Abstract

Unsteady computations are necessary if blade row interactions effects are relevant, for example for detailed optimization of a compressor at off-design conditions towards the aerodynamic stability limit, or for structural mechanical tuning of the blades. Modeling time accurate transient multistage flow is expensive both in terms of computer time and memory. Recently the implicit time-resolved Time Transformation method (based on Giles’ time inclining) has been shown to be computationally efficient and a good alternative for modeling transient flow in a single stage (one pitch ratio) turbomachinery configuration. A further advantage of this time resolved method is its ability to capture not only blade passing frequencies but also self-excited frequencies such as in wakes and tip vortex shedding. In this work, an extension of the Time Transformation method (TT) to multistage modeling has been employed to assess the method’s ability in predicting modern multistage compressor performance speedline curve, as well as its ability in capturing dominant machine frequencies. The multistage TT method is verified on a two and a half stage modified Hannover compressor, followed by an industrial validation on a Siemens Energy half scale six stage axial compressor based on the last stages of the Siemens Platform Compressor (PCO). Reference transient solutions on reduced portions of the compressor and/or modified blade count solutions are obtained and compared directly to single passage multistage Time Transformation predictions for the Hannover compressor. The method is then applied directly to the full six stage Siemens compressor employing the true blade counts for all six stages. The first goal of this work is to investigate the ability and accuracy of the multistage TT method to capture all relevant blades passing frequencies, including the impact of different degrees of pitch change between components. The second goal of this work is to explore how best to apply the method for the prediction of a compressor map, up to the surge line. Solutions are compared to experimental test rig data. Physical explanations of the key flow features observed in the experiment, as well as of the differences between the predictions and experimental data, are given.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.