Abstract
A combined flow control method based on positively bowed blade and endwall vortex generator jet (VGJ) was performed to a compressor cascade under three kinds of inlet conditions. The results show that the endwall VGJ can further decrease the total losses in positively bowed cascades. At 0° incidence with zero inlet boundary layer, the separation type in the positively bowed blade is open, with the VGJ, the loss reduction is 2.7 %. As the inlet boundary layer thickens at 0° incidence, the separation region increases with the separation type keeping unchanged, the loss reduction increasing to 11.73 %. As the incidence rises to +7° with zero inlet boundary layer, the separation type converts into closed and the flow separation is the severest in the three cases, with the VGJ, however, the loss reduction is just 7.4 %, which means that the control effect of endwall VGJ not only depends on the size of separation region but also relies on the type of separation mode. If the separation type is open, as the size of separation region expands, the control effectiveness of endwall VGJ increases; if the separation type converts into closed with the further aggravation of flow field, that control effect will decrease.
Funding statement: This work was supported by the “National Natural Science Foundation of China” (Grant No. 50976026) and “Research Groups of the National Natural Science Foundation of China” (Grant No. 51121004).
Nomenclature
- h
blade height, mm
- t
pitch, mm
- Cax
axial chord length, mm
- Lx
axial distance from the jet hole to the leading edge, mm
- Ly
circumferential distance from the jet hole to the leading edge, mm
- α
pitch angle, °
- δ
skew angle, °
- y+
wall function
mass flow rate, kg /s
- p*
total pressure, Pa
- p
static pressure, Pa
- ω
total pressure loss coefficient
- U
velocity
- S
saddle point
- F
spiral point
- N
nodal point
- BL
boundary layer
- PBD
positively bowed blade
- VGJ
vortex generator jet
- Subscripts
- 1
cascade inlet
- 2
cascade outlet
- jet
jet tube inlet
- m
main flow
- e
endwall
- 0
without flow control
References
1. Li LT, Song YP, Chen F, Liu HP. Effects of vortex generator jet on flow separations in bowed compressor cascades. ASME Paper 2015-GT-42308, 2015.10.1115/GT2015-42308Search in Google Scholar
2. Gummer V, Wenger U, Kau HP. Using sweep and dihedral to control three-dimensional flow in transonic stators of axial compressors. J Turbomach 2001;123(1):40–48.10.1115/2000-GT-0491Search in Google Scholar
3. Gallimore SJ, Bolger JJ, Cumpsty NA The use of sweep and dihedral in multistage axial flow compressor blading: Part II-low and high speed designs and test verification. ASME Paper 2002-GT-30329, 2002.10.1115/GT2002-30329Search in Google Scholar
4. Fischer A, Riess W, Seume JR. Performance of strongly bowed stators in a 4-stage high speed compressor. ASME Paper 2002-GT-38392, 2002.10.1115/GT2003-38392Search in Google Scholar
5. Culley DE, Bright MM, Prahst PS, Strazisar AJ. Active flow separation control of a stator vane using surface injection in a multistage compressor experiment. ASME Paper 2003-GT-38863, 2003.10.1115/GT2003-38863Search in Google Scholar
6. Bons JP, Sondergaard R, Rivir RB. Turbine separation control using pulsed vortex generator jets. J Turbomach 2009;123(2):198–206.10.1115/2000-GT-0262Search in Google Scholar
7. Evans S, Coull J, Haneef I. Minimizing the loss produced by a turbulent separation using vortex generator jets. Aiaa J 2012;50(4):778–787.10.2514/6.2010-4590Search in Google Scholar
8. Evans S, Hodson H. Separation control mechanisms of steady and pulsed vortex-generator jets. J Propul Power 2012;28(6):1201–1213.10.2514/1.B34457Search in Google Scholar
9. Benton SI, Bons JP, Sondergaard R. Secondary flow loss reduction through blowing for a high-lift front-loaded low pressure turbine cascade. J Turbomach 2013;135(2):021020.10.1115/GT2012-68812Search in Google Scholar
