Report

OPTIMIZATION OF TURBINE BLADE PROFILE BASED ON PITCH AND SHAPE
By Ammar Shafiq
Report submitted to the faculty of PIEAS in partial fulfillment of requirements for the Degree of M.S. Nuclear Engineering
Department of Nuclear Engineering Pakistan Institute of Engineering & Applied Sciences, Nilore, Islamabad, Pakistan.
October, 2008
Department of Nuclear Engineering,

Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences (PIEAS) Nilore. Islamabad 45650, Pakistan
Declaration of Originality
I hereby declare that the work contained in this report and the intellectual content of this report are the product of my own work. This report has not been previously published in any form nor does it contain any verbatim of the published resources which could be treated as infringement of the international copyright law. I also declare that I do understand the terms copyright and plagiarism, and that in case of any copyright violation or plagiarism found in this work, I will be held fully responsible of the consequences of any such violation.
Signature: ________________________________ Name:___________________________________ Date: ____________________________________ Place: ___________________________________
Certificate of Approval
This is to certify that the work contained in this thesis entitled
OPTIMIZATION OF TURBINE BLADE PROFILE BASED ON

PITCH AND SAHPE was carried out by Ammar Shafiq Under our supervision and that in our opinion, it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, for the degree of MS Nuclear Engineering from Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences (PIEAS).
Approved By:
Signature:________________________ Supervisor: Engr. Dr. Mohammad Javed Hyder
Signature: ________________________ PIEAS Co-Supervisor: Hafiz Laiq-ur-Rehman
Verified By:
Signature: ________________________ Head, Department of Nuclear Engineering Stamp:
Dedication
To my Mother and Father whose prayers have enabled me to undertake this task.
ii
Acknowledgements
I am really thankful to my colleagues, Fellows of Mechanical Engineering Department Mr. Asif, Mr. Imran, Mr. Rizwan and Mr. Asnaf and my co-supervisor Hafiz Laiq-urRehman from whom I learned a lot through fruitful discussions. Special thanks to Mr. Attique Ahmed whose technical help was always there whenever further progress in this work seemed difficult. Most of all, I am thankful to my supervisor, Dr. Mohammad Javed Hyder whose theoretical strength guided me in the right direction, especially regarding the pressure and velocity profiles in a gas turbine, and his kind personality has always been a source of motivation for me during this project. Ammar Shafiq
iii
Table of Contents
1
TU UT TU TU
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1
UT
1.1
UT TU TU UT TU UT
History of Gas Turbines ...................................................................................... 2

UT TU UT TU UT
2
TU UT TU TU
1.1.1 Taqi al-Din and the First Steam Turbine .................................................... 2 1.1.2 Hurdles in Implementing Brayton Cycle .................................................... 4 1.1.3 Reciprocating Gas Engine........................................................................... 4 1.1.4 Velocity Staged Steam Turbine by Charles G. Curtis ................................ 5 1.1.5 Gas Turbine by Armengaud Brothers ......................................................... 5 1.1.6 Holzwarths Design .................................................................................... 6 1.1.7 Gas Turbine by Brown Boveri and Company............................................. 6 Axial Flow Turbines ................................................................................................... 8
TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT UT
2.1
UT TU
Principle of Turbine Operation ........................................................................... 8

UT UT
2.2
TU TU
Velocity Triangles for Axial Flow Turbines..................................................... 10

UT UT
2.3
TU TU TU UT
Vortex Theory ................................................................................................... 11

UT TU UT UT
3
TU UT TU TU
2.3.1 Free vortex design ..................................................................................... 13 Three-Dimensional Flotran CFD Analysis in ANSYS ............................................. 15 3.1
UT TU TU UT TU UT
Blade Profile ..................................................................................................... 16

UT TU UT TU UT
3.1.1 Keypoints in a Blade Profile ..................................................................... 16 3.1.2 Passing B-Splines through Keypoints ....................................................... 18 3.1.3 Creating Blade Area.................................................................................. 19 3.2 Copying the Blade Area .................................................................................... 20
TU UT TU UT TU UT TU UT
3.3
TU UT TU
Modeling the Channel of Fluid ......................................................................... 20

UT UT
3.4
TU TU TU UT TU UT TU
Meshing............................................................................................................. 22
UT TU UT UT
3.4.1 Mesh Convergence Criteria ...................................................................... 22 3.5 Extruding the whole domain ............................................................................. 24 3.6
TU UT TU
Fluid Properties ................................................................................................. 24

UT UT
3.7
TU TU TU UT TU UT TU
Execution Control ............................................................................................. 25

UT TU UT UT
3.7.1 Termination Criteria.................................................................................. 25 3.8 Ambient Conditions .......................................................................................... 25 3.9

TU UT TU TU UT TU UT
Boundary Conditions ........................................................................................ 26

UT TU UT TU UT
3.9.1 Inlet ........................................................................................................... 26 3.9.2 Outlet......................................................................................................... 26 3.10 Results ............................................................................................................... 27

TU UT TU UT
4
TU UT TU TU
Performing Analysis for Different Blade Profiles .................................................... 30

UT
4.1
UT TU TU UT TU UT TU
FLOTRAN CFD Analysis for 22o exit angle, 3.6 cm pitch blade .................... 30
UP UP UT TU UT UP UP UT
4.1.1 Mesh Convergence Criteria ...................................................................... 31 4.2 FLOTRAN CFD Analysis for 70o exit angle, 3.6 cm pitch blade .................... 35
iv 4.2.1 Mesh Convergence Criteria ...................................................................... 35 Performing Analysis For Three Blade Profiles at Blade Pitch of 4.6 cm ................. 41
TU UT TU UT UT TU UT
5
TU TU
5.1
UT TU
Mesh Convergence for 22 Profile.................................................................... 41

UP UP UT UT
5.2
TU TU
Mesh Convergence for 60o Profile.................................................................... 45

UP UP UT UT
5.3
TU TU
Mesh Convergence for 70 Profile.................................................................... 49

UP UP UT UT
5.4
TU TU
Comparison of velocity variation along the blade profile ................................ 53

UT UT
5.5
TU TU
Comparison of Pressure variation along the blade profile ................................ 54

UT UP UP UT
6
TU UT TU TU
Performing Analysis for Different Blade Pitches having 60o blade exit angle......... 55 6.1
UT TU
Mesh Convergence Criteria for 4.0 cm Blade Pitch ......................................... 55

UT UT
6.2
TU TU
Comparison of velocity variation along the blade profile ................................ 59

UT UT
7
TU UT TU
Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 61
UT
8
TU TU
Future Recommendations ......................................................................................... 62

UT UT
9
TU TU
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 63
UT UT
10
TU TU
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................... 64
UT
10.1
TU UT TU TU TU UT
APDL Program for Preprocessing of 60o, 3.6 cm pitch blade ......................... 64

