0
Research Papers

Double Wall Cooling of a Full Coverage Effusion Plate With Cross Flow Supply Cooling and Main Flow Pressure Gradient

[+] Author and Article Information
Phil Ligrani, Zhong Ren

Propulsion Research Center,
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
University of Alabama in Huntsville,
5000 Technology Drive,
Olin B. King Technology Hall S236,
Huntsville, AL 35899

Sneha Reddy Vanga

Propulsion Research Center,
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
University of Alabama in Huntsville,
5000 Technology Drive,
Olin B. King Technology Hall S236,
Huntsville, AL 35899

Christopher Allgaier

ITLR University of Stuttgart,
Pfaffenwaldring 31,
Stuttgart 70569, Germany

Federico Liberatore, Rajeshriben Patel

Combustion Engineering,
Solar Turbines, Inc.,
2200 Pacific Highway, Mail Zone E-4,
San Diego, CA 92186-5376

Ram Srinivasan

Combustion Engineering,
Solar Turbines, Inc.,
2200 Pacific Highway, Mail Zone E-4,
San Diego, CA 92186-5376

Yin-Hsiang Ho

Combustion Engineering,
Solar Turbines, Inc.,
2200 Pacific Highway, Mail Zone E-4,
San Diego, CA 92186-5376

Manuscript received July 30, 2018; final manuscript received August 20, 2018; published online October 4, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Riccardo Da Soghe.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 141(3), 031015 (Oct 04, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: GTP-18-1531; doi: 10.1115/1.4041451 History: Received July 30, 2018; Revised August 20, 2018

