Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:20:52.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigation on shock-induced separation loss mitigation method considering radial equilibrium in a transonic compressor rotor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2022

Y. Liu ,
Q. Zhao Open the ORCID record for Q. Zhao [Opens in a new window] ,
W. Zhao ,
Q. Zhou  and
J. Xu
Y. Liu
Affiliation:
Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Q. Zhao*
Affiliation:
Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Innovation Academy for Light-duty Gas Turbine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
W. Zhao
Affiliation:
Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Innovation Academy for Light-duty Gas Turbine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Q. Zhou
Affiliation:
Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Innovation Academy for Light-duty Gas Turbine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
J. Xu
Affiliation:
Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Innovation Academy for Light-duty Gas Turbine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
*
*Corresponding author. Email: zhaoqingjun@iet.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A shock-induced separation loss reduction method, using local blade suction surface shape modification (smooth ramp structure) with constant adverse pressure gradient with the consideration of radial equilibrium effect to split a single shock foot into multiple weaker shock wave configuration, is investigated on the NASA Rotor 37 for promoting aerodynamic performance of a transonic compressor rotor. Numerical investigation on baseline blade and improved one with blade modification on suction side has been conducted employing the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes method to reveal flow physics of ramp structure. The results indicate that the passage shock foot of baseline is replaced with a family of compression waves and a weaker shock foot generating moderate adverse pressure gradient on ramp profile, which is beneficial for mitigating the shock foot and shrinking flow separation region as well. In addition, the radial secondary flow of low-momentum fluids within boundary layer is decreased significantly in the region of passage shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction on blade suction side, which mitigates the mass flow and mixing intensity of tip leakage flow. With the reduction of flow separation loss induced by passage shock, the adiabatic efficiency and total pressure ratio of improved rotor are superior to baseline model. This study herein implies a potential application of ramp profile in design method of transonic and supersonic compressors.