UP UP UT UT
Program ..................................................................................................................... 64 Vita.................................................................................................................................... 80
List Of Figures
Figure 1-1 Figure 1-2 Figure 2-1 Figure 2-2 Figure 2-3 Figure 2-4 Figure 2-5 Figure 2-6 Figure 3-1 Figure 3-2 Figure 3-3 Figure 3-4 Figure 3-5 Figure 3-6 Figure 3-7 Figure 3-8 Figure 3-9 Figure 3-10 Figure 3-11 Figure 3-12 Figure 3-13 Figure 3-14 Figure 3-15 Figure 3-16 Figure 4-1 Figure 4-2 Figure 4-3 Figure 4-4 Figure 4-5 Figure 4-6 Figure 4-7 Figure 4-8 Figure 4-9 Figure 4-10 Figure 4-11 Figure 4-12 Figure 4-13 Figure 4-14 Figure 4-15 Figure 4-16 Figure 4-17 Figure 4-18 Figure 5-1
TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU
Heros Aeolipile [2] .................................................................................... 2 Barbers British Patent 1791 ...................................................................... 4 Simple Gas Turbine System ........................................................................ 9 One stage of an axial flow turbine ............................................................ 10 Velocity Triangles for the first stage......................................................... 11 Changes in pressure and velocity across the annulus .............................. 13 Variation of gas angles with radius .......................................................... 14 Blade profiles and velocity triangles at root and tip ................................ 14 Keypoints tracing the blade profile........................................................... 18 B-Splines passed through Keypoints of Blade Profile .............................. 18 Area created from B-Splines ..................................................................... 19 Five copies of the blade ............................................................................ 20 The fluid Channel...................................................................................... 21 Blade areas being treated as voids ........................................................... 21 Four Points selected to calculate velocity ................................................ 22 Graph plotted to meet the mesh convergence criteria .............................. 23 Meshed Fluid Domain............................................................................... 23 Fluid domain in 3D ................................................................................... 24 Pressure Contours .................................................................................... 27 Magnified view of Pressure Profile .......................................................... 27 Velocity Profile ......................................................................................... 28 Magnified View of Velocity Profile ........................................................... 28 Velocity Vectors ........................................................................................ 29 Magnified view of Velocity Vectors .......................................................... 29 Blade profiles with exit angle of (a) 22o, (b) 60o and (c) 70o .................... 30 Mesh Convergence Criteria ...................................................................... 31 Meshed Fluid Domain............................................................................... 31 Pressure profile......................................................................................... 32 Magnified view of Pressure Profile .......................................................... 32 Velocity Vectors ........................................................................................ 33 Magnified view of Velocity Profile ........................................................... 33 Velocity Vectors ........................................................................................ 34 Magnified view of Velocity Vectors .......................................................... 34 Mesh Convergence Criteria ...................................................................... 35 Meshed Fluid Domain............................................................................... 36 Pressure Profile ........................................................................................ 36 Magnified View of Pressure Profile.......................................................... 37 Velocity Profile ......................................................................................... 37 Magnified View of Velocity Profile ........................................................... 38 Velocity Vectors ........................................................................................ 38 Magnified View of Velocity vectors around the blades ............................ 39 Magnified view of velocity vectors in the inlet channel ............................ 39 Mesh convergence criteria........................................................................ 41
UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UP UP UP UP UP UTP UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT
vi Figure 5-2 Figure 5-3 Figure 5-4 Figure 5-5 Figure 5-6 Figure 5-7 Figure 5-8 Figure 5-9 Figure 5-10 Figure 5-11 Figure 5-12 Figure 5-13 Figure 5-14 Figure 5-15 Figure 5-16 Figure 5-17 Figure 5-18 Figure 5-19 Figure 5-20 Figure 5-21 Figure 5-22 Figure 5-23 Figure 5-24 Figure 5-25 Figure 5-26 Figure 6-1 Figure 6-2 Figure 6-3 Figure 6-4 Figure 6-5 Figure 6-6 Figure 6-7 Figure 6-8 Figure 6-9 Figure 6-10
TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU
Meshed Fluid Domain............................................................................... 42 Pressure Profile ........................................................................................ 42 Magnified view of Pressure Profile .......................................................... 43 Velocity Profile ......................................................................................... 43 Magnified view of Velocity Profile ........................................................... 44 Velocity vectors ......................................................................................... 44 Magnified view of Velocity Vectors .......................................................... 45 Mesh convergence criteria........................................................................ 45 Meshed Fluid domain ............................................................................... 46 Pressure Profile ........................................................................................ 46 Magnified view of Pressure Profile .......................................................... 47 Velocity Profile ......................................................................................... 47 Magnified view of Velocity Profile ........................................................... 48 Velocity Vectors ........................................................................................ 48 Magnified view of Velocity vectors ........................................................... 49 Mesh convergence criteria........................................................................ 49 Meshed Fluid Domain............................................................................... 50 Pressure profile......................................................................................... 50 Magnified view of pressure profile ........................................................... 51 Velocity profile .......................................................................................... 51 Magnified view of Velocity profile ............................................................ 52 Velocity vectors ......................................................................................... 52 Magnified view of velocity vectors............................................................ 53 Velocity comparison of three blade profiles ............................................. 53 Pressure comparison of three profiles ...................................................... 54 Mesh convergence criteria........................................................................ 55 Meshed Fluid Domain............................................................................... 56 Pressure Profile ........................................................................................ 56 Magnified view of pressure profile ........................................................... 57 Velocity profile .......................................................................................... 57 Magnified view of velocity profile............................................................. 58 Velocity vectors ......................................................................................... 58 Magnified view of velocity vectors............................................................ 59 Velocity comparison of three blade pitches .............................................. 59 Comparison of pressure variation for the three blade pitches ................. 60
UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT
vii
List of Tables
Table 3-1 Table 3-2 Table 3-3 Table 3-4 Table 3-5 Table 3-6
TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU TU UT TU
Gas Turbine Specifications [6] ..................................................................... 17 Blade Profile Specifications [6].................................................................... 17 Fluid Properties ............................................................................................ 25 Termination Criteria ..................................................................................... 25 Ambient Conditions....................................................................................... 25 Inlet Conditions............................................................................................. 26
UT UT UT UT UT UT
viii
Abstract
The objective of this thesis is to find out the blade shape and pitch that would be most suitable for the given operating conditions. For this purpose, ANSYS was used as a tool and a number of analyses were performed. Pressure and velocity profiles were computed for seven different cases of blade shape and pitch. Programming in APDL was done to handle the problems more efficiently. From a number of analyses, it was observed that the velocity rise was maximum (350 m/s) in 70o exit angle shape with 4.6 cm pitch.
P P
Pressure drop was maximum, about 0.4 bars in both 60o and 70o shapes with 4.6 cm
P P P P
pitch. However, the 70o shape was showing more non-uniformity in velocity and pressure
P P
profiles. The 60o shape with 4.6 cm pitch seems to be the most appropriate for turbine
P P
operation. According to the analytical solution for 60o exit angle shape 3.6 cm pitch
P P
operating under inlet pressure and velocity of 1.65 bars and 320 m/s respectively, and outlet pressure of 1.3 bars, the velocity at exit was 165 m/s, whereas the ANSYS Analysis yielded an exit velocity of 200 m/s.
1 Introduction
Turbine comes into play whenever there is a question of converting kinetic energy of fluid into mechanical energy, in fact, of many aspects of producing mechanical power, turbine is most satisfactory [1]. Reciprocating engines have been playing an important role in driving vehicles but there use in big vehicles like tanks and jet engines is not feasible because of their large size and weight. Reciprocating engines have a number of moving mechanical parts which require frequent lubrication, the lubrication being itself and expensive operation. Therefore, gas turbine engines became the major focus point for the engineers around the world especially during the 20th century. Gas turbine engines
P P
have a number of advantages over the reciprocating engines, for example, they have less moving parts which move only in one direction unlike reciprocating engines, have high power-to-weight ratio, are smaller in size than reciprocating engines of the same power rating, have high operation speeds and low lubricating oil cost and consumption, just to name a few. Gas turbines are used in gas turbine engines for propulsion purposes and in power plants for power production. The difference between the two is simple to understand. When the gas turbine is to be used in a power plant, the torque produced and rotational speed of the main shaft is of interest, and if the turbine is to be used in battle tanks, high speed vehicles or air crafts, the exhaust gases from the gas turbine are of interest [1]. Whenever there is a question of producing a high thrust magnitude, the size and weight become an important issue and cost is of less importance, since the safety of people travelling in those vehicles is of prime importance. If a gas turbine is to be installed in a power plant, the large size and weight are affordable but cost is limited because the power produced needs to be of more worth than the money being invested in installing the power plant. In order to have a better understanding of the advancements taking place in the field of gas turbines, whether they are being produced for the purpose of power production or propulsion, it is important to first of all take a glance at the history of gas turbines.
1.1 History of Gas Turbines

