0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Turbomachinery

Investigation of Tabs in Short Annular Diffusers With Swirling Flow

[+] Author and Article Information
D. J. Cerantola

Department of Mechanical and
Materials Engineering,
Queen's University,
Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
e-mail: david.cerantola@queensu.ca

A. M. Birk

Department of Mechanical and
Materials Engineering,
Queen's University,
Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
e-mail: birk@me.queensu.ca

Contributed by the Turbomachinery Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received November 26, 2014; final manuscript received January 24, 2015; published online February 18, 2015. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 137(9), 092601 (Sep 01, 2015) (8 pages) Paper No: GTP-14-1639; doi: 10.1115/1.4029695 History: Received November 26, 2014; Revised January 24, 2015; Online February 18, 2015

Square tabs were placed on the base of an ellipsoidal center-body (CB) in short annular diffusers. Tests were conducted in subsonic swirling flow with an inlet Reynolds number of 1 × 105. The tabs, with a projected height equivalent to the boundary layer thickness, reduced the outlet distortion and incurred a pressure penalty in the three smaller diffusers whose designs were not expected to stall. The largest area ratio (AR = 6.18) diffuser improved back pressure coefficient 4.6% with four tabs that blocked 4.7% of the inlet cross section over its bare diffuser but was 42% lower than that obtained by the AR = 2.73 diffuser with no tabs. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was useful for capturing relevant flow features that corroborated with experimental data and literature. Tabs oriented normal to the diffuser axis were less effective at influencing the flow as swirl angle increased but similar elongated wakes oriented with the flow direction were observed at all simulated swirl angles. The CFD either predicted equivalent performance due to the over-prediction associated with diffusion equaling the under-prediction associated with vorticity or over-predicted performance.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Japikse, D., and Baines, N. C., 1998, Diffuser Design Technology, Concepts ETI, White River Junction, VT.
Wright, A., Lei, Z., Mahallati, A., Cunningham, M., and Militzer, J., 2012, “Effects of Scalloping on the Mixing Mechanisms of Forced Mixers With Highly Swirling Core Flow,” ASME Paper No. GT2012–70081. [CrossRef]
Lei, Z., Mahallati, A., Cunningham, M., and Germain, P., 2012, “Effects of Core Flow Swirl on the Flow Characteristics of a Scalloped Forced Mixer,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 134(11), p. 111201. [CrossRef]
Seddon, J., 1984, “Understanding and Countering the Swirl in S-Ducts: Tests on the Sensitivity of Swirl to Fences,” Aeronaut. J., 88(874), pp. 117–127.
Weng, P. F., and Guo, R. W., 1994, “New Method of Swirl Control in a Diffusing S-Duct,” AIAA J., 30(7), pp. 1918–1919. [CrossRef]
Anderson, B. H., and Gibb, J., 1996, “Vortex Generator Installation Studies on Steady State and Dynamic Inlet Distortion,” AIAA Paper No. 96-3279. [CrossRef]
Japikse, D., and Pampreen, R., 1979, “Annular Diffuser Performance for an Automotive Gas Turbine,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 101(3), pp. 358–371. [CrossRef]
Dominy, R. G., Kirkham, D. A., and Smith, A. D., 1998, “Flow Development Through Interturbine Diffusers,” ASME J. Turbomach., 120(2), pp. 298–304. [CrossRef]
Zhang, X. F., Hu, S., Benner, M., Gostelow, P., and Vlasic, E., 2010, “Experimental and Numerical Study on an Inter-Turbine Duct,” ASME Paper No. IMECE2010-37322. [CrossRef]
Thayer, E. B., 1971, “Evaluation of Curved-Wall Annular Diffusers,” ASME Paper No. 71-WA/FE-35.
Birk, A. M., and VanDam, D., 1994, “Infra-Red Signature Suppression for Marine Gas Turbines: Comparison of Sea Trial and Model Test Results for the DRES Ball IRSS System,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 116(1), pp. 75–81. [CrossRef]
Jirásek, A., 2006, “Design of Vortex Generator Flow Control in Inlets,” J. Aircr., 43(6), pp. 1886–1892. [CrossRef]
Carletti, M. J., Rogers, C. B., and Parekh, D. E., 1995, “Use of Streamwise Vorticity to Increase Mass Entrainment in a Cylindrical Ejector,” AIAA J., 33(9), pp. 1641–1645. [CrossRef]
Habchi, C., Lemenand, T., Della Valle, D., and Peerhossaini, H., 2010, “Turbulence Behavior of Artificially Generated Vorticity,” J. Turbul., 11(36), pp. 1–28. [CrossRef]
Zaman, K. B. M. Q., Reeder, M. F., and Samimy, M., 1994, “Control of an Axisymmetric Jet Using Vortex Generators,” Phys. Fluids, 6(2), pp. 778–793. [CrossRef]
Ahuja, K., and Brown, W., 1989, “Shear Flow Control by Mechanical Tabs,” AIAA Paper No. 89-0994. [CrossRef]
Hari, S., and Kurian, J., 2001, “Effectiveness of Secondary Tabs for Supersonic Mixing,” Exp. Fluids, 31(3), pp. 302–308. [CrossRef]
Bohl, D. G., and Foss, J. F., 1999, “Near Exit Plane Effects Caused by Primary and Primary-Plus-Secondary Tabs,” AIAA J., 37(2), pp. 192–201. [CrossRef]
