Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Turbomachinery

Dynamic Similarity in Turbine Deposition Testing and the Role of Pressure

[+] Author and Article Information
C. Sacco, C. Bowen, R. Lundgreen, J. P. Bons

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43235

E. Ruggiero, J. Allen, J. Bailey

GE Aviation,
Cincinnati, OH 45215

Contributed by the Turbomachinery Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received August 23, 2017; final manuscript received September 23, 2017; published online July 5, 2018. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(10), 102605 (Jul 05, 2018) (12 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1475; doi: 10.1115/1.4038550 History: Received August 23, 2017; Revised September 23, 2017

The role of absolute pressure in deposition testing is reviewed from first principles. Relevant dimensionless parameters for deposition testing are developed and dynamic similarity conditions are assessed in detail. Criteria for establishing appropriate conditions for laboratory studies of deposition are established pursuant to the similarity variables. The role of pressure is particularly singled out for consideration relative to other variables such as temperature, particle size, and test article geometry/scaling. A case study is presented for deposition in a generic array of impinging jets. A fixed quantity (2 g) of 0–10 μ Arizona road dust (ARD) is delivered to the impingement array at three different temperatures (290, 500, and 725 K) and at fixed pressure ratio. Deposition results are presented for operating pressures from 1 to 15 atm. Surface scans show that the height of deposit cones at the impingement sites decreases with increasing pressure at constant temperature and pressure ratio. This reduction is explained by the lower “effective” Stokes number that occurs at high particle Reynolds numbers, yielding fewer particle impacts at high pressure. A companion computational fluid dynamics (CFD) study identifies the additional role of Reynolds number in both the impingement hole losses and the shear layer thickness.