The word "turbine" is associated with spinning. The turbine traces its history back to Hero of Alexandria who in 62 AD demonstrated a device named Aeolipile. It did not produce useful work but it did demonstrate the result of accelerating a gaseous fluid through nozzle causing the sphere to rotate [2]. Apparently Hero's steam engine was taken to be no more than a toy, and thus its full potential was not realized for centuries.
Figure 1-1
Heros Aeolipile [2]
The development of the gas turbine depended upon the prior development of many devices including smoke jacks (first described by Leonardo da Vince), windmills, water wheels and steam turbines. Of particular significance in the development of the gas turbine were those technologies associated with the development of efficient compressors and improved materials that could withstand the high temperatures required for gas turbines.
1.1.1 Taqi al-Din and the First Steam Turbine

T T
It is important to know that Taqi al-Din had described in his book Al-Turuq alT T T T
saniyya fi al-alat al-ruhaniyya (The Sublime Methods of Spiritual Machines) which he

T T T T T T T T
completed in 959/1551, a steam turbine as a prime mover for rotating a spit [2]. Thus he preceded Branca by 78 years and Wilkins by 97 years. Here is what Taqi al-Din says:
T T T T
3 Part Six: Making a spit which carries meat over fire so that it will rotate by itself without the power of an animal. This was made by people in several ways, and one of these is to have at the end of the spit a wheel with vanes, and opposite the wheel place a hollow pitcher made of copper with a closed head and full of water. Let the nozzle of the pitcher be opposite the vanes of the wheel. Kindle fire under the pitcher and steam will issue from its nozzle in a restricted form and it will turn the vane wheel. When the pitcher becomes empty of water bring close to it cold water in a basin and let the nozzle of the pitcher dip into the cold water. The heat will cause all the water in the basin to be attracted into the pitcher and the the steam will start rotating the vane wheel again. The first patent issued for a gas turbine was issued in 1791 to John Barber, an Englishman. The principle of operation of this gas turbine required that air and fuel from a gas producer be compressed in different cylinders and then directed into a combustion chamber where the fuel was burned. The products of combustion were then caused to flow through a nozzle onto a turbine wheel. John Barbers concept was sound, but given the technology of that day, it was not possible for the device to create sufficient power to both compressing the air, the gas and to have power left over to provide useful work. Nevertheless, the credit for the idea that leads to the modern gas turbine can clearly be give to John Barber. In spite of the fact that John Barbers 1791 patent represented all of the important features of a successful gas turbine it wasnt until the early part of the 20th
P P
century that engineers were able to produce a machine that was useful.
Figure 1-2
Barbers British Patent 1791
1.1.2 Hurdles in Implementing Brayton Cycle

To make the gas turbine useful it was necessary to solve two primary technological hurdles. The first was materials and the second compressors. First, it wasnt until the development of cobalt and nickel base super alloys allowed sufficiently high turbine inlet temperatures before the thermodynamics of the Brayton Cycle could be improved to the point of providing useful work at a reasonable efficiency. Second, the fundamental nature of the gas turbine Brayton Cycle is that the compressor work represents a large percentage of the available turbine work. For this reason the compressor efficiency needs to be quite good. It wasnt until the early part of the 20th
P P
century that the aerodynamics of compressor as well enough understood and worked out in a practical nature to allow compressors of sufficiently high efficiency to be applied to gas turbines. Even today, the best of gas turbines require approximately 50 percent of the turbine work to drive the compressor.
1.1.3 Reciprocating Gas Engine

At the same time that Stolze was conceiving his gas turbine the 1870s, George Brayton, an American, built a successful gas engine based on a cycle that was composed of two reversible constant pressure processes and two adiabatic processes. While
5 Braytons engine was a reciprocating engine, his cycle is the basis of the gas turbine cycle we know today. In 1882 the Norwegian Adgidius Elling started the construction of a gas turbine which possessed a six stage centrifugal compressor. This turbine in 1903 produced 11 horsepower. In 1904 Elling built another gas turbine wherein the air was heated by the turbine exhaust gases through a heat exchanger. This regenerative gas turbine produced an output of 44 horsepower. Little is known either about these gas turbines or about further developments by Elling.
1.1.4 Velocity Staged Steam Turbine by Charles G. Curtis

By the late 1800s the idea of using turbines in practical applications had taken hold. Charles G. Curtis, who patented a velocity staged steam turbine in 1896 and after further development sold all right of this design to the General Electric Company in 1901 for 1.5 million dollars, a pricey sum in that day. Curtis also obtained the first American patent of a gas turbine in 1895.
1.1.5 Gas Turbine by Armengaud Brothers

The first truly practical gas turbine, and one which received much attention in its day, appears to have been developed by the Armengaud Brothers of Paris France. This gas turbine was based on a patent granted to Charles Lemale in 1901 in France. The gas turbine was ultimately produced in 1905 and 1906. It utilized a 25 stage centrifugal compressor, built by Brown Boveri and Company, and had a pressure ratio of 3 to 1. The combustion chamber used a carborundum lining and hence started the application of ceramics in gas turbines. The turbine wheel and buckets were water cooled, depending on differences in density between hot and cold water to provide the circulation of the water. Between the combustor and turbine was a 16.5 long pipe in which water was injected into the gas stream in order to reduce the combustion gas temperature to something below 850F before entering the turbine buckets. Only a portion of the air compressed by the compressor was used in combustion and to drive the turbine. Stodola performed an analysis of the efficiency of Armengauds turbine and concluded it was barely 3 percent and the useful turbine output some 82 horsepower.
6 Of particular interest is the development of another gas turbine by the Armengaud Brothers that had a very unique feature. The gases from the combustor flowed through the turbine and then through a heat exchanger that produced steam that was again directed through the same turbine wheel.
1.1.6 Holzwarths Design

Another gas turbine development of historical significance was that of Hans Holzwarth of Germany who began a series of experiments in 1905. Holzwarths design is significant in that it depended on an explosion of the fuel air mixture in order to generate sufficient pressure rise to derive useful work from the turbine. In the Holzwarth design air at very low pressure of some 30 to 40 psig was used to scavenge the turbine combustor in which fuel was subsequently sprayed and allowed to burn raising the pressure to some 170 to 200 psig. This elevated pressure opened a valve that allowed the high pressure and hot gas to expand through the turbine. Turbines based on this principle were produced with outputs up to 20 megawatts.
1.1.7 Gas Turbine by Brown Boveri and Company