Behrouzi, P., and McGuirk, J. J., 2006, “Effect of Tab Parameters on Near-Field Jet Plume Development,” J. Propul. Power, 22(3), pp. 576–585. [CrossRef]
Park, H., Jeon, W.-P., Choi, H., and Yoo, J. Y., 2007, “Mixing Enhancement Behind a Backward-Facing Step Using Tabs,” Phys. Fluids, 19(10), p. 105103. [CrossRef]
Carletti, M. J., Rogers, C. B., and Parekh, D. E., 1996, Parametric Study of Jet Mixing Enhancement by Vortex Generators, Tabs, and Deflector Plates, Vol. 237, ASME, New York, pp. 303–312.
Samimy, M., Zaman, K. B. M. Q., and Reeder, M. F., 1993, “Effect of Tabs on the Flow and Noise Field of an Axisymmetric Jet,” AIAA J., 31(4), pp. 609–619. [CrossRef]
Reeder, M. F., and Zaman, K. B. M. Q., 1996, “Impact of Tab Location Relative to the Nozzle Exit on Jet Distortion,” AIAA J., 34(1), pp. 197–199. [CrossRef]
Reeder, M. F., and Samimy, M., 1996, “The Evolution of a Jet With Vortex-Generating Tabs: Real-Time Visualization and Quantitative Measurements,” J. Fluid Mech., 311(3), pp. 73–118. [CrossRef]
Wood, C. C., 1951, “Preliminary Investigation of the Effects of Rectangular Vortex Generators on the Performance of a Short 1.9:1 Annular Diffuser,” National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, Report No. NACA RM L51G09.
Valentine, E. F., and Carroll, R. B., 1951, “Effects of Several Arrangements of Rectangular Vortex Generators on the Static Pressure Rise Through a Short 2:1 Diffuser,” National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, Report No. NACA RM L50L04.
Valentine, E. F., and Carroll, R. B., 1952, “Effects of Some Primary Variables of Rectangular Vortex Generators in the Static-Pressure Rise Through a Short Diffuser,” National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, Report No. NACA RM L52B13.
Kaldschmidt, G., Syltebo, B., and Ting, C., 1973, “A 727 Airplane Center Duct Inlet Low Speed Performance Confirmation Model Test for Refanned JT 8 D Engines, Phase 2,” National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, Report No. NASA CR–134534.
Sajben, M., Chen, C. P., and Kroutil, J. C., 1977, “A New Passive Boundary-Layer Control Device,” J. Aircr., 14(7), pp. 654–660. [CrossRef]
Stevens, S. J., and Williams, G. J., 1980, “The Influence of Inlet Conditions on the Performance of Annular Diffusers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 102(3), pp. 357–363. [CrossRef]
Jirásek, A., 2007, “Example of Integrated CFD and Experimental Studies: Design of Flow Control in the FOI-EIC-01 Inlet,” Third International Symposium on Integrating CFD and Experiments in Aerodynamics, U.S. Air Force Academy, CO, June 20–21.
Gupta, A. K., Lilley, D. G., and Syred, N., 1984, Swirl Flows, Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, UK.
Lilley, D. G., 1999, “Annular Vane Swirler Performance,” J. Propul. Power, 15(2), pp. 248–252. [CrossRef]
Adams, D. W., 2013, “Improvements on Single Point Incremental Forming Through Electrically Assisted Forming, Contact Area Prediction and Tool Development,” Ph.D. thesis, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Gallington, R. W., 1980, “Measurement of Very Large Flow Angles With Non-Nulling Seven-Hole Probes,” Aeronautics Digest, Paper No. USAFA-TR-80-17, pp. 60–88.
Crawford, J., and Birk, A. M., 2013, “Improvements to Common Data Reduction and Calibration Methods for Seven Hole Probes,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(2), p. 031206. [CrossRef]
Crawford, J., and Birk, A. M., 2013, “Influence of Tip Shape on Reynolds Number Sensitivity for a Seven Hole Pressure Probe,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 135(9), p. 091602. [CrossRef]
ANSYS Inc., 2013, ANSYS® Release 15.0: ANSYS FLUENT User's Guide, ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
Shih, T.-H., Liou, W. W., Shabbir, A., Yang, Z., and Zhu, J., 1995, “A New k–ϵ Eddy Viscosity Model for High Reynolds Number Turbulent Flows,” Comput. Fluids, 24(3), pp. 227–238. [CrossRef]
Cerantola, D. J., and Birk, A. M., 2015, “Experimental Validation of Numerically Optimized Short Annular Diffusers,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 137(5), p. 052604. [CrossRef]
Cerantola, D. J., 2014, “Evaluation of Swirl and Tabs in Short Annular Diffusers,” Ph.D. thesis, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Cerantola, D. J., and Birk, A. M., 2014, “Study of Tabs in a Short Annular Diffuser With a Strong Swirling Flow,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-25567. [CrossRef]
Howard, J., Thornton-Trump, A., and Henseler, H., 1967, “Performance and Flow Regimes for Annular Diffusers,” ASME Paper No. 67-WA/FE-21.
Adenubi, S. O., 1976, “Performance and Flow Regime of Annular Diffusers With Axial Turbomachine Discharge Inlet Conditions,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 98(2), pp. 236–243. [CrossRef]
Menter, F., 1994, “Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32(8), pp. 1598–1605. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Annular diffuser cutaway

