Performance Limits of Turbomachines

Performance Limits of Turbomachines
David K. Hall
Gas Turbine Laboratory Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA 02139
January 26, 2010
Objective and Challenges

Objective Examine, in a rigorous manner, the limits (and possible future advances) of turbomachine eciency Determine the best we can do Challenges What are unavoidable contributors to loss (ineciency)?

Skin friction will always be present What can be eliminated? Examples: boundary layer transition criteria, compressibility
What assumptions frame the question?
David K. Hall (MIT Gas Turbine Lab)
Research Exam 1/26/10
2 / 19
Framing the Issues to Address

What does the best we can do mean? The challenge is not how to calculate, but deciding what to calculate.
3 / 19
Framing the Issues to Address

What does the best we can do mean? The challenge is not how to calculate, but deciding what to calculate. Losses approach: count only those which cannot be eliminated

Viscous dissipation associated with boundary layers Rotor-casing gap ow loss (zero gap leads to large loss, 3D eect)
Flow regimes approach: consider features with largest impact

Incompressible ow calculations Boundary layer transition: consider range from natural transition to fully turbulent
3 / 19
Previous Work
Denton, 1993. Loss Mechanisms in Turbomachines
Entropy generation, various loss sources
Storer & Cumpsty, 1994. An Approximate Analysis and Prediction Method for Tip Clearance Loss in Axial Compressors
Entropy generated by tip clearance ow
Dickens & Day, 2008. The Design of Highly Loaded Axial Compressors
Simplied prole model for predicting prole losses, trends
Drela, 2009. Power Balance in Aerodynamic Flows
Power- rather than drag-based approach for aerodynamic ows
4 / 19
Stage Performance Estimation

Estimate attainable turbomachinery eciency by assessing dissipation associated with unavoidable contributors to loss Based on local ow irreversibilities (not loss correlations) Allows for calculation of advanced-core engine performance
5 / 19
Stage Performance Estimation

Estimate attainable turbomachinery eciency by assessing dissipation associated with unavoidable contributors to loss Based on local ow irreversibilities (not loss correlations) Allows for calculation of advanced-core engine performance
5 / 19
Main Messages
Small increases in gas turbine component eciency ( 2%) can have a large eect on cycle eciency ( 10%). Model developed to estimate performance limits based on dening local irreversibilities Theoretical limit an appreciable amount (2%) above current performance Procedure developed for special case to address long-standing issue:
Lower limit of two-dimensional prole loss
6 / 19
NASA N+3 Project Background

Metric Fuel Burn Noise LTO NOx Field Length NASA Goal 70% reduction 71 EPNdB below Stage 4 75% reduction below CAEP 6 Explore metro-plex concepts
Identify technology and conguration concepts to meet N+3 goals for 2030-2035 time frame.

Estimates of component eciency used in performance calculations Establishing upper limits on component performance provides context

Maximum benet expected from engine advances Diculty of reaching given level of performance
7 / 19
Component Performance and Engine Eciency

ThrustSpecific Fuel Consumption (TSFC) 16 = 0.89 = 0.94
15
Cycle results calculated using semi-perfect gas engine cycle model (not discussed here) Representative turbofan cycle Mission and cycle held xed
14
13 14% 17%
12
Component eciencies varied Bypass ratio optimized for minimum TSFC
11 10
20
30
40 Pressure ratio
50
60
Component eciency alone has signicant eect on cycle eciency Greatest benet if pressure ratio is optimized
8 / 19
Stage Characterization: Meanline Design

Meanline Flow Geometry Flow coecient Stage loading coecient Degree of reaction Chord/pitch ratio Reynolds number Blade Velocity Distribution Linear blade velocity distribution Function of above parameters
Re
Linear variation across pitch on hub and casing
9 / 19
Stage Charactarization: 3D Annulus Geometry
Blade aspect ratio Radius ratio Tip clearance height ratio
AR rhub /rtip /h
10 / 19
Performance: sum ineciencies due to various losses

Losses included (cannot be eliminated) Blade surface dissipation Turbulent boundary layer calculation (so far) Wake mixing 2D control volume Endwall losses constant dissipation coecient Tip clearance losses 2D mixing model (rotor only) Losses not included (may be mitigated in the future)

Parasitic losses, leakage ows Losses due to three-dimensional eects Shock losses
11 / 19
Stage Eciency and Non-Dimensional Parameters