It wasnt until the 1930s that the practical gas turbine as we know today began to be placed into commercial service. These gas turbines were largely the development of Brown Boveri and Company in Switzerland and intended to be an offshoot of their development of the Velox boilers. These boilers depended on a super charged combustion chamber in order to improve heat transfer. In 1936 Henry Thomas of the Sun Oil Company of Philadelphia was in the process of developing the Houdry Cracking process for oil refineries. He concluded that applying super chargers in the process in order to burn carbon residues could result in the production of power that could then be applied in the refineries. He approached Brown Boveri and Company who was willing to adapt there axial flow compressors from the Veloxs boiler to this process. During the shop testing of the compressor and turbine sets it was necessary for Brown Boveri to provide a combustion chamber in order to simulate the heat of the carbon burning process within the Houdry process. With this setup in their erection shops, Brown Boveri realized that the compressor, combustor, and turbine provided for a workable gas turbine which could be turned to power production. This led Brown Boveri to produce a gas
7 turbine that was installed at Neuchatel in Switzerland for stand by service in a bomb proof installation in 1939. This gas turbine had an output of 4 megawatts with a turbine inlet temperature of approximately 1020F. In 1942 Brown Boveri installed a 2200 horsepower gas turbine on a locomotive for the Swiss Railway Service. Within 10 years there were 43 manufactures producing gas turbines of a variety of designs and being placed in a variety of services.
2 Axial Flow Turbines

There are two basic types of turbine radial flow and axial flow. The vast majority of gas turbines employ the axial flow turbine, so the attention will be given to this type. The radial turbine can handle low mass flows more efficiently than the axial flow machine and has been widely used in the cryogenic industry as a turbo-expander, and in turbochargers for reciprocating engines. Although for all but the lowest powers the axial flow turbine is normally the more efficient, when mounted back-to-back with a centrifugal compressor the radial turbine offers the benefit of a very short and rigid rotor. This configuration is eminently suitable for gas turbines where compactness is more important than low fuel consumption. Auxiliary power units for aircraft generating sets of up to 3 MW, and mobile power plants are typical applications [1].
2.1 Principle of Turbine Operation

When gases expand in the turbine, they rotate the turbine shaft and thus power can be produced, or if thrust is needed, the expanding gases can produce thrust while passing through the turbine. In order to have expansion in the turbine, a suitable pressure ratio has to be achieved in the compressor, that is, the pressure of air at outlet has to be a multiple of the air pressure at inlet. Therefore, first step in the cycle of turbine operation is the compression of working fluid. If, after compression in the compressor, the working fluid were to be expanded immediately in the turbine, the power produced by the turbine would completely be taken up by the compressor and no amount of work would be available outside the cycle. However, it has been found that the output of the turbine can be increased if the temperature of the working fluid is raised when it is on its way to the turbine. If the working fluid is air, one way is to combust the fuel in the compressed air. This would raise the temperature of the working fluid, air in this case, and the power output of turbine would certainly increase if this hot working fluid is allowed to expand through it. If such methodology is adopted, turbine would be able to provide power in addition to driving the compressor. This whole situation represents the gas turbine or internal combustion turbine in its simplest form. The three main components are a
9 compressor, combustion chamber and turbine, connected together as shown dramatically in figure 2.1 [1]. In practice, losses occur in both the compressor and turbine which increases the power absorbed by the compressor and decrease the power output of the turbine. A certain addition to the energy of the working fluid, and hence a certain fuel supply, will therefore be required before the one component can drive the other. This fuel produces no useful power, so that the component losses contribute to a lowering of the efficiency of the machine. Further addition of fuel will result in a useful power output. The maximum fuel/air ratio that may be used is governed by the working temperature of the highly stressed turbine blades, which temperature must not be allowed to exceed a certain critical value. This value depends upon the creep strength of the materials used in the construction of the turbine and the working life required. A simple gas turbine system is shown in Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-1
Simple Gas Turbine System
It is important to realize that in a gas turbine the processes of compression, combustion and expansion do not occur in a single component as they do in a reciprocating engine. They occur in a components which are separate in the sense that they can be designed, tested and developed individually, and these components can be linked together to form a gas turbine unit in a variety of ways. The possible number of components is not limited to the three already mentioned. Other compressors and turbine can be added, with intercoolers between the compressors, and reheat combustion
10 chambers between the turbines. A heat-exchanger which uses some of the energy in the turbine exhaust gas to preheat the air entering the combustion chamber may also be introduced. These refinements may be used to increase the power output and efficiency of the plant at the expense of added complexity, weight and cost. The way in which these components are linked together not only affects the maximum overall thermal efficiency, but also the variation of efficiency with power output and of output torque with rotational speed. One arrangement may be suitable for driving an alternator under varying load at constant speed, while another may be more suitable for driving a ships propeller where the power varies as the cube of the speed.
2.2 Velocity Triangles for Axial Flow Turbines

First of all, one stage of a typical axial flow turbine is shown in Figure 2-2.
Figure 2-2
One stage of an axial flow turbine
The velocity triangles for one axial flow turbine stage and the employed nomenclature is shown in Figure 2-3.
11
Figure 2-3
Velocity Triangles for the first stage

B B
The gas enters the row of nozzle blades with a static pressure and temperature p1, T1 and a velocity C1, is expanded to p2, T2 and leaves with an increased velocity C2 at an
B B B B B B B B B B
angle 2. The rotor blade inlet angle will be chosen to suit the direction 2 of the gas
B B B B
velocity V2 relative to the blade at inlet. 2 and V2 are found by vectorial subtraction of
B B B B B B
the blade speed U from the absolute velocity C2. After being deflected, and usually
B B
further expanded, in the rotor blade passages, the gas leaves at p3, T3 with relative
B B B B
velocity V3 at angle 3. Vectorial addition of U yields the magnitude and direction of the
B B B B
gas velocity at exit from the stage, C3 and 3. 3 is known as the swirl angle.
B B B B B B
2.3 Vortex Theory

The shape of velocity triangles must vary from root to tip of the blade because the blade speed U increases with radius. Another reason is that the whirl component in the flow at outlet from the nozzles causes the static pressure and temperature to vary across the annulus. With a uniform pressure at inlet, or at least with a much smaller variation because the whirl component is smaller, it is clear that the pressure drop across the nozzle will vary, giving rise to a corresponding variation in efflux velocity C2. Twisted blading
B B
designed to take account of the changing gas angles is called vortex blading.
12 It has been common steam turbine practice, except in low-pressure blading where the blades are very long, to design on conditions at the mean diameter, keep the blade angles constant from root to tip, and assume that no additional loss is incurred by the variation in incidence along the blade caused by the changing gas angles. Comparative tests have been conducted on a single stage gas turbine of radius ratio 1.37, using in turn blades of constant angle and vortex blading. The results showed that any improvement in efficiency obtained with vortex blading was within the margin of experimental error. This contrasts with similar tests on a six-stage axial compressor, which showed a distinct improvement from the use of vortex blading. This was, however, an improvement not so much in efficiency as in the delay of the onset of surgin which of course does not arise in accelerating flow. It appears, therefore, that steam turbine designers have been correct in not applying vortex theory except when absolutely necessary at the low pressure end. They have to consider the additional cost of twisted blades for the very large number of rows of blading required, and they know that the Rankine cycle is relatively insensitive to component losses. Conversely, it is not surprising that the gas turbine designer, struggling to achieve the highest possible component efficiency, has consistently used some form of vortex blading which it is felt intuitively must give a better performance, however small. Vortex theory states that the fluid elements are to be in radial equilibrium, an increase in static pressure from root to tip is necessary whenever there is a whirl component of velocity. Figure 2-4 shows why the gas turbine designer cannot talk of impulse or 50 percent reaction stages. The proportion of the stage pressure or temperature drop which occurs in the rotor must increase from root to tip.
13
Figure 2-4
Changes in pressure and velocity across the annulus
Although Figure 2-4 refers to a single-stage turbine with axial inlet velocity and no swirl at outlet, the whirl component at inlet and outlet of a repeating stage will be small compared with Cw2; the reaction will therefore still increase from root to tip, if somewhat
B B
less markedly.
2.3.1 Free vortex design

