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

Effects of Effusion and Film Cooling Jet Momenta on Combustor Flow Fields

[+] Author and Article Information
Alejandro M. Briones

Combustion Group,
Energy and Environmental Engineering Department,
University of Dayton Research Institute,
300 College Park,
Dayton, OH 45469-0043
e-mail: alejandro.briones@udri.udayton.edu

Scott D. Stouffer

Combustion Group,
Energy and Environmental Engineering Department,
University of Dayton Research Institute,
300 College Park,
Dayton, OH 45469-0043
e-mail: scott.stouffer.ctr@us.af.mil

Konstantinos Vogiatzis

Engility/PETTT,
Air Force Research Laboratory,
AFRL/RC Building 676 2435 Fifth Street,
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
e-mail: konstantin.vogiatzis@engilitycorp.com

Keith Rein

Spectral Energies,
LLC 5100 Springfield Street, Suite 301,
Dayton, OH 45431
e-mail: keith.rein.ctr@us.af.mil

Brent A. Rankin

Air Force Research Laboratory,
1790 Loop Road N.,
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
e-mail: brent.rankin.1@us.af.mil

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received February 1, 2017; final manuscript received October 13, 2017; published online April 20, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Timothy J. Jacobs.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(8), 081503 (Apr 20, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1043; doi: 10.1115/1.4039178 History: Received February 01, 2017; Revised October 13, 2017

The effects of effusion and film cooling momenta on combustor flow fields are investigated. Steady, compressible three-dimensional (3D) simulations are performed on a single-swirler combustor using Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) with flamelet generated manifold and Lagrangian–Eulerian multiphase spray, while accounting for dome and liner cooling. Two simulations are performed on the same mesh. One simulation is conducted using a parallelized, automated, predictive, imprint cooling (PAPRICO) model with dynamic flux boundary conditions and downstream pressure probing (DFBC-DPP). PAPRICO involves removing the cooling jet geometry from the dome and liner while retaining the cooling hole imprints. The PAPRICO model does not require a priori knowledge of the cooling flow rates through various combustor liner regions nor specific mesh partitioning. The other simulation is conducted using the homogenously patched cooling (HPC) model, which involves removing all the cooling jets. The HPC model applies volumetric sources adjacent to the combustor wall regions where cooling jets are present. The momentum source, however, becomes negligible. The HPC model is not predictive and requires tedious ex situ mass flow measurements from an auxiliary flowbench experiment, afflicted with systematic errors. Hence, the actual in situ air flow splits through the several combustor regions is not known with absolute certainty. The numerical results are compared with measurements of mass flow rates, static pressure drops, and path-integrated temperatures. The results demonstrate that it is critical to account for the discrete dome and liner cooling momentum to better emulate the reacting flow in a combustor.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Drennan, S. , and Kumar, G. , 2014, “Demonstration of an Automatic Meshing Approach for Simulation of a Liquid Fueled Gas Turbine With Detailed Chemistry,” AIAA Paper No. 2014-3628.
Briones, A. M. , Sekar, B. , Blunck, D. L. , Erdmann, T. J. , and Shouse, D. , 2015, “ Reacting Flows in Ultra-Compact Combustors With Combined-Diffuser-Flameholder,” J. Propul. Power, 31(1), pp. 238–252. [CrossRef]
Briones, A. M. , Thornburg, H. , Sekar, B. , Neuroth, C. , and Shouse, D. , 2013, “Numerical-Experimental Research of Ultra Compact Combustors Containing Film and Effusion Cooling,” AIAA Paper No. 2013-1045.
Briones, A. M. , Rankin, B. A. , Stouffer, S. D. , Erdmann, T. J. , and Burrus, D. L. , 2016, “Parallelized, Automated, Predictive, Imprint Cooling Model for Combustor Liners,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56187.
Briones, A. M. , Rankin, B. A. , Stouffer, S. D. , Erdmann, T. J. , and Burrus, D. L. , 2016, “ Parallelized, Automated, Predictive, Imprint Cooling Model for Combustor Systems,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 139(3), p. 031505. [CrossRef]
Marosky, A. , Seidel, V. , Sattelmayer, T. , and Magni, F. , 2012, “ Impact of Cooling Air Injection on the Combustion Stability of a Premixed Swirl Burner Near Lean Blowout,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 134(12), p. 121502. [CrossRef]
Marosky, A. , Seidel, V. , Sattelmayer, T. , Magni, F. , and Geng, W. , 2013, “ Impact of Cooling Air Injection on the Combustion Stability of a Premixed Swirl Burner Near Lean Blowout,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 135(11), p. 111501. [CrossRef]
Putnam, A. A. , 1971, Combustion-Driven Oscillations in Industry, Elsevier, New York.
Richards, G. A. , Straub, D. L. , and Robey, E. H. , 2003, “ Passive Control of Combustion Dynamics in Stationary Gas Turbines,” J. Propul. Power, 19(5), pp. 795–810. [CrossRef]
Mansour, A. , Benjamin, M. , and Steinthorsson, E. , 2000, “A New Hybrid Air Blast Nozzle for Advanced Gas Turbine Combustors,” ASME Paper No. GT2000-0117.
ANSYS, 2016, “ANSYS FLUENT 17.1, Theory Guide,” ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
Briones, A. , Stouffer, S. , Vogiatzis, K. , Rein, K. , and Rankin, B. , 2017, “Effects of Discrete Dome and Liner Cooling Momentum on Combustor Flow Fields,” AIAA Paper No. 2017-0781.
Barth, T. J. , and Jespersen, D. , 1989, “The Design and Application of Upwind Schemes on Unstructured Meshes,” AIAA Paper No. 89-0366.
Anderson, W. , and Bonhus, D. L. , 1994, “ An Implicit Upwind Algorithm for Computing Turbulent Flows on Unstructured Grids,” Comput. Fluids, 23(1), pp. 1–21. [CrossRef]
Erdmann, T. J. , Burrus, D. L. , Briones, A. M. , Stouffer, S. D. , Rankin, B. A. , and Caswell, A. W. , 2017, “Experimental and Computational Characterization of Flow Rates in a Multiple-Passage Gas Turbine Combustor Swirler,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-65252.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) and (b) Computational domain and boundary conditions for the single-swirler combustor. The boundary conditions are color-coded such that blue indicates pressure inlets, gray indicates walls, red indicates mass flow outlet, and magenta indicates the wall imprint cooling holes for the PAPRICO model. (a) shows the isometric view. (b) is same as (a) except that the outer liner surface was removed to allow for observing the inside of the combustor and imprint cooling jets. (c) and (d) show schematics of the swirl indicating the four passages. (e) shows a wireframe schematic of the combustor illustrating the primary and secondary dilution as well as the film and effusion cooling jets.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Illustration of the imprint cooling jet orientations, |êi|, obtained with Eq. (8) needed to compute the momentum flux in Eq. (7), mom˙jet,i″

