Research Papers

Effects of Inlet Disturbances on Fan Stability

[+] Author and Article Information
Kuen-Bae Lee

Mechanical Engineering Department,
Imperial College London,
London SW7 2AZ, UK
e-mails: kuenbae.lee@imperial.ac.uk;

Mark Wilson

Rolls-Royce plc,
Derby DE24 8BJ, UK
e-mail: mark.wilson@rolls-royce.com

Mehdi Vahdati

Mechanical Engineering Department,
Imperial College London,
London SW7 2AZ, UK
e-mail: m.vahdati@imperial.ac.uk

1Corresponding author.

2Present address: Rolls-Royce plc, Derby DE24 8BJ, UK.

Manuscript received November 20, 2018; final manuscript received November 28, 2018; published online December 24, 2018. Editor: Jerzy T. Sawicki.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 141(5), 051014 (Dec 24, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: GTP-18-1703; doi: 10.1115/1.4042204 History: Received November 20, 2018; Revised November 28, 2018

This paper investigates the effects of inlet disturbance caused by crosswind on a fan blade operation and addresses the possible aerodynamic instabilities, which can arise for such a fan-intake system. The work is carried out by using a three-dimensional unsteady computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model (AU3D), and for a modern low-speed fan rig for which extensive measured data is available. The computational domain includes the fan with outlet guide vanes for the bypass flow, engine-section stators for the core, and a symmetric intake upstream of the fan (a whole low-pressure domain). The unsteady full annulus simulations under crosswind are performed to analyze the effects of inlet disturbances on the operation of this blade. It was observed that, for sufficiently high amplitudes of crosswind, the intake lip separates, and results in a significant loss of stall margin. Moreover, even in the absence of lip separation, the blade can still stall prematurely due to nonhomogeneous flow caused by the two contra-rotating trailing vortices. In the second phase of this study, the effects of fan loading on the suppression of flow separation in the intake, and the consequent stall margin of the fan blade, were explored. The results indicated that, as the fan speed increases, it becomes more capable of reducing the inlet distortion levels, and consequently, the loss in stall margin decreases.