According to free vortex design, i. ii. iii. The stagnation enthalpy ho is constant over the annulus (i.e. dho / dr = 0),
B B
The axial velocity is constant over the annulus, The whirl velocity is inversely proportional to the annulus,
When the above mentioned conditions are fulfilled, the radial equilibrium of fluid elements is satisfied. The variation of gas angles with radius appears in the Figures 2-5 and 2-6, which also includes the velocity triangles at root and tip drawn to scale.
14
Figure 2-5
Variation of gas angles with radius
Figure 2-6
Blade profiles and velocity triangles at root and tip
15
3 Three-Dimensional Flotran CFD Analysis in ANSYS

ANSYS is a well known and internationally recognized as one of the most authenticated software for the analysis of systems. ANSYS is based on Finite Element Method, also called Finite Element Analysis. The finite element method is a numerical procedure that can be used to obtain solutions to a large class to engineering problem involving stress analysis, heat transfer, fluid flow and electromagnetism. In general, engineering problems are mathematical models of physical situations. Mathematical models are differential equations with a set of corresponding boundary and initial conditions. The differential equations are derived by applying the fundamental laws and principles of nature to a system or a control volume. These governing equations represent balance of mass, force or energy. When possible, the exact solution of these equations renders detailed behavior of a system under a given set of conditions. There are many practical engineering problems for which we cannot obtain exact solutions. This inability to obtain an exact solution may be attributed to either the complex nature of governing differential equations or the difficulties that arise from dealing with the boundary and initial conditions. To deal with such problems, we resort to numerical approximations. In contrast to analytical solutions, which show the exact behavior of a system at any point with in the system, numerical solutions approximate exact solutions only at discrete points, called nodes. The first step of any numerical procedure is discretization. This process divides the medium of interst into a number of small subregions and nodes. There are two common classes of numerical methods: (1) finite difference methods and (2) finite element methods. With finite difference methods, the differential equation is written for each node, and the derivatives are replaced by difference equations. This approach results in a set of simultaneous linear equations. Although finite difference methods are easy to understand and employ in simple problems, they become difficult to apply to problems with complex geometries or complex boundary conditions. This situation is also true for problems with non-isotropic material properties.
16 In contrast, the finite element method uses integral formulations rather than difference equations to create a system of algebraic equations. Moreover, an appropriate continuous function is assumed to represent the solution for each element. The complete solution is then generated by connecting or assembling the individual solutions, allowing for continuity at the inter-elemental boundaries [4]. ANSYS is a comprehensive general-purpose finite element computer program that contains over 100,000 lines of code. ANSYS is capable of performing static, dynamic, heat transfer, fluid flow, and electromagnetism analyses. ANSYS has been a leading FEA program for well over 35 years. Today ANSYS is found in many engineering fields, including aerospace, automotive, electronics and nuclear [4]. Although finite element method has been extensively used in the field of structural mechanics, it has been successfully applied to solve several other types of engineering problems, such as heat conduction, fluid dynamics, seepage flow, and electric and magnetic fields. These applications prompted mathematicians to use this technique for the solution of complicated boundary value and other problems. In fact, it has been established that the method can be used for the numerical solution of ordinary and partial differential equations [5]. Flow of fluid inside a gas turbine was simulated using ANSYS, and to model the situation inside the turbine in a more realistic manner, the analysis was carried out in 3D. The steps necessary to perform the flow analysis in three dimensions are explained below:
3.1 Blade Profile

As discussed earlier, the blade profile largely depends on the type and specifications of the turbine. Moreover, the boundary conditions play an important role in deciding which blade profile would be most suitable for the turbine under consideration.
3.1.1 Keypoints in a Blade Profile

The turbine under consideration has the following specifications as shown in Table 3-1 and detailed calculations can be found in Reference [6].
17
Table 3-1 Gas Turbine Specifications [6] Axial Flow Gas Turbine Type of the Turbine No. of Stages Total Turbine Power Net Power Output Degree of Reaction Type of Blading 2 1488 kW 744 kW 50 % Symmetrical Blading
First of all, a suitable blade profile was generated for the conditions that actually exist in the gas turbine under consideration. The profile used in the analysis originates from the temperature, pressure and fluid velocity conditions at inlet and outlet of the turbine. This means that different temperature and pressure conditions or velocity magnitudes would alter the suitable shape of blade profile. The blade profile data is shown in Table 3-2 and detailed calculations can be looked up in Reference [6] Table 3-2 Blade Profile Specifications [6] 20o Blade Inlet Angle
P P
Blade Exit Angle Chord Blade Height Blade Pitch
60o
P P
2.98 cm 8.96 cm 3.6 cm
The blade profile generated, keeping in mind the above mentioned specifications is shown in Figure 4-1. The coordinates of the 115 keypoints tracing the blade profile are given in Appendix.
18
Figure 3-1
Keypoints tracing the blade profile
3.1.2 Passing B-Splines through Keypoints

Next step was to pass B-Splines through keypoints. A total of four (04) B-Splines were passed that constitute single blade.
Figure 3-2
B-Splines passed through Keypoints of Blade Profile
19 Command: BSPLN, POINT1, POINT2,, POINT10 If the number of points is more than 10, following command is used Command: FLST, 3, No. of Points, 3 FITEM, 3, No. of 1st Point
P P
FITEM, 3, No. of last Point BSPLN, , P51X In Figure 4-1, it is shown that the last keypoint lies at the origin which makes the trailing edge of the blade a sharp corner. Such sharp corners cause swirl in flow problems and meshing problems during the modeling process. To avoid any flow and modeling complications, the trailing edge was filleted with a radius of 0.9mm. Thus the fifth line shows up at this point which appears as a small curve at the trailing edge in figure 4-2.
3.1.3 Creating Blade Area

From B-splines, blade area was created as shown in Figure 4-3
Figure 3-3 Command: AL, L1, L2, , L10
Area created from B-Splines
20
3.2 Copying the Blade Area

The flow analysis over the rotor was required and if the rotor is looked at from top, there are blades mounted on the rotor disc in a row. In order to get more realistic results, the analysis of five blades was required, therefore, four more copies of the blade area were made with a distance of 3.6 cm between each copy, as shown in Figure 4-4.
Figure 3-4 Command: AGEN, 5, 1, , ,0.036
Five copies of the blade
3.3 Modeling the Channel of Fluid

The long inlet and outlet duct (also called chimney) was made so that the flow is developed when it enters the blade passages. Also the effects of wall turning and inlet and outlet can be minimized using this long chimney technique. The inclination was such that the fluid was entering tangent to the blade inlet edge [6]. The channel was modeled using
21 the blade inlet and outlet angles. In this case, the blade inlet angle is 20o and outlet angle
P P
is 60o. The fluid channel was modeled as shown in Figure 4-5:

P P
Figure 3-5
The fluid Channel
There were a series of commands used to model the fluid channel shown in figure 4-5, these commands are given in Appendix 1. Since the flid and blade are entirely different materials, they will be treated separately, that is why these five blade areas were subtracted from the whole area as shown in figure 4-6.
Figure 3-6
Blade areas being treated as voids
22
3.4 Meshing
The fluid domain was meshed in 2D and extrusion was done after refining the mesh to the requirement. The default meshing done by ANSYS is not completely reliable because the field variables show a significant variation in magnitude if the number of elements is increased or decreased.
3.4.1 Mesh Convergence Criteria