Stage eciency calculated by adding all loss sources stage = 1 Parametric dependence
8 > > > > > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > : Flow coecient Stage loading coecient Reynolds number Re Radius ratio rhub /rtip Aspect ratio AR Tip gap height ratio /h Degree of reaction Chord/pitch ratio 9 > > = Independent
blade + wake + wall + gap P
stage
Eciency = F
Stage location/size
> > ;
Design variables
Plot results as countours of eciency on a ow coecient-stage loading coecient plane
12 / 19
Compressor Eciency Limits

Stage efficiency
0 1 0 .. 0 0 0 9 .7 0 0 .8 9 .8 .9 .5 9 7 8 ..0 9 8 7 5 6 4 3 2 1 8 5 5 9 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 0.8 5
1 0.9
2
0.9
0.9 2
93
Stage loading coefficient = ht/U
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1

6 7 4 3 85 9 2 1 5 7 8 9 .9 .8 0 5 .9 0 .8 0 ..9 7 .0 00
00 0 .7 .0 0 .9 5 8 .0 9 7 9 8 7 8 9 5 2 3 4 6 5
Independent Variables Flow coecient Stage loading coecient
0.
= Vx /U = ht /U 2 of LPC stage 500,000 0.8 1.0 1% blade height
4 0.9
0.
8 95 7 6 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 ..8 0 9 8 9 5 0 .. .0 7 0 .0 00 5 5 9 8 2 7 5 6 4 3 9 .7 9 7 8 .8 0 .9 .8 .9 5 .9 0 1 0 0. 92 0 0 5 0.8 .7 0. 08 0.
0.9
0.
93
0.
94
Fixed parameters: representative Inlet axial Reynolds number Hub-to-tip ratio Blade aspect ratio Rotor tip clearance gap
0. 00 .9 81 0 ..8 9 9 8 7 9 8 8 7 6 4 3 2 5 5 0. 85
0. 9 92
0.
0.
93
0.9
0.92
0.9
0.1
0.9 0.85 0.75 0.5 0.8 0.2 0.3
0.92
Flow coefficient = Vx/U
0.4
0.93 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0 0.5 0.5 0.6
Chosen design variables Reaction 50% Chord/pitch ratio Diusion factor = 0.47
0.7
5 0.80.8 0.75 0 0.5 0.8 0.9
Maximum eciency (under the assumptions): 94% Optimum blade loading
Tradeo, high overspeeds vs many blades
Flow separates above critical blade loading (blank region)
13 / 19
Model agrees with existing information (Dickens, 2008)

1 0.9 Stage loading coefficient = h /U 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.85 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Flow coefficient = V /U
x 2 t
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.8
Loss build-up model

1D correlation
General trends: location of peak, rate of drop away from peak Eciency greater in magnitude (expected)
14 / 19
Loss Breakdown, 50% Reaction
Rotor blade 23%
Stator blade 23%
Rotor wake 5%
Stator wake 5%
Rotor endwall 20% Rotor tip clearance 8%
Stator endwall 16%
15 / 19
Lower Limit of Prole Loss

Goal: minimize loss (objective), nd optimum velocity distribution (design variables), given meanline ow parameters (design parameters) Objective Calculation Cascade vortex lattice method (assume thin airfoil, nite camber) (vupper , , , ) (vlower , )
Boundary layer calculation (Drela) (Re, vupper , vlower )
Optimization Automatic Dierentiation (AD) software (vupper , ; , , Re)
Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno (BFGS) gradient-based optimizer (max , vupper , ) = F (, , Re)

Performance Limits of Turbomachines Research Exam 1/26/10 16 / 19
Path to the Thesis

Complete Compressor Analysis

Stage performance estimation and demonstration Prole loss assesment

Laminar ow and transition Optimization process
Turbine Analysis

Finite airfoil thickness Cooling ow and entropy generation
17 / 19
Intellectual Nuggets
Rational discrimination of procedure for dening a best case
Logic behind choices of where to be optimistic vs conservative
Bottom-up loss model
First of its kind, based on local irreversibilities
Prole Performance Limit
Special case; answers what is the best we can do? for two-dimensional turbomachinery prole loss
18 / 19
Summary
Cycle studies show increases in gas turbine component eciency can provide a large benet in overall fuel eciency A framework for estimating the upper bound on turbomachine eciency is developed

Based on local ow irreversibilities Shows signicant advances in component eciency possible
Optimization of inputs (including velocity distribution) will allow for calculation of minimum prole loss
19 / 19

Performance Limits of Turbomachines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance Limits of Turbomachines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance Limits of Turbomachines

January 26, 2010

Objective and Challenges

What assumptions frame the question?

David K. Hall (MIT Gas Turbine Lab)