Experimentally measured results are presented for different experimental conditions for a test plate with double wall cooling, composed of full-coverage effusion-cooling on the hot side of the plate, and cross-flow cooling on the cold side of the plate. The results presented are different from those from past investigations, because of the addition of a significant mainstream pressure gradient. Main stream flow is provided along a passage with a contraction ratio of 4, given by the ratio upstream flow area, to downstream flow area. With this arrangement, local blowing ratio decreases significantly with streamwise development along the test section, for every value of initial blowing ratio considered, where this initial value is determined at the most upstream row of effusion holes. Experimental data are given for a sparse effusion hole array. The experimental results are provided for mainstream Reynolds numbers of 92,400–96,600, and from 128,400 to 135,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.3–3.6, 4.4, 5.2, 6.1–6.3, and 7.3–7.4. Results illustrate the effects of blowing ratio for the hot side and the cold side of the effusion plate. Of particular interest are values of line-averaged film cooling effectiveness and line-averaged heat transfer coefficient, which are generally different for contraction ratio of 4, compared to a contraction ratio of 1, because of different amounts and concentrations of effusion coolant near the test surface. In regard to cold-side measurements on the crossflow side of the effusion plate, line-averaged Nusselt numbers for contraction ratio 4 are often less than values for contraction ratio 1, when compared at the same main flow Reynolds number, initial blowing ratio, and streamwise location.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Rogers, N. , Ren, Z. , Buzzard, W. , Sweeney, B. , Tinker, N. , Ligrani, P. M. , Hollingsworth, K. D. , Liberatore, F. , Patel, R. , Ho, S. , and Moon, H.-K. , 2016, “ Effects of Double Wall Cooling Configuration and Conditions on Performance of Full Coverage Effusion Cooling,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56515.
Schulz, A. , 2001, “ Combustor Liner Cooling Technology in Scope of Reduced Pollutant Formation and Rising Thermal Efficiencies,” Heat Transfer in Gas Turbine Systems, R. J. Goldstein , ed., Vol. 934, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, New York, pp. 135–146.
Krewinkel, R. , 2013, “ A Review of Gas Turbine Effusion Cooling Studies,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 66, pp. 706–722. [CrossRef]
Sasaki, M. , Takahara, K. , Kumagai, T. , and Hamano, M. , 1979, “ Film Cooling Effectiveness for Injection From Multirow Holes,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 101(1), pp. 101–108. [CrossRef]
Martiny, M. , Schulz, A. , and Wittig, S. , 1995, “ Full-Coverage Film Cooling Investigation: Adiabatic Wall Temperatures and Flow Visualization,” ASME Paper No. 95-WA/HT-4.
Bailey, J. C. , Intile, J. , Tolpadi, A. , Fric, T. , Nirmalan, N. V. , and Bunker, R. S. , 2002, “ Experimental and Numerical Study of Heat Transfer in a Gas Turbine Combustor Liner,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 125(4), pp. 994–1002. [CrossRef]
Lin, Y. , Song, B. , Li, B. , Liu, G. , and Wu, Z. , 2003, “ Investigation of Film Cooling Effectiveness of Full-Coverage Inclined Multihole Walls With Different Hole Arrangements,” ASME Paper No. GT-2003-38881.
Kelly, G. B. , and Bogard, D. G. , 2003, “ An Investigation of the Heat Transfer for Full Coverage Film Cooling,” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38716.
Jackowski, T. , Schulz, A. , Bauer, H.-J. , Gerendas, M. , and Behrendt, T. , 2016, “ Effusion Cooled Combustor Liner Tiles With Modern Cooling Concepts: A Comparative Experimental Study,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56598.
Ji, Y. , Ge, B. , Zang, S. , Yu, J. , and Zhang, J. , 2016, “ Experimental Investigation of Effusion Cooling Performance on the Liner of a Scaled Three Injector Annular Combustor,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57035.
Sung, Y. , Dord, A. , Laskowski, G. M. , Shunn, L. , Natsui, G. , and Kapat, J. , 2016, “ Detailed Large Eddy Simulations (LES) of Multi-Hole Effusion Cooling Flow for Gas Turbines,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-57957.
Wang, G. , Ledezma, G. A. , DeLancey, J. , and Wang, A. , 2016, “ Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Effusion Cooling for High Pressure Turbine Components—Part 1: Experimental Study With PSP,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56398.
Ledezma, G. A. , Lachance, J. , Wang, G. , Wang, A. , and Laskowski, G. M. , 2016, “ Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Effusion Cooling for High Pressure Turbine Components—Part 2: Numerical Results,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56400.
Ji, Y. , Ge, B. , Zang, S. , Xin, J. , Ye, C. , and Song, H. , 2017, “ Effect of Holes Array on Effusion Cooling Characteristics of a Three-Nozzle Model Combustor Liner,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-64247.
Vinton, K. R. , and Wright, L. M. , 2017, “ Effect of Flow Acceleration on Mainstream-to-Coolant Flow Interaction for Round and Shaped Film Cooling Holes,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-63818.
McClintic, J. W. , Anderson, J. B. , Bogard, D. G. , Dyson, T. E. , and Webster, Z. D. , 2017, “ Effect of Internal Crossflow Velocity on Film Cooling Effectiveness—Part I: Axial Shaped Holes,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-64616.
McClintic, J. W. , Anderson, J. B. , Bogard, D. G. , Dyson, T. E. , and Webster, Z. D. , 2017, “ Effect of Internal Crossflow Velocity on Film Cooling Effectiveness—Part II: Compound Angle Shaped Holes,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-64624.
Ren, Z. , Vanga, S. R. , Rogers, N. , Ligrani, P. M. , Hollingsworth, K. D. , Liberatore, F. , Patel, R. , Srinivasan, R. , and Ho, Y. , 2017, “ Internal and External Cooling of a Full Coverage Effusion Cooling Plate: Effects of Double Wall Cooling Configuration and Conditions,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-64921.
Oldfield, M. L. G. , 2008, “ Impulse Response Processing of Transient Heat Transfer Gauge Signals,” ASME J. Turbomach., 130(2), p. 021023. [CrossRef]
Kline, S. J. , and McClintock, F. A. , 1953, “ Describing Uncertainties in Single Sample Experiments,” Mech. Eng., 75, pp. 3–8.
Moffat, R. J. , 1988, “ Describing the Uncertainties in Experimental Results,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 1(1), pp. 3–17. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Experimental facility. (a) Cross-sectional view of the double wall cooling test section with CR = 4, including optical instrumentation arrangements. Impingement plate blocked for present tests. (b) Effusion cooling test plate from Rogers et al.[1].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Variation of local blowing ratio BR with streamwise location x/de for Rems of 128,000–135,000, Rems,avg of 243,000– 253,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.6, 4.4, 5.2, 6.3, and 7.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Streamwise variation of local, spatially resolved heat transfer coefficients at spanwise location y/de = 8 for Rems of 92,400–96,600, Rems,avg of 167,000–177,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.3, 4.4, 5.2, 6.1, and 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Streamwise variation of local, spatially resolved heat transfer coefficients at spanwise location y/de = 10 for Rems of 92,400–96,600, Rems,avg of 167,000–177,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.3, 4.4, 5.2, 6.1, and 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Local, spatially resolved surface heat transfer coefficient distribution for Rems of 93,600, Rems,avg of 174,000, and initial blowing ratio of 6.1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Local, spatially resolved surface adiabatic film cooling effectiveness distribution for Rems of 92,400, Rems,avg of 177,000, and initial blowing ratio of 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Streamwise variation of line-averaged heat transfer coefficients for Rems of 92,400–96,600, Rems,avg of 167,000– 177,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.3, 4.4, 5.2, 6.1, and 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Streamwise variation of line-averaged adiabatic film cooling effectiveness for Rems of 92,400–96,600, Rems,avg of 167,000–177,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.3, 4.4, 5.2, 6.1, and 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of line-averaged heat transfer coefficients for main flow passage contraction ratios 1 and 4, Rems of 93,600, Rems,avg of 174,000, and initial blowing ratios of 6.1–6.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of line-averaged adiabatic film cooling effectiveness for main flow passage contraction ratios 1 and 4, Rems of 93,600, Rems,avg of 174,000, and initial blowing ratios of 6.1–6.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of line-averaged heat transfer coefficients for main flow passage contraction ratios 1 and 4, Rems of 92,400, Rems,avg of 177,000, and initial blowing ratio of 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of line-averaged adiabatic film cooling effectiveness for main flow passage contraction ratios 1 and 4, Rems of 92,400, Rems,avg of 177,000, and initial blowing ratio of 7.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of cold-side local, spatially resolved surface Nusselt number variations for Rems of 128,000–135,000, Rems,avg of 243,000–253,000, and different initial blowing ratios: (a) BR = 3.3, (b) BR = 4.4, (c) BR = 5.2, (d) BR = 6.3, and (e) BR = 7.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Streamwise variation of line-averaged, cold-side Nusselt numbers for Rems of 128,000–135,000, Rems,avg of 243,000–253,000, and initial blowing ratios of 3.3, 4.4, 5.2, 6.3, and 7.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of streamwise variation of cold-side, line-averaged Nusselt numbers for main flow passage contraction ratios 1 and 4, Rems of 134,000, Rems,avg of 248,000, and initial blowing ratios of 4.3–4.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of streamwise variation of cold-side, line-averaged Nusselt numbers for main flow passage contraction ratios 1 and 4, Rems of 128,000, Rems,avg of 253,000, and initial blowing ratios of 7.3–7.4

Tables

Errata

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