Four points were selected along the blade profile path and velocity was noted for every increase in number of elements, as expected, the velocity in m/s, showed change in magnitude when the mesh was refined. The points were selected as shown in figure 3-7.
Figure 3-7
Four Points selected to calculate velocity
After increasing the element density a number of times, the velocity achieved almost a constant value and did not change by further increasing the number of elements. This change was evident from the graph that was plotted between the number of elements and velocity. Initially there were some peaks in the graph, but then the curve got almost flat which indicated that the results can be taken at this element density. The mesh obtained at the end was selected and the results at that mesh are reported. Figure 3-8 shows the plot between the element density and velocity.
23
Figure 3-8
Graph plotted to meet the mesh convergence criteria
The graph shown in Figure 3-8 led to the meshed fluid domain shown in Figure 3-9.
Figure 3-9 Command: ET, 2, FLUID142 ET, 1, FLUID141 MSHKEY, 0 MSHAPE, 1, 2D AMESH, ALL
Meshed Fluid Domain
24
EXTOPT, ESIZE, 5, 1, EXTOPT, ACLEAR, 1 The element sizes on each line are given in Appendix 1.
3.5 Extruding the whole domain

Since the blade height was found out to be 8.96 cm, whole domain was extruded with the depth of the same dimension as shown in Figure 3-10.
Figure 3-10
Fluid domain in 3D
Command: VEXT,ALL, , , 0, 0, -0.0896, 1, 1, 1
3.6 Fluid Properties

The fluid has been considered to be Air with constant Specific Heat and Conductivity. Every quantity is input in SI Units. The quantities are given in Table 3-3.
25 Table 3-3 Property Density Viscosity Specific Heat Fluid Properties Value 0.424 kg / m3
P P P P
8.4 x 10-6 Pa . s 1.068 kJ / kg K
Moreover, in the FLOTRAN solution options in ANSYS main menu, air was considered to be incompressible and the flow was assumed to be steady state and turbulent.
3.7 Execution Control

Execution control is another important part in the ANSYS main menu while solving fluid flow problems. It has a number of sub-menus which require the input of certain quantities.
3.7.1 Termination Criteria

The termination criteria for Temperature, Turbulent Kinetic Energy and Turbulent Dissipation Rate were ignored, those for other quantities are shown in Table 3-4. Table 3-4 Quantity Vx
B B
Termination Criteria Value 0.01 m/s 0.01 m/s 0.01 m/s 1 x 10-12 Pa
P P
Vy
B B
Vz
B B
Pressure
3.8 Ambient Conditions

The data for ambient conditions was input as shown in Table 3-5 Table 3-5 Quantity Vx
B B
Ambient Conditions Value 0 m/s 0 m/s 0 m/s 101350 Pa
Vy
B B
Vz
B B
Pressure
26 Turbulent Kinetic Energy Turbulent Dissipation Rate Temperature 1.0000000133514 x 10-10

P P
1.0000000133514 x 10-10
P P
293 K
3.9 Boundary Conditions

Boundary conditions play a very important role in the analysis of any system. As far as steady state and adiabatic flow problems are concerned, pressure and velocity are specified at inlet and only pressure is specified at outlet so that velocity profile can be computed the code itself. The inlet and outlet conditions are given in sections 3.9.1 and 3.9.2 respectively.
3.9.1 Inlet
Initially, the components of absolute velocity were available which were resolved according to the gas angles and since the analysis was to be performed with fluid incident at blade angles, the horizontal and vertical components were re-calculated. First of all, the absolute velocity was found from given Cw and Ca by their vectorial sum. Cw was 280 m/s
B B B B B B
and Ca was equal to 155 m/s. using pythagorus theorem, the absolute velocity comes out
B B
to be 320 m/s. Now, this was to be resolved using the blade inlet angle of 20o. From here,
P P
the horizontal and vertical components were calculated which are given in Table 3-6. Table 3-6 Pressure Vx
B B
Inlet Conditions 1.65 bar 110 m / s -300 m / s
Vy
B B
Vz
B B
0m/s
3.9.2 Outlet
Only pressure was input to be 1.3 bars at outlet. Moreover, no slip condition has been applied on walls which are basically the areas of blade. Symmetry Boundary Condition has also been applied to the inlet and outlet channels. This was for the pre-processing phase, the APDL program for solution was not written, rather the solution was done using GUI. Only one step involved the solution, that
27 is, click on Run FLOTRAN and the program calculates pressure and velocity profiles. Post processing was also done using GUI. The contour plots and vector plots were obtained which are given in section 3.10.
3.10 Results
The pressure contours were obtained which are shown in Figures 3-11 and 3-12.
Figure 3-11
Pressure Contours
Figure 3-12
Magnified view of Pressure Profile
28
The velocity profile is shown in Figure 3-13 and 3-14.
Figure 3-13
Velocity Profile
Figure 3-14
Magnified View of Velocity Profile
The corresponding Velocity Vectors are shown in Figures 3-15 and 3-16.
29
Figure 3-15
Velocity Vectors
Figure 3-16
Magnified view of Velocity Vectors
30
4 Performing Analysis for Different Blade Profiles

The blade profile explained in the previous chapter was generated for certain pressure, temperature and velocity conditions. However, after the program written in APDL became fully functional, the blade profile was changed and analysis was performed using same conditions as explained previously. The leading edge of the blade was left unchanged and the trailing edge angle was first reduced from 60o to 22o(which
P P P P
makes the blade profile more steep) and then increased to 70o (which makes the blade
P P
profile more gradual). This shape change was arbitrary, and FLOTRAN CFD analysis was performed for both the new profiles. The three profiles are shown in Figure 4-1 to have a more clear vision about the blade shapes. The analysis was performed by developing a program in APDL, therefore, the respective commands are given in respective Appendices.
Figure 4-1
Blade profiles with exit angle of (a) 22o, (b) 60o and (c) 70o
P P P P P P P P
4.1 FLOTRAN CFD Analysis for 22o exit angle, 3.6 cm pitch blade
First the blade with an exit angle of 22o was considered for analysis. The blade and
P P
fluid channel were modeled for this profile as already discussed in chapter 3. The important thing to discuss here is the mesh convergence criteria and results that are obtained. Mesh convergence is discussed in section 4.1.1.
31

Four points were plotted as shown in Figure 3.7 and velocity was calculated at those points each time the number of elements was increased. The graph was plotted between velocity and number of elements as already discussed in section 3.4.1. The graph is shown in Figure 4-2.
Figure 4-2 Mesh Convergence Criteria The number of elements shown at the last point were selected for meshing the fluid domain. The mesh that resulted is shown in Figure 4-3.
Figure 4-3
Meshed Fluid Domain
32 The same inlet conditions and boundary conditions were applied to the model shown in Figure 4-3 and pressure and velocity profiles were obtained. The pressure profile is shown in Figure 4-4 and Figure 4-5.
Figure 4-4
Pressure profile
Figure 4-5
The velocity profile is shown in Figures 4-6 and 4-7.
33
Figure 4-6
Velocity Vectors
Figure 4-7
Magnified view of Velocity Profile
And the velocity vectors are displayed in Figures 4-8 and 4-9.
34
Figure 4-8
Velocity Vectors
Figure 4-9
35
4.2 FLOTRAN CFD Analysis for 70o exit angle, 3.6 cm pitch blade
P P
As discussed step-wise in chapter 3, the blade profile was generated and blade and fluid region were modeled. The important thing to discuss here is Mesh Convergence. This is because the results cannot be reliable until and unless the shown constant values with increasing number of elements.

