0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Controls, Diagnostics, and Instrumentation

Experimental Study of Effusion Cooling With Pressure-Sensitive Paint

[+] Author and Article Information
Guanghua Wang

GE Global Research Center,
1 Research Circle,
Niskayuna, NY 12309
e-mail: wanggu@ge.com

Gustavo Ledezma

GE Global Research Center,
1 Research Circle,
Niskayuna, NY 12309
e-mail: ledezma@ge.com

James DeLancey

GE Global Research Center,
1 Research Circle,
Niskayuna, NY 12309
e-mail: delancey@research.ge.com

Anquan Wang

GE Aviation,
1 Neumann Way,
Cincinnati, OH 45215
e-mail: wangga@ge.com

Contributed by the Controls, Diagnostics and Instrumentation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received July 18, 2016; final manuscript received August 25, 2016; published online January 4, 2017. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 139(5), 051601 (Jan 04, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1348; doi: 10.1115/1.4034943 History: Received July 18, 2016; Revised August 25, 2016

Gas turbines overall efficiency enhancement requires further increasing of the firing temperature and decreasing of cooling flow usage. Multihole (or effusion, or full-coverage) film cooling is widely used for hot gas path components cooling in modern gas turbines. The present study focused on the adiabatic film effectiveness measurement of a round multihole flat-plate coupon. The measurements were conducted in a subsonic open-loop wind tunnel with a generic setup to cover different running conditions. The test conditions were characterized by a constant main flow Mach number of 0.1 with constant gas temperature. Adiabatic film effectiveness was measured by pressure-sensitive paint (PSP) through mass transfer analogy. CO2 was used as the coolant to reach the density ratio of 1.5. Rig computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation was conducted to evaluate the impact of inlet boundary layer on testing. Experimental data cover blowing ratios (BRs) at 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 2.0. Both 2D maps and lateral average profiles clearly indicated that the film effectiveness increases with increasing BR for BR < 0.8 and decreases with increasing BR for BR > 0.8. This observation agreed with coolant jet behavior of single film row, i.e., attached, detached then reattached, and fully detached. PSP data quality was then discussed in detail for validating large eddy simulation.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Multihole film effectiveness measurement rig

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Definition of multihole coupon geometry: (a) top view and (b) cross section view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Out-of-plane velocity field [21]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Inlet boundary layer velocity profile before the first film hole [21]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Spectral response of the PSP signals [25] (Reproduced with permission from Innovative Scientific Solutions Inc., Dayton, OH.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

PSP data reduction process for binary paint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

PSP calibration setup [25]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

PSP calibration raw data at different partial pressures and sample temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

PSP calibration data at different sample temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Two-dimensional film effectiveness maps

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Lateral (spanwise) average film effectiveness profiles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Spatial average one-periodic film effectiveness map

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Streamwise film effectiveness profiles at top, center, and bottom locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Area average film effectiveness profiles as function of BR at regions of R1–R8

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Spanwise film effectiveness profiles at center of R1, R3, R5, and R7

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Spanwise film effectiveness profiles at center of R2, R4, R6, and R8

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Film effectiveness measurement uncertainties for 2D maps in Fig. 10, lateral average profiles in Fig. 11, and spatial average one-period maps in Fig. 12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

PDF of the film effectiveness in front of the first row of film holes

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