0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Turbomachinery

Assessment of Unsteadiness Modeling for Transient Natural Convection

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Fadl

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
e-mail: m.s.fadl@lboro.ac.uk

L. He

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
e-mail: Li.He@eng.ox.ac.uk

P. Stein, G. Marinescu

GE Power,
Baden 5400, Switzerland

1Present address: CREST, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, LE11 3TU.

2Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Turbomachinery Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received July 6, 2017; final manuscript received July 11, 2017; published online September 26, 2017. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(1), 012605 (Sep 26, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1306; doi: 10.1115/1.4037721 History: Received July 06, 2017; Revised July 11, 2017

Turbine flexible operations with faster startups/shutdowns are required to accommodate emerging renewable power generations. A major challenge in transient thermal design and analysis is the time scale disparity. For natural cooling, the physical process is typically in hours, but on the other hand, the time-step sizes typically usable tend to be very small (subseconds) due to the numerical stability requirement for natural convection as often observed. An issue of interest is: What time-step sizes can and should be used in terms of stability as well as accuracy? In this work, the impact of flow temporal gradient and its modeling is examined in relation to numerical stability and modeling accuracy for transient natural convection. A source term-based dual-timing formulation is adopted, which is shown to be numerically stable for very large time-steps. Furthermore, a loosely coupled procedure is developed to combine this enhanced flow solver with a solid conduction solver for solving unsteady conjugate heat transfer (CHT) problems for transient natural convection. This allows very large computational time-steps to be used without any stability issues, and thus enables to assess the impact of using different time-step sizes entirely in terms of a temporal accuracy requirement. Computational case studies demonstrate that the present method can be run stably with a markedly shortened computational time compared to the baseline solver. The method is also shown to be more accurate than the commonly adopted quasi-steady flow model when unsteady effects are non-negligible.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Topel, M. , Genrup, M. , Jöcker, M. , Spelling, J. , and Laumert, B. , 2015, “ Operational Improvements for Startup Time Reduction in Solar Steam Turbines,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 137(4), p. 042604. [CrossRef]
Born, D. , Stein, P. , Marinescu, G. , Koch, S. , and Schumacher, D. , 2016, “ Thermal Modeling of an Intermediate Pressure Steam Turbine by Means of Conjugate Heat Transfer—Simulation and Validation,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 139(3), p. 031903. [CrossRef]
Marinescu, G. , Mohr, W. F. , Ehrsam, A. , Ruffino, P. , and Sell, M. , 2013, “ Experimental Investigation in to Thermal Behavior of Steam Turbine Components—Temperature Measurements With Optical Probes and Natural Cooling Analysis,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 136(2), p. 021602. [CrossRef]
Marinescu, G. , Stein, P. , and Sell, M. , 2015, “ Natural Cooling and Startup of Steam Turbines: Validity of the Over-Conductivity Function,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 137(11), p. 112601. [CrossRef]
Maffulli, R. , and He, L. , 2014, “ Wall Temperature Effects on Heat Transfer Coefficient for High Pressure Turbines,” AIAA J. Propul. Power, 30(4), pp. 1080–1090. [CrossRef]
Maffulli, R. , and He, L. , 2017, “ Impact of Wall Temperature on Heat Transfer Coefficient and Aerodynamics for 3-D Turbine Blade Passage,” ASME J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl., 9(4), p. 041002. [CrossRef]
Zhang, Q. , and He, L. , 2014, “ Impact of Wall Temperature on Turbine Blade Tip Aerothermal Performance,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 136(5), p. 052602. [CrossRef]
He, L. , and Oldfield, M. L. G. , 2011, “ Unsteady Conjugate Heat Transfer Modeling,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133(3), p. 031022. [CrossRef]
Sun, Z. , Chew, J. W. , Hills, N. J. , Volkov, K. N. , and Barnes, C. J. , 2010, “ Efficient Finite Element Analysis/Computational Fluid Dynamics Thermal Coupling for Engineering Applications,” ASME J. Turbomach., 132(3), p. 031016. [CrossRef]
Errera, M. , and Baqué, B. , 2013, “ A Quasi-Dynamic Procedure for Coupled Thermal Simulations,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 72(11), pp. 1183–1206. [CrossRef]
Wang, Z. , Corral, R. , Chaquet, J. M. , and Pastor, G. , 2013, “ Analysis and Improvement of a Loosely Coupled Fluid-Solid Heat Transfer Method,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94332.
Altaç, Z. , and Uğurlubilek, N. , 2016, “ Assessment of Turbulence Models in Natural Convection From Two- and Three-Dimensional Rectangular Enclosures,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., 107, pp. 237–246. [CrossRef]
Ma, J. , and Xu, F. , 2015, “ Transient Flows Around a Fin at Different Positions,” Procedia Eng., 126, pp. 393–398. [CrossRef]
Xu, F. , and Saha, S. C. , 2014, “ Transition to an Unsteady Flow Induced by a Fin on the Sidewall of a Differentially Heated Air-Filled Square Cavity and Heat Transfer,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 71, pp. 236–244. [CrossRef]
He, L. , and Fadl, M. , 2017, “ Multi-Scale Time Integration for Transient Conjugate Heat Transfer,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 83(12), pp. 887–904. [CrossRef]
Perelman, T. L. , 1961, “ On Conjugated Problems of Heat Transfer,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 3(4), pp. 293–303. [CrossRef]
Jameson, A. , 1991, “ Time Dependent Calculations Using Multigrid, With Applications to Unsteady Flows Past Airfoil and Wings,” AIAA Paper No. 91-1596.
Arnone, A. , Liou, M. S. , and Povinelli, L. A. , 1995, “ Integration of Navier-Stokes Equations Using Dual Time Stepping and a Multigrid Method,” AIAA J., 33(6), pp. 985–990. [CrossRef]
He, L. , 2000, “ 3D Navier-Stokes Analysis of Rotor-Stator Interactions in Axial Flow Turbines,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A, 214(1), pp. 13–22. [CrossRef]
Giles, M. B. , 1997, “ Stability Analysis of Numerical Interface Conditions in Fluid–Structure Thermal Analysis,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 25(4), pp. 421–436. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Computational domain and mesh (fluid-domain only)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Residual histories for different time-step sizes (direct unsteady solver of fluent)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Residual histories for different time-step sizes (present source term-based unsteady solver)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparisons of wall heat fluxes (in W/m2) along circumference (in deg) between the present method with large time-steps (Δt = 10 s, 40 s, 160 s) and the direct method of fluent with a stability restricted small time-step (Δt = 0.2 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Instantaneous temperature fields for the present solutions ((a) Δt = 10 s and (b) 160 s, respectively) and the direct baseline solutions (Δt = 0.2 s for both cases)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Instantaneous velocity fields for the present solutions ((a) Δt = 10 s and (b) 160 s, respectively) and the direct baseline solutions (Δt = 0.2 s for both cases)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Wall heat fluxes (W/m2) along circumference (boundary temperature gradient of 20 K/0.2 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Wall heat fluxes (W/m2) along circumference (boundary temperature gradient of 5 K/0.2 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Fluid and solid domains and mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of fluid–solid interface temperatures (K) between the present loosely coupled CHT (“present”) and the direct fully coupled CHT (“direct”) solutions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Heat fluxes (W/m2) on both sides of interface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Convergence histories of the baseline direct coupled CHT solutions for different time-steps

