0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Turbomachinery

Experimental Thermal Field Measurements of Film Cooling Above the Suction Surface of a Turbine Vane

[+] Author and Article Information
Willam R. Stewart

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
204 E Dean Keeton Street Stop C2200,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: stewart@ge.com

David G. Bogard

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
204 E Dean Keeton Street Stop C2200,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: dbogard@mail.utexas.edu

1Present address: GE Global Research, Niskayuna, NY 12309.

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received November 29, 2014; final manuscript received January 31, 2015; published online April 28, 2015. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 137(10), 102604 (Oct 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-14-1641; doi: 10.1115/1.4030263 History: Received November 29, 2014; Revised January 31, 2015; Online April 28, 2015

Two-dimensional thermal profiles were experimentally measured downstream of a single row of film cooling holes on both an adiabatic and a matched Biot number model turbine vane. The measurements were taken as a comparison to computational simulations of the same model and flow conditions. Previously, adiabatic and overall effectiveness comparisons have been made between experimental and computational data. To improve computational models of the evolution of a film cooling jet as it propagates downstream, the thermal field above the vane, not just the footprint on the vane surface, must be analyzed. This study expands these data to include 2D thermal fields above the vane at 0, 5, and 10 hole diameters downstream of the film cooling holes. Four blowing ratios were tested, M = 0.28, 0.65, 1.11, and 2.41. In each case, the computational jets remained colder than the experimental jets because they did not diffuse into the mainstream as quickly. In addition, the computational results for the higher two blowing ratios exhibited the effects of the kidney vortex commonly studied in film cooling, but the experimental thermal fields were not dominated by this vortex. Finally, in comparing results above adiabatic and matched Biot number models, these thermal fields allow for an accurate analysis of whether or not the adiabatic wall temperature was a reasonable estimate of the driving temperature for heat transfer.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of turbine vane test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Measured pressured distribution in comparison to CFD prediction of an infinite cascade [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Secondary coolant flow loop

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic of the model vane with internal and film cooling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Cross section of the mesh used by Dyson et al. [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Experimental and aero and thermal boundary layer measurements just upstream of the film cooling hole location

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Example of test to test repeatability of θ measurements at x/d = 5, M = 0.65, z/d = 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Contour plots of θ and η (not corrected for in wall conduction effects) showing good agreement at y/d = 0 and x/d = 5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Laterally averaged ϕ or η with M = 0.65 [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Contour plots of ϕ and η with M = 0.65 [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of CFD simulations of an (a) adiabatic wall and a (b) low thermal conductivity wall [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Experimental thermal fields at x/d = 0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Experimental and computational [12] thermal fields above the adiabatic and conducting vane surfaces at x/d = 5 and 10, M = 0.28

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 5, M = 0.28

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 10, M = 0.28

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Experimental and computational [12] thermal fields above the adiabatic and conducting vane surfaces at x/d = 5 and 10, M = 0.65

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Centerline profiles of θ at x/d = 5 and M = 0.65 comparing experimental measurements and computational predictions [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 5, M = 0.65

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 10, M = 0.65

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Experimental and computational [12] thermal fields above the adiabatic and conducting vane surfaces at x/d = 5 and 10, M = 1.11

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 5, M = 1.11

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 10, M = 1.11

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Experimental and computational [12] thermal fields above the adiabatic and conducting vane surfaces at x/d = 5 and 10, M = 2.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Computational adiabatic and overall effectiveness contour plots for M = 2.41 [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 5, M = 2.41

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Centerline profiles of θ, z/d = 2, x/d = 10, M = 2.41

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