Keywords

Shock waveRamp structureConstant adverse pressure gradientShock wave/boundary-layer interactionTransonic compressor rotor
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 126 , Issue 1302: The 25th ISABE Conference Special Issue – Part II , August 2022 , pp. 1394 - 1413
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Wennerstrom, A.J. Highly loaded axial flow compressors: History and current developments, J Turbomach, 1990, pp 567–578.Google Scholar
Broichhausen, K.D. and Ziegler, K.U. Supersonic and transonic compressors: Past, status and technology trends, Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2005, ASME Paper GT2005-69067, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunham, J. 50 years of turbomachinery research at Pyestock—Part one: Compressors, Aeronaut J, 2000, 104, (1033), pp 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wennerstrom, A.J. A review of predictive efforts for transport phenomena in axial flow compressors, J Turbomach, 1991, 113, (2), pp 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
John, K.H. and Holger, B. Shock Wave-Boundary-Layer Interactions, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2011, pp 5–60.Google Scholar
Shuang, G., Shaowen, C., Yanping, S., Yufei, S. and Fu, C. Effects of boundary layer suction on aerodynamic performance in a high-load compressor cascade, Chin J Aeronaut, 2010, 23, (2), pp 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, T.M., Babinsky, H. and Squire, L.C. Passive control of shock wave–boundary-layer interactions, Aeronaut J, 2000, 104, (1033), pp 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinefuchi, K., Starikovskiy, A.Y. and Miles, R.B. Control of shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction using nanosecond-pulsed plasma actuators, J Propul Power, 2018, 34, (4), pp 909–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybalko, M., Babinsky, H. and Loth, E. Vortex generators for a normal shock/boundary layer interaction with a downstream diffuser, J Propul Power, 2012, 28, (1), pp 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
John, A., Qin, N. and Shahpar, S. Using shock control bumps to improve transonic fan/compressor blade performance, J Turbomach, 2019, 141(8), p 081003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaitonde, D.V. Progress in shock wave/boundary layer interactions, Prog Aerosp Sci 2015, 72, pp 80–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, P. and Zhang, K. Experimental and numerical investigation of a curved compression system designed on constant pressure gradient, 45th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, 2009.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y., Tan, H.J., Tian, F.C. and Zhuang, Y. Control of incident shock/boundary-layer interaction by a two-dimensional bump, AIAA J, 2014, 52, (4), pp 767–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y., Tan, H.J., Sun, S. and Rao, C.Y. Control of cowl shock/boundary-layer interaction in hypersonic inlets by bump, AIAA J, 2015, 53, (11), pp 3492–3496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, P.J.K. and Colliss, S.P. Review of research into shock control bumps, Shock Waves, 2015, 25, (5), pp 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blinde, P.L., Humble, R.A., Vanudheusden, B.W. and Scarano, F. Effects of micro-ramps on a shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, Shock Waves, 2009, 19, (6), pp 507–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asmelash, H.A., Martis, R.R. and Singh, A. Numerical simulation of ramp induced shock wave/boundary-layer interaction in turbulent flow, Aeronaut J, 2013, 117, (1192), pp 629–638.Google Scholar
Lee, S. and Loth, E. On ramped vanes to control normal shock boundary layer interactions, Aeronaut J, 2018, 122, (1256), pp 1568–1585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adkins, G.G. and Smith, L.H. Spanwise mixing in axial-flow turbomachines, J Eng Power, 1982, 104, (1), pp 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traub, L.W., Waghela, R. and Bordignon, K.A. Characterisation of a highly staggered spanwise cambered biplane, Aeronaut J, 2015, 119, (1212), pp 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wennerstrom, A.J. A review of predictive efforts for transport phenomena in axial flow compressors, J Turbomach, 1991, 113, (1), pp 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, M.G., Gorrell, S.E. and Car, D. Radial migration of shed vortices in a transonic rotor following a wake generator: A comparison between time accurate and average passage approaches, J Turbomach, 2011, 133, (3), pp 921–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hah, C. and Reid, L.A. Viscous flow study of shock-boundary layer interaction, radial transport, and wake development in a transonic compressor, J Turbomach, 1991, 114, (3), pp 538–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, L. and Moore, R.D. Design and overall performance of four highly loaded, high-speed inlet stages for an advanced high pressure-ratio core compressor, NASA TP 1337, 1978.Google Scholar
Moore, R.D. and Reid, L. Performance of single-stage axial flow transonic compressor with rotor and stator aspect ratios of 1.19 and 1.26, respectively, and with design pressure ratio of 2.05, NASA TP-1659, 1980.Google Scholar
Dunham, J. CFD validation for propulsion system components, AGARD-AR-355, 1998.Google Scholar
Chima, R.V. Calculation of tip clearance effects in a transonic compressor rotor, J Turbomach, 1998, 120, (1), pp 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drayna, T., Nompelis, I. and Candler, G. Hypersonic inward turning inlets: Design and optimization, Proceedings of the 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2006. p. 297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, P.J.K. and Colliss, S.P. Review of research into shock control bumps, Shock Waves, 2015, 25, (5), pp 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogawa, H. and Babinsky, H. Shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction control using three-dimensional bumps for transonic wings, AIAA J, 2008, 46, (6), pp 1442–1452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epsipha, P., Mohammad, Z. and Kamarul, A.A. CFD investigation of transonic axial compressor rotor blade at various off-design conditions, J Sci Technol, 2016, 24, pp 451–463.Google Scholar
Biollo, R. and Benini, E. Validation of a Navier-Stokes solver for CFD computations of transonic compressors, Proceedings of ASME Engineering Systems Design and Analysis 2006, ASME Paper ESDA2006-95318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biollo, R. and Benini, E. Shock/Boundary-Layer/Tip-clearance interaction in a transonic rotor blade, J Propul Power, 2009, 25, (3), pp 668–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qizar, M.A., Mansour, M.L. and Goswami, S. Study of steady state and transient blade row CFD methods in a moderately loaded NASA transonic high-speed axial compressor stage, Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2013, GT2013-94739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suder, K.L. Experimental investigation of the flow field in a transonic, axial flow compressor with respect to the development of blockage and loss, NASA Technical report, 1996.Google Scholar
Ren, X. and Gu, C. A numerical study on the tip clearance in an axial transonic compressor rotor, Appl Therm Eng, 2016, 103, pp 282–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulat, M.P. and Bulat, P.V. Comparison of turbulence models in the calculation of supersonic separated flows, World Appl Sci J, 2013, 27, (10), pp 1263–1266.Google Scholar
Sun, Z., Scarano, F., Oudheusden, B.W., Schrijer, F.F., Yan, Y. and Liu, C. Numerical and experimental investigations of the supersonic microramp wake, AIAA J, 2014, 52, (7), pp 1518–1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerolymos, G.A. and Vallet, I. Tip-clearance and secondary flows in a transonic compressor rotor, Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 1998, 98-GT-366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, J., Lin, F., Chen, J., Nie, C. and Biela, C. Flow structures in the tip region for a transonic compressor rotor, J Turbomach, 2013, 135, (3), p 031012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar