methods, CTMF tests involve the interaction between hot and cold regions of the parts and thus more closely simulates the material behavior in cooled gas turbine structures. The paper describes the methodology of CTMF tests and their application to typical load conditions in cooled gas turbine parts. Experimental results are compared with numerical predictions showing the advantages of the proposed testing method.

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

Example of temperature distribution and schematic load history in cooled turbine blades

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Out-of-phase and in-phase TMF cycles

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Sketch of CTMF tests with two specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Temperatures and external forces versus time

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Measured total, thermal, and mechanical strain in the first load cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Measured stress versus time in the first load cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Measured hysteresis of stress versus mechanical strain in (a) the first, (b) the second, and (c) the 100th load cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Measured maximum and minimum stress and total strain versus number of load cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Predicted stress in the first two load cycles

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Predicted stress versus mechanical strain

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of measured and predicted stress cycles for zero external force

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