As shown in Figure 3-7, four points were plotted along the blade profile path and velocity was noted after running the analysis a number of times. A graph was plotted between velocity and number of elements and those number of elements were selected after which it was obvious that velocity will not change its magnitude. The graph is shown in Figure 4-10.
Figure 4-10
Mesh Convergence Criteria
The meshed fluid domain which resulted is shown in Figure 4-11.
36
Figure 4-11 Meshed Fluid Domain Taking into account the same inlet and outlet and symmetry boundary condition, pressure and velocity profiles were obtained. The pressure profile is shown in Figure 4-12 and Figure 4-13.
Figure 4-12
Pressure Profile
37
Figure 4-13
Magnified View of Pressure Profile
Figure 4-14
Velocity Profile
38
Figure 4-15 Magnified View of Velocity Profile The velocity vectors are shown in Figures 4-16, 4-17 and 4-18.
Figure 4-16
Velocity Vectors
39
Figure 4-17
Magnified View of Velocity vectors around the blades
Figure 4-18 Magnified view of velocity vectors in the inlet channel From Figure 4-18, it is clear that there is a significant amount of recirculation in the inlet channel, the reason being that the path between the blades is so narrowed due to the
40 increased exit angle, that the fluid cannot flow through the blades and starts recirculating in the inlet channel. Therefore, we conclude that the three different profiles cannot be compare at the pitch of 3.6 cm.
41
5 Performing Analysis
For
Three
Blade
Profiles at Blade Pitch of 4.6 cm

The blade pitch was changed from 3.6 cm to 4.6 cm and analysis was done for all the three profiles so that a fair comparison can be done of the results of the three analyses. The three profiles have already been shown in Figure 4-1. However, the mesh convergence criteria is to be discussed since the pitch is changed by 1 cm. The contour plots for pressure and velocity and vector plots for velocity have been plotted on the same scale.
5.1 Mesh Convergence for 22o Profile

P P
As shown in Figure 3-7, velocity was calculated at four points along the blade profile and the process was continued until the velocity reached a constant magnitude. The graph showing the mesh convergence criteria for 22o profile is displayed in Figure 5-1.
P P
Figure 5-1
Mesh convergence criteria
The mesh resulted from the mesh convergence is shown in Figure 5-2.
42
Figure 5-2 Meshed Fluid Domain Taking into account the inlet and outlet conditions, the pressure and velocity profiles were obtained. The pressure profile is shown in Figures 5-3 and 5-4.
Figure 5-3
Pressure Profile
43
Figure 5-4
Figure 5-5
Velocity Profile
44
Figure 5-6
Velocity vectors are shown in Figures 5-7 and 5-8.
Figure 5-7
Velocity vectors
45
Figure 5-8

P P
The graph for mesh convergence criteria is shown in Figure 5-9
Figure 5-9
The fluid domain was meshed as shown in Figure 5-10
46
Figure 5-10 Meshed Fluid domain The pressure and velocity profiles were obtained. The pressure profile is shown in Figures 5-11 and 5-12.
Figure 5-11
Pressure Profile
47
Figure 5-12 Magnified view of Pressure Profile The velocity profile is shown in Figures 5-13 and 5-14.
Figure 5-13
Velocity Profile
48
Figure 5-14
The velocity vectors are shown in Figures 5-15 and 5-16.
Figure 5-15
Velocity Vectors
49
Figure 5-16
Magnified view of Velocity vectors

P P
The graph plotted to meet the mesh convergence criteria for 70o profile is shown in
P P
Figure 5-17.
Figure 5-17
The meshed fluid domain is shown in Figure 5-18.
50
Figure 5-18
Meshed Fluid Domain
The pressure profile is shown in Figures 5-19 and 5-20.
Figure 5-19
Pressure profile
51
Figure 5-20
Magnified view of pressure profile
Figure 5-21
Velocity profile
52
Figure 5-22
Magnified view of Velocity profile
Figure 5-23
Velocity vectors
53
Figure 5-24
Magnified view of velocity vectors
5.4 Comparison of velocity variation along the blade profile

A path was made along the three blade profiles constituting of more than 60 points in the same fashion as shown in Figure 3-7, and velocity was calculated at each and every point in order to study the velocity variation as the fluid passes by the blade. After that, the velocity variation curves for the three profiles were plotted on the same graph so that a fair comparison can be done between them. The graph showing the comparison of velocity for the three profiles is shown in Figure 5-25.
Figure 5-25
Velocity comparison of three blade profiles
54
5.5 Comparison of Pressure variation along the blade profile

Working on the scheme shown in Figure 3-7, more than 60 points were plotted and pressure was calculated at each and every point. Moreover, the pressure profiles for the three profiles were plotted on the same graph. The graph showing the pressure comparison is displayed in Figure 5-26.
Figure 5-26
Pressure comparison of three profiles
55
6 Performing Analysis for Different Blade Pitches having 60o blade exit angle
P P
The analysis for two more blade profiles has been explained in chapter 5. Now the effect of change in blade pitch on fluids pressure and velocity profile is to be found out. Therefore, the blade pitch was changed from 3.6 cm to 4.0 cm and 4.6 cm and analysis was performed for the same blade profile, the profile with an exit angle of 60o, same inlet
P P
/ outlet and boundary conditions. The mesh convergence criteria for 60o blade profile and 3.6 cm pitch and 4.6 cm pitch have already been explained in section 3.4.1 and section 5.2.
6.1 Mesh Convergence Criteria for 4.0 cm Blade Pitch

The graph plotted to meet the mesh convergence criteria is shown in Figure 6-1.
Figure 6-1
The meshed fluid domain is shown in Figure 6-2.
56
Figure 6-2
Meshed Fluid Domain
The pressure profile is shown in Figure 6-3 and Figure 6-4.
Figure 6-3
Pressure Profile
57
Figure 6-4
Magnified view of pressure profile
Figure 6-5
Velocity profile
58
Figure 6-6
Magnified view of velocity profile
Figure 6-7
Velocity vectors
59
Figure 6-8
Magnified view of velocity vectors
Moreover, the pressure and velocity profiles have also been explained for 3.6 cm blade pitch and 4.6 cm blade pitch.
6.2 Comparison of velocity variation along the blade profile

