0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Heat Transfer

Structural Deflection's Impact in Turbine Stator Well Heat Transfer

[+] Author and Article Information
Julien Pohl

School of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Leeds,
Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
e-mail: jul.pohl@gmx.de

Harvey M. Thompson

Professor of Computational Fluid Dynamics
School of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Leeds,
Leeds LS2 9JT, UK

Antonio Guijarro Valencia, Gregorio López Juste

ETSIA,
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid,
Madrid 28040, Spain

Vincenzo Fico, Gary A. Clayton

Thermo-Fluid Systems,
Rolls-Royce plc.,
Derby DE24 8BJ, UK

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 29, 2016; final manuscript received August 9, 2016; published online October 18, 2016. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 139(4), 041901 (Oct 18, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1290; doi: 10.1115/1.4034636 History: Received June 29, 2016; Revised August 09, 2016

In the most evolved designs, it is common practice to expose engine components to main annulus air temperatures exceeding the thermal material limit in order to increase the overall performance and to minimize the engine-specific fuel consumption (SFC). To prevent overheating of the materials and thus the reduction of the component life, an internal flow system is required to cool the critical engine parts and to protect them. This paper shows a practical application and extension of the methodology developed during the five-year research program, main annulus gas path interaction (MAGPI). Extensive use was made of finite element analysis (FEA (solids)) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD (fluid)) modeling techniques to understand the thermomechanical behavior of a dedicated turbine stator well cavity rig, due to the interaction of cooling air supply with the main annulus. Previous work based on the same rig showed difficulties in matching predictions to thermocouple measurements near the rim seal gap. In this investigation, two different types of turbine stator well geometries were analyzed, where—in contrast to previous analyses—further use was made of the experimentally measured radial component displacements during hot running in the rig. The structural deflections were applied to the existing models to evaluate the impact inflow interactions and heat transfer. Additionally, to the already evaluated test cases without net ingestion, cases simulating engine deterioration with net ingestion were validated against the available test data, also taking into account cold and hot running seal clearances. 3D CFD simulations were conducted using the commercial solver fluent coupled to the in-house FEA tool SC03 to validate against available test data of the dedicated rig.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Typical turbine stator well

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Compilation of previous results at the rim seal [47,10]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Test rig cross section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Overview of instrumentation inside the TSW

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Indicated rim seal ingestion and egress rates [13]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

2D finite element model for thermal analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

2D finite element model for displacement calculations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

3D baseline (left) and deflector (right) FEA models for coupled thermal analyses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Extent of the baseline 3D CFD sector model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Extent of the deflector plate 3D CFD sector model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Schematic representation of the coupling process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Temperature contours from the FEA model for the four test cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Contours of nondimensional radial displacement from the FEA model for the four test cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Contours of nondimensional adiabatic fluid temperature θad,fl from the steady-state CFD simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of air temperatures between CFD coupling results and experimental test data

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of metal temperatures between coupling results and experimental test data for the baseline geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Comparison of metal temperatures between coupling results and experimental test data for the deflector geometry

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