A characterization of unsteady effects for transonic turbine airfoil limit loading

S. Owen, F. Taremi, M. Uddin
{"title":"A characterization of unsteady effects for transonic turbine airfoil limit loading","authors":"S. Owen, F. Taremi, M. Uddin","doi":"10.1177/09576509231196268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To better understand the effect of vortex shedding on the nature of the trailing edge shock system during airfoil limit loading a computational fluid dynamic investigation was performed for a transonic turbine airfoil at sublimit, limit and supercritical conditions. Four modeling strategies were employed: steady state RANS, unsteady RANS, DDES, and turbulence model free. The influence of transient modeling approaches on the predicted mass-flow averaged total pressure loss coefficient, mass-flow averaged flow angles, and on the limit loading pressure ratio were found to be insignificant with the exception of the URANS model during critical loading. It was found that the URANS modeling approach failed to predict the transition from near trailing edge dominated vortex formation to base pressure vortex formation resulting in a drastic rise in predicted total pressure loss. Surface isentropic Mach distributions were predicted similarly for all modeling strategies, with the exception of the trailing edge base pressure region and points of shock impingement along the suction surface. A detailed review of the boundary layer states at the trailing edge was performed. It was found that all of the modeling approaches predicted laminar boundary layer profiles along the pressure surface trailing edge and turbulent profiles along the suction surface. The predicted base pressure distributions were also reviewed, showing the base pressure to decrease with increasing pressure ratio. The unsteady simulation approaches consistently predicted lower average surface pressures than the steady state RANS simulations. Qualitative images of the numerical Schlieren contours were presented and reviewed showing large differences in the prediction of vortex shape, size, and subsequent shock influence.","PeriodicalId":20705,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09576509231196268","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To better understand the effect of vortex shedding on the nature of the trailing edge shock system during airfoil limit loading a computational fluid dynamic investigation was performed for a transonic turbine airfoil at sublimit, limit and supercritical conditions. Four modeling strategies were employed: steady state RANS, unsteady RANS, DDES, and turbulence model free. The influence of transient modeling approaches on the predicted mass-flow averaged total pressure loss coefficient, mass-flow averaged flow angles, and on the limit loading pressure ratio were found to be insignificant with the exception of the URANS model during critical loading. It was found that the URANS modeling approach failed to predict the transition from near trailing edge dominated vortex formation to base pressure vortex formation resulting in a drastic rise in predicted total pressure loss. Surface isentropic Mach distributions were predicted similarly for all modeling strategies, with the exception of the trailing edge base pressure region and points of shock impingement along the suction surface. A detailed review of the boundary layer states at the trailing edge was performed. It was found that all of the modeling approaches predicted laminar boundary layer profiles along the pressure surface trailing edge and turbulent profiles along the suction surface. The predicted base pressure distributions were also reviewed, showing the base pressure to decrease with increasing pressure ratio. The unsteady simulation approaches consistently predicted lower average surface pressures than the steady state RANS simulations. Qualitative images of the numerical Schlieren contours were presented and reviewed showing large differences in the prediction of vortex shape, size, and subsequent shock influence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨声速涡轮翼型极限载荷的非定常效应表征
为了更好地理解旋涡脱落对翼型极限加载时尾缘激波系统性质的影响,对某跨声速涡轮翼型在亚极限、极限和超临界条件下的计算流体动力学进行了研究。采用稳态RANS、非定常RANS、DDES和无湍流模型四种建模策略。除临界加载时的URANS模型外,瞬态建模方法对预测质量-流量平均总压损失系数、质量-流量平均流动角和极限加载压力比的影响均不显著。研究发现,URANS建模方法无法预测从近尾缘主导涡形成到基压涡形成的转变,导致预测的总压损失急剧上升。除了后缘基压区和沿吸力面激波冲击点外,所有建模策略的表面等熵马赫分布预测都相似。对后缘的边界层状态进行了详细的回顾。结果表明,所有模拟方法均能预测沿压力面尾缘的层流边界层廓线和沿吸力面的湍流廓线。对预测的基压分布进行了回顾,表明基压随压力比的增大而减小。非定常模拟方法预测的平均表面压力始终低于稳态RANS模拟。数值纹影轮廓的定性图像显示了涡旋形状、大小和随后的激波影响预测的巨大差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
114
审稿时长
5.4 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Power and Energy, Part A of the Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, is dedicated to publishing peer-reviewed papers of high scientific quality on all aspects of the technology of energy conversion systems.
期刊最新文献
Studies on fuels and engine attributes powered by bio-diesel and bio-oil derived from stone apple seed (Aegle marmelos) for bioenergy Analysis of the aerothermal performance of modern commercial high-pressure turbine rotors using different levels of fidelity Analytical modeling and performance improvement of an electric two-stage centrifugal compressor for fuel cell vehicles Investigations into rubbing wear behavior of honeycomb land against labyrinth fin with periodic-cell model Secondary air induced flow structures and their interplay with the temperature field in fixed bed combustors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1