10. Benton SI, Bernardini C, Bons JP. Parametric optimization of unsteady end wall blowing on a highly loaded low-pressure turbine. J Turbomach 2014;136(7):071013.10.1115/1.4026127Search in Google Scholar
11. Zheng XQ, Zhou S, Lu Y, Hou A. Flow control of annular compressor cascade by synthetic jets. J Turbomach 2008;130(2):021018.10.1115/GT2006-90211Search in Google Scholar
12. Wagner JH, Dring RP, Joslyn HD. Inlet boundary layer effects in an axial compressor rotor: Part I – blade-to-blade effects. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 1984;107:374–380.10.1115/1.3239734Search in Google Scholar
13. Wagner JH, Dring RP, Joslyn HD. Inlet boundary layer effects in an axial compressor rotor: Part II – through flow effects. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 1985;107(2):381–386.10.1115/1.3239735Search in Google Scholar
14. Choi M, Park J, Baek J. Effects of the inlet boundary layer thickness on the loss characteristics in an axial compressor. Int J Turbo Jet Engines 2006;23(1):51–72.10.1115/GT2005-68580Search in Google Scholar
15. Gbadebo SA, Cumpsty NA, Hynes TP. Three-dimensional separations in axial compressors. J Turbomach 2005;127(2):331–339.10.1115/GT2004-53617Search in Google Scholar
16. Nerger D, Saathoff H, Radespiel R. Experimental investigation of endwall and suction side blowing in a highly loaded compressor stator cascade. J Turbomach 2012;134(2):0210101.10.1115/GT2010-22578Search in Google Scholar
17. Evans S, Hodson H, Hynes T, Wakelam C. Controlling separation on a simulated compressor blade using vortex-generator jets. J Propul Power 2010;26(4):819–827.10.2514/6.2008-4317Search in Google Scholar
18. Sasaki T, Breugelmans F. Comparison of sweep and dihedral effects on compressor cascade performance. J Turbomach 1998;120(3):454–463.10.1115/97-GT-002Search in Google Scholar
19. Zhang YJ, Chen F, Feng GT, Su JX. Effect of turning angle on flow field performance of linear bowed stator in compressor at low mach number. Chinese J Aeronaut 2006;19(4):271–277.10.1016/S1000-9361(11)60328-2Search in Google Scholar
20. Song YP, Chen F, Yang J. A numerical investigation of boundary layer suction in compound lean compressor cascades. J Turbomach 2006;128(2):357–366.10.1115/GT2005-68441Search in Google Scholar
21. Zhang LX, Chen SW, Xu H. Effect of boundary layer suction on aerodynamic performance of high-turning compressor cascade. ASME Paper 2013-GT-94907, 2013.10.1115/GT2013-94907Search in Google Scholar
22. Ding J, Chen SW, Xu H, Sun SJ. Control of flow separations in compressor cascade by boundary layer suction holes in suction surface. ASME Paper 2013-GT-94723, 2013.10.1115/GT2013-94723Search in Google Scholar
23. Chen SW, Experimental and numerical investigation of using bowed blade in compressor cascade with different turning angles. Harbin Institute of Technology, Ph.D Thesis, 2007. (in Chinese).Search in Google Scholar
24. Feng GT, Zhang YJ, Chen F. Influence of inlet boundary layer on flow field performance of the 2D compressor bowed stator vane. J Aerosp Power 2006;21(2):254–260.Search in Google Scholar
25. Lighthill MJ. Attachment and separation in three-dimensional flow. Laminar Boundary Layers 1963;2(6):72–82.Search in Google Scholar
26. Tobak M, Peake DJ. Topology of Three-dimensional Separated Flows. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1982;14:61–85.10.1146/annurev.fl.14.010182.000425Search in Google Scholar
27. Kang S. An application of topological analysis to studying the three-dimensional flow in cascades: Part I – topological rules for skin-friction lines and section streamlines. Appl Math Mech 1990;11(5):489–495.10.1007/BF02016379Search in Google Scholar
28. Wang KC. Separation pattern of boundary layer over an inclined body of revolution. Aiaa J 1972;10(8):1044–1050.10.2514/6.1971-130Search in Google Scholar
29. Zhang HL, Wang ST, Wang ZQ. Variation of vortex structure in a compressor cascade at different incidences. J Propul Power 2007;23(1):221–226.10.2514/1.17245Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
