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

Development and Test of Oxide/Oxide Ceramic Matrix Composites Combustor Liner Demonstrators for Aero-engines

[+] Author and Article Information
Thomas Behrendt

German Aerospace Center,
Institute of Propulsion Technology,
Linder Hoehe,
Koeln D-51147, Germany
e-mail: thomas.behrendt@dlr.de

Stefan Hackemann, Peter Mechnich

German Aerospace Center,
Institute of Material Research,
Linder Hoehe,
Koeln D-51147, Germany

Yuan Shi, Severin Hofmann, Dietmar Koch

German Aerospace Center,
Institute of Structures and Design,
Pfaffenwaldring 38-40,
Stuttgart D-70569, Germany

Sandrine Hönig

German Aerospace Center,
Institute of Structures and Design, Pfaffenwaldring 38-40,
Stuttgart D-70569, Germany

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 24, 2016; final manuscript received July 21, 2016; published online October 4, 2016. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 139(3), 031507 (Oct 04, 2016) (12 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1275; doi: 10.1115/1.4034515 History: Received June 24, 2016; Revised July 21, 2016

Ceramic matrix composites (CMC) offer the potential of increased service temperatures and are thus an interesting alternative to conventional combustor alloys. Tubular combustor liner demonstrators made of an oxide/oxide CMC were developed for a lean combustor in a future aero-engine in the medium thrust range and tested at engine conditions. During the design, various aspects like protective coating, thermomechanical design, and development of a failure model for the CMC as well as design and test of an attachment system were taken into account. The tests of the two liners were conducted at conditions up to 80% take-off. A new protective coating was tested successfully with a coating thickness of up to t = 1 mm. Different inspection criteria were derived in order to detect crack initiation at an early stage for a validation of the failure model. With the help of detailed pre- and post-test computer tomography (CT) scans to account for the microstructure of the CMC, the findings of the failure model were in reasonable agreement with the test results.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

WHIPOX microstructure, cross section of fibers parallel and perpendicular to image plane, fiber diameter ∼12 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Temperature distribution of liner II on T/EBC, view onto hot gas surface of the tubular liner

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Interpolated CMC temperatures and boundary conditions in the FE analysis of liner II (t = 0.3 mm T/EBC)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Maximum stress in hoop direction on the outer surface of combustor (cold side) of liner II (t = 0.3 mm T/EBC)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Three-dimensional visualization of the adapted Tsai–Wu failure criterion for different WHIPOX materials; see Ref. [18]; stars for test results with predamaged matrix, and points for test results with undamaged matrix

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

CMC liner and attachment systems downstream and upstream

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Results of simulation for attachment system upstream with displacement of 0.37 mm between the spring arms with the CMC liner installed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Results of simulation for attachment system downstream with predeformation of 0.52 mm of the liner (gray) in axial (x) direction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Spring-arm segment, WHIPOX and additional weights A and B (top) and WHIPOX specimen with bonded weights (bottom)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Quasi-static analysis of the frictional force between WHIPOX and alloy Inconel® 718 (left); dynamic examination with pressure spring (center); and dynamic examination without pressure spring (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

CT scans for the spring-arm segment (attachment system upstream) before dynamic tests (left) and after dynamic tests (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

CMC liner I with effusion cooling holes and a T/EBC thickness of t = 1 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

CMC liner with attachment system in pressure casing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Axial positions of the thermocouples in the CMC liners

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

CMC temperatures on the hot gas side of liner I (t = 1 mm T/EBC) for the operating conditions 65–80% take-off

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Temperature differences across the CMC ΔTCMC of liner I (t = 1 mm T/EBC) for the operating conditions 65–80% take-off

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

CMC temperatures in liner I at 65% take-off and different relative pressure drops Δpc of the liner cooling air

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Temperature differences across the CMC ΔTCMC of liner II (t = 0.3 mm T/EBC) for the operating conditions 50–70% take-off

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Crack on the cooling air side of liner I after 80% take-off

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

CT scans of WHIPOX™ liner I after 80% take-off: unrolled flat projection of cracks I and II (top) and radial cross section of crack I (bottom)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

CT scans of WHIPOX™ liner II after 70% take-off: unrolled flat projection of crack III (top) and radial cross section of crack III (bottom)

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