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Convergence histories of the present loosely coupled CHT solutions for different time-steps

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Interface temperatures (in K) at t = 700 s by the direct CHT method with a small-time-step (Δt = 0.2 s) and the present loosely coupled CHT method with different time-steps

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Time evolution of interface temperature profiles (K) (direct CHT: Δt = 0.2 s; loosely coupled CHT: Δt = 10 s): (a) 200–500 s and (b) 2500–5000 s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of temperature contours in solid and fluid domains between the direct solution (Δt = 0.2 s) and the present solution (Δt = 10 s) at t = 500 s and t = 1000 s, respectively: (a) t = 500 s and (b) t = 5000

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Effect of the time-step sizes on the predicted interface wall temperature (K) distributions (t = 3000 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Effect of the time-step sizes on the predicted interface wall temperature (K) distributions (t = 4000 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Three-dimensional computational configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Comparison of instantaneous heat flux contours at fluid–solid interface (at t = 200 s), between the direct solution (Δt = 0.2 s) and the present loosely coupled solution (Δt = 10 s): (a) direct CHT and (b) loosely coupled CHT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison of instantaneous temperatures on a mid-domain cut plane (at t = 200 s) between the direct solution (Δt = 0.2 s) and the present loosely coupled solution (Δt = 10 s): (a) direct CHT and (b) loosely coupled CHT

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