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Test section schematic depicting instrumentation locations. Section  = three-hole probe traverse at annulus outlet (x = −1.05Do) and section  = three-hole probe traverse at annular diffuser inlet (x = −0.23Do). Squares denote wall pressure taps. At least two instruments were placed at each axial location.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Manufactured geometry components (symmetry plane shown)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Symmetry plane computational domain and boundary conditions. Cross sections:  = annulus outlet,  = annular diffuser inlet (x = −0.23Do),  = diffuser outlet.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

AR = 2.73 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl predicted pressure planes and streamlines

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

AR = 2.73 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl axial velocity contours and velocity vectors. (a) x = 0, (b) x = 0.13Do, (c) x = 0.26Do, (d) x = 0.39Do, (e) x = 0.52Do, (f) x = 1.00Do.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

AR = 2.73 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl predicted axial vorticity contours. See Fig. 6 for plane locations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

AR = 2.73 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl predicted azimuthal vorticity contours. See Fig. 6 for plane locations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

AR = 2.73 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl predicted turbulence intensity contours. See Fig. 6 for plane locations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Configurations with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl wall pressure distributions. CB data (solid symbols) on left axis and OW data (hollow symbols) on right axis. CFD nondimensionalized by the experimental 〈qt,exp〉. CFD results extracted along θ = 0 deg and θ = 45 deg planes. Experimental CB taps located at θ = 0 deg and OW taps at θ = 45 deg. (a) AR = 1.61 diffuser, (b) AR = 1.91 diffuser, (c) AR = 2.73 diffuser, and (d) AR = 6.18 diffuser.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

AR = 1.91 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl outlet contours. CFD results plotted on top two quadrants and experiment on bottom two quadrants. Total pressure contours on left quadrants and axial vorticity contours on right quadrants.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

AR = 2.73 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl outlet contours. See Fig. 11 for quadrant identifiers.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

AR = 6.18 diffuser with four tabs and St = 0.7 swirl outlet contours. See Fig. 11 for quadrant identifiers.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Influence of swirl on performance with four tabs. CFD: solid lines = 0 tabs, dashed lines = 4 tabs. Exp: filled circles with error bars = 0 tabs, hollow circles = 4 tabs. (a) Back pressure and (b) outlet velocity uniformity.

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