0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Industrial & Cogeneration

Performance Measurements of a Unique Louver Particle Separator for Gas Turbine Engines

[+] Author and Article Information
Grant O. Musgrove

Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX 78238
e-mail: grant.musgrove@swri.org

Karen A. Thole

Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering Department,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802

Joseph Barker

United Technologies Corporation –
Pratt & Whitney,
East Hartford, CT 06108

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 26, 2012; final manuscript received July 20, 2012; published online November 21, 2012. Editor: Dilip R. Ballal.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 135(1), 012001 (Nov 21, 2012) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-12-1228; doi: 10.1115/1.4007568 History: Received June 26, 2012; Revised July 20, 2012

Solid particles, such as sand, ingested into gas turbine engines, reduce the coolant flow in the turbine by blocking cooling channels in the secondary flow path. One method to remove solid particles from the secondary flow path is to use an inertial particle separator because of its ability to incur minimal pressure losses in high flow rate applications. In this paper, an inertial separator is presented that is made up of an array of louvers followed by a static collector. The performance of two inertial separator configurations was measured in a unique test facility. Performance measurements included pressure loss and collection efficiency for a range of Reynolds numbers and sand sizes. To complement the measurements, both two-dimensional and three-dimensional computational results are presented for comparison. Computational predictions of pressure loss agreed with measurements at high Reynolds numbers, whereas predictions of sand collection efficiency for a sand size range 0–200μm agreed within 10% of experimental measurements over the range of Reynolds numbers. Collection efficiency values were measured to be as high as 35%, and pressure loss measurements were equivalent to less than 1% pressure loss in an engine application.

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

References

Tabakoff, W., Hosny, W., and Hamed, A., 1976, “Effect of Solid Particles on Turbine Performance,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 98(1), pp. 47–52. [CrossRef]
Kim, J., Dunn, M. G., Baran, A. J., Wade, D. P., and Tremba, E. L., 1993, “Deposition of Volcanic Materials in the Hot Sections of Two Gas Turbine Engines,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 115, pp. 641–651. [CrossRef]
Dunn, M. G., Baran, A. J., and Miatah, J., 1994, “Operation of Gas Turbine Engines in Volcanic Ash Clouds,” ASME Paper No. 94-GT-170.
Walsh, W. S., Thole, K. A., and Joe, C., 2006, “Effects of Sand Ingestion on the Blockage of Film-Cooling Holes,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90067. [CrossRef]
Land, C. C., Thole, K. A., and Joe, C., 2008, “Considerations of a Double-Wall Cooling Design to Reduce Sand Blockage,” ASME Paper No. GT2008-50160. [CrossRef]
Poulton, P., and Cole, B.N., 1981, “An Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Louvred Inertia Air Filter Performance,” Proceedings of the Conference on Gas Born Particles, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Oxford, UK, June, pp. 161–170.
Smith, J. L., Jr., and Goglia, M. J., 1956, “Mechanism of Separation in Louver-Type Dust Separator,” ASME Trans.78(2), pp. 389–399.
Gee, D. E., and Cole, B. N., 1969, “A Study of the Performance of Inertia Air Filters,” Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers—Symposium on Fluid Mechanics and Measurements in Two-Phase Systems, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK, pp. 167–176.
Zverev, N. I., 1946, “Shutter-Type Dust Collector of Small Dimensions,” Eng. Dig., 7(11), pp. 353–355.
Schneider, O., Dohmen, H. J., and Reichert, A. W., 2002, “Experimental Analysis of Dust Separation in the Internal Cooling Air System of Gas Turbines,” ASME Paper No. GT2002-30240. [CrossRef]
Schneider, O., Dohmen, H. J., Benra, F.-K., and Brillert, D., 2003, “Investigations of Dust Separation in the Internal Cooling Air System of Gas Turbines,” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38293. [CrossRef]
Schneider, O., Dohmen, H. J., Benra, F.-K., and Brillert, D., 2004, “Dust Separation in a Gas Turbine Pre-Swirl Cooling Air System, a Parameter Variation,” ASME Paper No. GT2004-53048. [CrossRef]
Schneider, O., Benra, F.-K., Dohmen, H. J., and Jarzombek, K., 2005, “A Contribution to the Abrassive Effect of Particles in a Gas Turbine Pre-Swirl Cooling Air System,” ASME Paper No. GT2005-68188. [CrossRef]
Villora, N. G., Dullenkopf, K., and Bauer, H. J., “Separation of Particles in the Secondary Air System of Gas Turbines,” ASME Paper No. GT2011-45080. [CrossRef]
Syred, C., Griffiths, A., and Syred, N., 2004, “Gas Turbine Combustor With Integrated Ash Removal for Fine Particulates,” ASME Paper No. GT2004-53270. [CrossRef]
Musgrove, G. O., Barringer, M. D., Thole, K. A., Grover, E., and Barker, J., 2009, “Computational Design of a Louver Particle Separator for Gas Turbine Engines,” ASME Paper No. GT2009-60199. [CrossRef]
Powder Technology, Inc., 2009, Burnsville, MN.
ANSYS, Inc., 2009, FLUENT Version 6.3.26, ANSYS Inc., NH.
Moffat, R. J., 1988, “Describing the Uncertainties in Experimental Results,” Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci., 1, pp. 3–17. [CrossRef]
Schetz, J., and Fuhs, A., 1996, Handbook of Fluid Dynamics and Fluid Machinery, Vol. 1, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, Chap. 14.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The (a),(b) open loop test facility included a sand injection system and (c) transparent test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Particle size distribution by percent volume of ISO 12103-1 A4 test sand [17]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The (upper) variable and (lower) constant louver configurations included structural supports and a wedge and baffle at the collector inlet

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The louver anchor length (A) is determined by subtracting the louver length (L) from the distance between louvers (L+A)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Test repeatability was indicated by the similar sand deposition in the test facility for varying ML and m0 for the variable louver configuration at Re = 25,000 for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Collection efficiency was independent of ML and m0 for the variable louver configuration at Re = 25,000 for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Pressure loss across both separator configurations increased for decreasing Reynolds numbers

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

The collection efficiency for both configurations increased as Reynolds number decreased for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Sand was uniformly collected across the collector span in increasing amounts with decreasing Reynolds number for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Circulation size was observed to decrease with decreasing Reynolds number for the (a) constant and (b) variable louver configurations for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Distribution of sand through the test facility for the variable louver configuration when varying Reynolds number for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Distribution of sand through the test facility for the constant louver configuration when varying Reynolds number for 0 < Ds < 200 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Collection efficiency was dependent on sand size and louver configuration at Re = 46,400

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Sand sizes Ds < 20 μm were distributed evenly across the collector; however, sizes Ds > 20 μm deposited only at the collector ends for Re = 46,400

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Large sand sizes were observed to not follow streamlines through the variable louver configuration at Re = 46,400

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Large sand sizes were observed to not follow streamlines through the constant louver configuration at Re = 46,400

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Distribution of sand through the test facility for variable louver angle when varying sand size at Re = 46,400

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Distribution of sand through the test facility for constant louver angle when varying sand size at Re = 46,400

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