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


Gbadebo, S. A. , Hynes, T. P. , and Cumpsty, N. A. , 2004, “ Influence of Surface Roughness on Three-Dimensional Separation in Axial Compressors,” ASME J. Turbomach., 126(4), pp. 455–463.
Tarabrin, A. P. , Schurovsky, V. A. , Boldrov, A. I. , and Stalder, J. P. , 1998, “ Influence of Axial Compressor Fouling on Gas Turbine Unit Performance Based on Different Schemes and With Different Initial Parameters,” ASME Paper No. 98-GT-416.
Forsyth, P. , Gillespie, D. R. H. , McGilvray, M. , and Galoul, V. , 2016, “ Validation and Assessment of the Continuous Random Walk Model for Particle Deposition in Gas Turbine Engines,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57332.
Aldi, N. , Morini, M. , Pinelli, M. , Spina, P. R. , and Suman, A. , 2016, “ An Innovative Method for the Evaluation of Particle Deposition Accounting for Rotor Stator Interaction,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57803.
Borello, D. , Cardillo, L. , Corsini, A. , Delibria, G. , Rispoli, F. , Salvagni, A. , Sheard, A. G. , and Venturini, P. , 2016, “ Modelling of Particle Transport, Erosion, and Deposition in Power Plant Gas Paths,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57984.
Tabakoff, W. , 1991, “ Measurements of Particles Rebound Characteristics on Materials Used in Gas Turbines,” J. Propul., 7(5), pp. 805–114.
Tabakoff, W. , Hamed, A. , and Murugan, D. M. , 1996, “ Effect of Target Materials on the Particle Restitution Characteristics for Turbomachinery Application,” J. Propul. Power, 12(2), pp. 260–266.
Dunn, M. G. , 2012, “ Operation of Gas Turbine Engines in an Environment Contaminated With Volcanic Ash,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134(5), p. 051001.
Kim, J. , Dunn, M. G. , Baran, A. J. , Wade, D. P. , and Tremba, E. L. , 1993, “ Deposition of Volcanic Materials in the Hot Sections of Two Gas Turbine Engines,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 115, pp. 641–651.
Lawson, S. A. , Thole, K. A. , Okita, Y. , and Nakamata, C. , 2012, “ Simulations of Multiphase Particle Deposition on a Showerhead With Staggered Film-Cooling Holes,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134(5), p. 051041.
Bunker, R. S. , 2000, “ Effect of Partial Coating Blockage on Film Cooling Effectiveness,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-0244.
Lewis, S. , Barker, B. , Bons, J. P. , Ai, W. , and Fletcher, T. H. , 2011, “ Film Cooling Effectiveness and Heat Transfer Near Deposit-Laden Film Holes,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133(3), p. 031003.
Sundaram, N. , and Thole, K. A. , 2007, “ Effects of Surface Deposition, Hole Blockage, and Thermal Barrier Coating Spallation on Vane Endwall Film Cooling,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129(3), pp. 599–607.
Cosher, C. R. , and Dunn, M. , 2016, “ Comparison of the Sensitivity to Foreign Particle Ingestion of the GE-F101 and P/W-F100 Engines to Modern Aircraft Engines,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56052.
Cunningham, E. , 1910, “ On the Velocity of Steady Fall of Spherical Particles Through Fluid Medium,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 83(1910), p. 357.
Prenter, R. , Ameri, A. , and Bons, J. P. , 2017, “ Computational Simulation of Deposition in a Cooled High-Pressure Turbine Stage With Hot Streaks,” ASME J. Turbomach., 139(9), p. 091005.
Dowd, C. , Tafti, D. , and Yu, K. , 2017, “ Sand Transport and Deposition in Rotating Two-Pass Ribbed Duct With Coriolis and Centrifugal Buoyancy Forces at Re=100,000,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-63167.
Saffman, P. G. , 1965, “ The Lift on a Small Sphere in a Slow Shear Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 22, pp. 385–400.
Chang, Y. P. , Tsai, R. , and Sui, F. M. , 1999, “ The Effect of Thermophoresis on Particle Deposition From a Mixed Convection Flow Onto a Vertical Flat Plate,” J. Aerosol Sci., 30(10), pp. 1363–1378.
Whitaker, S. M. , Prenter, R. , and Bons, J. P. , 2015, “ The Effect of Freestream Turbulence on Deposition for Nozzle Guide Vanes,” ASME J. Turbomach., 137(12), p. 121001.
Bowling, R. A. , 1988, “ A Theoretical Review of Particle Adhesion,” Particles on Surfaces I, K. L. Mittal , ed., Plenum Press, New York.
Bons, J. P. , Prenter, R. , and Whitaker, S. , 2017, “ A Simple Physics-Based Model for Particle Rebound and Deposition in Turbomachinery,” ASME J. Turbomach., 139(8), p. 081009.
Whitaker, S. , Peterson, B. , Miller, A. , and Bons, J. P. , 2016, “ The Effect of Particle Loading, Size, and Temperature on Deposition in a Vane Leading Edge Impingement Cooling Geometry,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57413.
White, F. M. , 2006, Viscous Fluid Flow, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Donkelaar, A. , Martin, R. , Brauer, M. , Kahn, R. , Verduzco, C. , and Villenueve, P. , 2010, “ Global Estimates of Ambient Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations From Satellite-Based Aerosol Optical Depth: Development and Application,” Environ. Health Perspect., 118(6), pp. 847–855. [PubMed]
Israel, R. , and Rosner, D. E. , 1982, “ Use of a Generalized Stokes Number to Determine the Aerodynamic Capture Efficiency of Non-Stokesian Particles From a Compressible Gas Flow,” Aerosol. Sci. Tech., 2(1), pp. 45–51.
Lichtarowicz, A. , Duggins, R. K. , and Markland, E. , 1965, “ Discharge Coefficients for Incompressible Non-Cavitating Flow Through Long Orifices,” J. Mech. Eng. Sci., 7(2), pp. 210–219.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Predicted particle path lines for flow through a NGV cascade at 4 different diameters (1, 5, 15, 50 μm) and Stk (0.004, 0.11, 0.97, and 10.8). Background contours of Mach number. Path lines colored by Rep.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Predicted particle path lines for flow through an impingement cooling passage at four different diameters (0.1, 0.5, 1, 5 μm) and Stk (0.01, 0.26, 1.1, 27). Background contours of velocity magnitude.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Predicted particle spanwise deviation from flow streamlines versus particle diameter. Particles tracked from rotor inlet plane to first impact location on rotor blade.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Drag coefficient of a sphere showing Stokes regime. Lines indicate actual cD higher than Stokes cD for Rep > 1.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic of test apparatus

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Impingement plate schematic with periodic edge spacers (dotted lines). Solid lines denote center of impingement area in each direction.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sectioned view of assembled test fixture schematic (not to scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Sample target plate with deposits. Approximate area of optical scan indicated by shaded region. (P = 7.79 atm, T = 728 K, PR = 1.015).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Example of optical scan of shaded area in target plate from Fig. 8. Linear traces and grid indicated.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Flow regions of an impinging jet array

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Deposit capture efficiency versus discharge cavity pressure at PR = 1.015

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Normalized average peak height versus discharge cavity pressure at PR = 1.015

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Average trace through impingement cones for all pressures at PR = 1.015 and T = 505 K

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Average trace through impingement cones for all pressures at PR = 1.015 and T = 728 K

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Capture efficiency versus cavity pressure at PR = 1.03

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Computational domain for impingement holes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Velocity magnitude contours along impingement hole centerline for 3 pressures and T = 505 K, PR = 1.015

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Predicted wall shear stress contours on the target wall (above) compared to deposit scans from experiment (below) at 3 pressures and T = 505 K, PR = 1.015




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