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


Hughes, C. , 2011, “ Aircraft Engine Technology for Green Aviation to Reduce Fuel Burn,” AIAA Paper No. 2011-3531.
Peters, A. , Spakovszky, Z. S. , Lord, W. K. , and Rose, B. , 2015, “ Ultrashort Nacelles for Low Fan Pressure Ratio Propulsors,” ASME J. Turbomach., 137(2), p. 201001.
Freeman, C. , and Rowe, A. L. , 1999, “ Intake Engine Interactions of a Modern Large Turbofan Engine,” ASME Paper No. 99-GT-344.
Nishioka, T. , Kanno, T. , and Hayami, H. , “ Rotor-Tip Flow Fields Near Inception Point of Modal Disturbance in an Axial-Flow Fan,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-22187.
Mistry, C. , and Pradeep, A. , 2014, “ Experimental Investigation of a High Aspect Ratio, Low Speed Contra-Rotating Fan Stage With Complex Inflow Distortion,” Propul. Power Res., 3(2), pp. 68–81. [CrossRef]
Longley, J. P. , and Greitzer, E. M. , 1992, “ Inlet Distortion Effects in Aircraft Propulsion System Integration,” Fundamentals and Special Problems of Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), AGARD Lecture Series, Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, Cambridge University, Cambridge, MA, Report No. 92N28464 https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19920019221
Murphy, J. P. , and MacManus, D. G. , 2011, “ Ground Vortex Aerodynamics Under Crosswind Conditions,” Exp. Fluids, 50(1), pp. 109–124. [CrossRef]
Zantopp, S. , MacManus, D. G. , and Murphy, J. P. , 2010, “ Computational and Experimental Study of Intake Ground Vortices,” Aeronaut. J., 114(1162), pp. 769–784. [CrossRef]
Trapp, L. G. , and Motta Girardi, R. , 2010, “ Crosswind Effects on Engine Inlets: The Inlet Vortex,” J. Aircr., 47(2), pp. 577–590. [CrossRef]
Carnevale, M. , Wang, F. , Green, J. S. , and Di Mare, L. , 2016, “ Lip Stall Suppression in Powered Intakes,” J. Propul. Power, 32(1), pp. 161–170. [CrossRef]
Cao, T. , Vadlamani, N. R. , Tucker, P. G. , Smith, A. R. , Slaby, M. , and Sheaf, C. T. J. , 2016, “ Fan-Intake Interaction Under High Incidence,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56561.
Page, J. H. , Hield, P. , and Tucker, P. G. , 2017, “ Effect of Inlet Distortion Features on Transonic Fan Rotor Stall,” ASME Paper No. GT2017-64612.
Arend, D. J. , Wolter, J. D. , Hirt, S. R. , Provenza, A. J. , Gazzaniga, J. A. , Cousins, W. T. , Hardin, L. W. , and Sharma, O. P. , 2017, “ Experimental Evaluation of an Embedded Boundary Layer Ingesting Propulsor for Highly Efficient Subsonic Cruise Aircraft,” AIAA Paper No. 2017-5041.
Salta, C. A. , and Kroger, D. G. , 1995, “ Effect of Inlet Distortions on Fan Performance in Forced Draught Air-Cooled Heat Exchangers,” Heat Recovery Syst. CHP, 15(6), pp. 555–561. [CrossRef]
Murphy, J. , 2008, “ Intake Ground Vortex Aerodynamics,” Ph.D. thesis, Cranfield University, Bedford, UK. http://hdl.handle.net/1826/3515
Horvath, N. R. , 2013, “ Inlet Vortex Formation Under Crosswind Conditions,” M.S. thesis, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA.
Sayma, A. I. , Vahdati, M. , Sbardella, L. , and Imregun, M. , 2000, “ Modeling of Three-Dimensional Viscous Compressible Turbomachinery Flows Using Unstructured Hybrid Grids,” AIAA J., 38(6), pp. 945–954. [CrossRef]
Spalart, P. R. , and Allmaras, S. R. , 1992, “ A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows,” AIAA Paper No. 92-0439.
Li, M. , Lipeng, L. , Jian, F. , and Qiuhui, W. , 2014, “ A Study on Turbulence Transportation and Modification of Spalart–Allmaras Model for Shock-Wave/Turbulent Boundary Layer Interaction Flow,” Chin. J. Aeronaut., 27(2), pp. 200–209. [CrossRef]
Liu, Y. , Lu, L. , Fang, L. , and Gao, F. , 2011, “ Modification of Spalart–Allmaras Model With Consideration of Turbulence Energy Backscatter Using Velocity Helicity,” Phys. Lett., 375(24), pp. 2377–2381. [CrossRef]
Lee, K.-B. , Wilson, M. , and Vahdati, M. , 2018, “ Validation of a Numerical Model for Predicting Stalled Flows in a Low-Speed Fan—Part I: Modification of Spalart–Allmaras Turbulence Model,” ASME J. Turbomach., 140(5), p. 051008. [CrossRef]
Lee, K.-B. , Dodds, J. , Wilson, M. , and Vahdati, M. , 2018, “ Validation of a Numerical Model for Predicting Stalled Flows in a Low-Speed Fan—Part II: Unsteady Analysis,” ASME J. Turbomach., 140(5), p. 051009. [CrossRef]
Dodds, J. , and Vahdati, M. , 2015, “ Rotating Stall Observations in a High Speed Compressor—Part II: Numerical Study,” ASME J. Turbomach., 137(5), p. 051003. [CrossRef]
Choi, M. , Vahdati, M. , and Imregun, M. , 2011, “ Effects of Fan Speed on Rotating Stall Inception and Recovery,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133(4), p. 041013. [CrossRef]
Vahdati, M. , and Cumpsty, N. , 2015, “ Aeroelastic Instability in Transonic Fans,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 138(2), p. 022604. [CrossRef]
Lee, K.-B. , Wilson, M. , and Vahdati, M. , 2017, “ Numerical Study on Aeroelastic Instability for a Low Speed Fan,” ASME J. Turbomach., 139(7), p. 071004. [CrossRef]
Stapelfeldt, S. C. , Parry, A. B. , and Vahdati, M. , 2016, “ Investigation of Flutter Mechanisms of a Contra-Rotating Open Rotor,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(5), p. 051009. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of DC60 prediction—measured data (RR Internal Report IPCR38228)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Domain used for crosswind computations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of total pressure distribution at U* of 6.1: (a) experiment [7] and (b) CFD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Intake geometry for validation [7,8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Intake geometry for validation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of vortex circulation against crosswind [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of xy velocity vectors with vorticity contours at U* of 18.3: (a) experiment [7] and (b) CFD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Criteria for vortex formation around intake under crosswind condition [15,16]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of DC60 against crosswind [8]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Schematic diagram around an intake: (a) side view and (b) plane view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Characteristic map for the benchmark fan blade

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Measured and computed distribution of stagnation pressure at normalized mass flows of (a) 1.07 and (b) 0.95 at speed B

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Measured and computed distribution of stagnation pressure at normalized mass flows of (a) 1.31 and (b) 1.17 at speed C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of characteristic map between 0XW and 3XW at speed B and C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of Mach contours around intake lip for (a) 0XW (m¯ = 0.98) and (b) 3XW (m¯ = 0.95)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of transient and instantaneous solutions at (a) 0XW and (b) 3XW

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Comparison of DC60 between 2.3XW and 3XW against mass flow at speed B

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Loss of stall margin at speed B against DC60 (a) and total pressure contours at fan face (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Streamlines around intake (a) and swirl angle upstream of fan (b) for DC60 of 0.045

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

DC60 values against U*

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Total pressure contours at fan face according to rotation speeds on the HWK line: (a) speed A, (b) speed B, and (c) speed C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Comparison of loss of stall margin for speeds B and C against DC60



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