0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions

Hybrid RANS-LES Modeling of the Aerothermal Field in an Annular Hot Streak Generator for the Study of Combustor–Turbine Interaction

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Andreini

Department of Industrial Engineering,
University of Florence,
via S. Marta 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: antonio.andreini@htc.de.unifi.it

T. Bacci

Department of Industrial Engineering,
University of Florence,
via S. Marta 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: tommaso.bacci@htc.de.unifi.it

M. Insinna

Department of Industrial Engineering,
University of Florence,
via S. Marta 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: massimiliano.insinna@unifi.it

L. Mazzei

Department of Industrial Engineering,
University of Florence,
via S. Marta 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: lorenzo.mazzei@htc.de.unifi.i

S. Salvadori

Department of Industrial Engineering,
University of Florence,
via S. Marta 3,
Florence 50139, Italy
e-mail: simone.salvadori@unifi.it

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 30, 2016; final manuscript received July 7, 2016; published online September 20, 2016. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 139(2), 021508 (Sep 20, 2016) (12 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1293; doi: 10.1115/1.4034358 History: Received June 30, 2016; Revised July 07, 2016

The adoption of lean-burn technology in modern aero-engines influences the already critical aerothermal conditions at turbine entry, where the absence of dilution holes preserves the swirl component generated by burners and prevents any control on pattern factor. The associated uncertainty and lack of confidence entail the application of wide safety margins in turbine cooling design, with a detrimental effect on engine efficiency. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) can provide a deeper understanding of the physical phenomena involved in combustor–turbine interaction, especially with hybrid Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) large eddy simulation (LES) models, such as scale adaptive simulation (SAS), which are proving to overcome the well-known limitations of the RANS approach and be a viable approach to capture the complex flow physics. This paper describes the numerical investigation on a test rig representative of a lean-burn, effusion cooled, annular combustor developed in the EU Project Full Aerothermal Combustor-Turbine interactiOns Research (FACTOR) with the aim of studying combustor–turbine interaction. Results obtained with RANS and SAS were critically compared to experimental data and analyzed to better understand the flow physics, as well as to assess the improvements related to the use of hybrid RANS-LES models. Significant discrepancies are highlighted for RANS in predicting the recirculating region, which has slight influence on the velocity field at the combustor outlet, but affects dramatically mixing and the resulting temperature distribution. The accuracy of the results achieved suggests the exploitation of SAS model with a view to the future inclusion of the nozzle guide vanes in the test rig.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

View of the test rig and detail of swirlers and multiperforated liners

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Experimental setup for the PIV measurements on the combustor simulator

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Five-hole probe positions and definition of velocity angles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Computational domain with periodicity conditions (single sector case, 1S)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Computational domain (three-sector case, 3S)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Details of the computational grids

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Time-averaged contours of Pope's criterion (SAS at DP, 1S case). Areas with M > 0.2 are blanked.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of velocity field at the meridional plane (isoT case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of axial velocity field at the meridional plane (isoT case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of axial velocity profiles at the meridional plane (isoT case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Contours of swirl angle on plane 40 (DP case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Profiles of swirl angle on plane 40 at three different nondimensional radial positions (DP case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Contours of pitch angle on plane 40 (DP case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Profiles of pitch angle on plane 40 at three different nondimensional radial positions (DP case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Contours of nondimensional temperature at plane 40t (DP case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Contours of relative temperature differences between CFD and experiments at plane 40t

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Radial profiles of tangentially averaged nondimensional temperature at plane 40t

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