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of the single-swirler combustor displaying the six modeled and measured cooling sections, viz., dome cooling flow (purple), forward liner cooling flow (red), middle liner cooling flow (blue), downstream liner cooling flow (green), side cooling flow (yellow), and aft cooling flow (magenta). This six modeled cooling sections are also the six measured cooling regions.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic of the combustor liner displaying the location of the static pressure sensors

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Predicted velocity contours at (top) centerplane, (middle) (+2 cm) off-center plane, and (bottom) (−2 cm) off-center plane computed with (left) PAPRICO and (right) HPC. The major differences in the velocity flow field are circled in magenta and denoted with numbers referenced in the text.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Predicted vorticity contours at centerplane computed with (left) PAPRICO and (right) HPC. The major differences in the vorticity field are circled in magenta and denoted with numbers referenced in the text.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Predicted temperature contours at (top) centerplane, (middle) (+2 cm) off-center plane, and (bottom) (−2 cm) off-center plane computed with (left) PAPRICO and (right) HPC. The major differences in the temperature distributions are circled in magenta and denoted with numbers referenced in the text. The upstream and downstream locations of the path-integrated temperature measurements are indicated by the magenta-colored dots.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Predicted spanwise temperature (top) and equivalence ratio (bottom) profiles for PAPRICO (solid lines) and HPC (dashed lines) along the upstream (red) and downstream (blue) location reported in Fig. 7

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