Again, working on the scheme shown in Figure 3-7, a path was plotted and velocity was calculated at 100 points along the path. The curves for velocity variation for three blade pitches are plotted on the same graph for the purpose of comparison. The graph is shown in Figure 6-9.
Figure 6-9
Velocity comparison of three blade pitches
60 Next, the pressure variation was plotted for the three pitches on the same graph. The curves are shown in Figure 6-10.
Figure 6-10
Comparison of pressure variation for the three blade pitches
61
7 Conclusions
The flow analysis for the blade profile generated using the design configuration is giving a minimum pressure of 8.6 kPa which is less than the atmospheric pressure. Thus, this profile does not seem suitable for turbine operation. According to the analytical results, the absolute velocity at exit should be 165 m/s, whereas the analysis performed in ANSYS is giving a velocity magnitude of 200 m/s. However, the analysis performed for larger blade pitches of 4.0 cm and 4.6 cm and blade profiles of 22o and 70o yield
P P P P
pressures which are much higher than atmospheric, indicating a net flow out of the turbine, but the velocity and pressure profiles do not seem ideal due to non-uniformities indicated in respective figures. Highest velocity rise, almost of 350 m/s and highest pressure drop of 0.4 bars are witnesses in the case of 60o and 70o blade profile with a
P P P P
blade pitch of 4.6 cm. The lowest velocity rise of 100 m/s and pressure rise of 0.2 bars is seen in 22o blade profile of 4.6 cm pitch. After performing analysis for a number of
P P
different profile shapes and pitches, the configuration with 60o blade exit angle and 4.6
P P
cm pitch is found to be the most suitable for turbine operation.
62
8 Future Recommendations
Uptill now, only fluid analysis for steady state, incompressible and adiabatic flow has been carried out. The results that have been obtained will be improved and error will be reduced on further mesh refinement. In order to correctly find out more realistic results regarding the pressure and velocity contours and velocity vectors, thermal, transient and compressible flow analysis needs to be carried out. Moreover, analysis is to be carried out in more than one fields, that is, the fluid and structural analyses need to be carried out in conjunction with one another. Similarly, the fluid and thermal analysis also need to be carried out together. The above mentioned fields of analysis can be performed together if an APDL program is developed for Coupled-Field Analysis.
63
9 REFERENCES
1. HIH Saravanamuttoo, GFC Rogers, H Cohen, Gas Turbine Theory, Pearson Education Ltd., Singapore, 2001. 2. C. A. Norman, R. H. Zimmerman, Introduction to Gas-Turbine and JetPropulsion Design, Harper & Brothers Publishers, New York, 1948. 3. Ahmad Y. al-Hassan, Taqi al-Din and Arabic Mechanical Engineering, Instiute
T T
for the History of Arabic Science, Aleppo University, 1976, pp. 34-35. 4. Saeed Moaveni, Finite Element Analysis, Theory and Application with ANSYS, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458, 1999. 5. Singiresu S. Rao, The Finite Element Method in Engineering, Third Edition, Butterworth Heinemann, USA, 1999. 6. Asnaf Qadar, Design of Laboratory Scale Axial Flow Turbine, Pages 81-84 and 44-71, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan, October 2008. 7. Sukhvinder Kaur Bhatti, Shyamala Kumari, et all Transient state Stress Analysis on an axial flow gas turbine blade and disk using finite element procedure, Department of mechanical and marine engineering, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pardesh, India, August 2006.
64
10 APPENDIX
10.1 APDL Program for Preprocessing of 60o, 3.6 cm pitch blade
P P
The following program has been written in APDL which performs all the steps before the solution. When input is read from the file, the solution and post processing are performed through GUI.
Program
/PREP7 k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.006176123 , 0.009338371 , 0.01248646 0.0156201 0.01873901 0.0218429 0.0249315 0.02800453 0.0310617 0.03410274 0.03712738 0.04013533 0.04312633 0.04610011 0.04905639 0.05199491 0.0549154 0.0578176 0.06070124 0.06356606 0.06461817 0.06561648 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.00144208 0.002914336 0.004416634 0.005948838 0.00751081 0.009102407 0.01072349 0.0123739 0.0140535 0.01576213 0.01749964 0.01926586 0.02106065 0.02288384 0.02473526 0.02661474 0.02852211 0.03045721 0.03241985 0.03440986 0.03510416 0.03587379
65 k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.06655563 0.06743055 0.06823651 0.06896917 0.06962459 0.07019922 0.07068997 0.0710942 0.07137404 0.07156459 0.07166462 0.07167348 0.07159112 0.07141805 0.07115542 0.07080491 0.07036881 0.06984994 0.06925166 0.06857786 0.06783289 0.0670216 0.06614925 0.06522148 0.06424431 0.06322408 0.06216741 0.06108114 0.06085861 0.06063383 0.06040734 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.0367146 0.03762207 0.03859129 0.03961705 0.0406938 0.04181575 0.04297684 0.04417081 0.04526931 0.04638676 0.04751591 0.04864946 0.04978004 0.05090033 0.05200307 0.0530811 0.05412743 0.05513529 0.05609813 0.05700972 0.05786414 0.05865585 0.05937973 0.06003107 0.06060565 0.06109976 0.06151018 0.06183425 0.06188511 0.0619248 0.06195322
66 k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.06017971 0.05995152 0.05912361 0.05832308 0.05757639 0.05690824 0.0563407 0.05589255 0.05557861 0.05540925 0.05539008 0.05552173 0.0556785 0.05578102 0.05582872 0.05582133 0.05575891 0.05564178 0.0554706 0.05524632 0.05497016 0.05464366 0.05409524 0.05351713 0.05290987 0.052274 0.05161013 0.05091887 0.05020085 0.04945674 0.04868722 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.0619703 0.061976 0.06190042 0.06167616 0.06131066 0.06081598 0.06020849 0.05950827 0.05873848 0.05792456 0.05709344 0.05627258 0.05554744 0.05481266 0.0540723 0.05333045 0.05259118 0.0518586 0.05113672 0.05042954 0.04974096 0.04907477 0.04808984 0.04712203 0.04617224 0.04524136 0.04433024 0.04343973 0.04257064 0.04172378 0.04089994
67 k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, k, K, 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.04789301 0.04771711 0.04754109 0.04736495 0.0471887 0.04701233 0.04683584 0.04665924 0.04648253 0.0463057 0.04612875 0.04395907 0.04177427 0.03957447 0.0373598 0.03513036 0.03288627 0.03062766 0.02835465 0.02606736 0.02376591 0.02145042 0.01912102 0.01677783 0.01442097 0.01205058 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0.04009988 0.0399281 0.03975644 0.0395849 0.03941348 0.03924217 0.03907098 0.03889992 0.03872897 0.03855814 0.03838743 0.03631087 0.03425022 0.03220558 0.03017707 0.0281648 0.02616887 0.02418939 0.02222647 0.02028021 0.01835071 0.01643808 0.01454242 0.01266383 0.01080241 0.008958266 0.007131488 0.005322176 0.003530427 0.001756337 0.0
0.009666775 , 0.007269686 , 0.004859442 , 0.00243617 0.0 , ,
68
!******************************** !PASSING SPLINES THROUGH KP'S !******************************** !------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------!Passing Splines requires picking of keypoints which can be established through FLST command !----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The total number of --items to be picked
FLST, 3 , 21 , 3
3 indicates that the entities to be picked are specifically Keypoints.
This number shows that the second argument of FLST command will be specified (21) FITEM, 3, 115 . . 3 specifies that Keypoints will be picked. The number of Keypoint to be picked.
FITEM, 3, n (where n = 1 to 19) . . FITEM, 3, 20 KP 115 will be connected to KP 1, KP will be connected to KP 2 and so on till KP 19.
BSPLIN,,P51X The corresponding field on the command will have P51X Label.
69
!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------! Since we want to pass more than 1 splines through the Blade Keypoints, we need ! to pick the next set of Keypoints through which second spline will pass. !---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FLST,3,30,3 FITEM,3,20 . . FITEM,3,n (where n = 21 to 48) . . FITEM,3,49 BSPLIN, ,P51X
!---------------------------------------------------------------------!Next set of Keypoints to be picked to pass the third spline !---------------------------------------------------------------------FLST,3,36,3 FITEM,3,49 . . FITEM,3,n (where n = 50 to 83) . . FITEM,3,84 BSPLIN, ,P51X !--------------------------!Next set of Keypoints
70 !--------------------------FLST,3,32,3 FITEM,3,84 . . FITEM,3,n (where n = 85 to 114) . . FITEM,3,115 BSPLIN, ,P51X LFILLT ,1 , 4 , 0.9E-3 The intersection of lines 1 & 4 was filleted at a radius of 0.9 mm
AL,1,2,3,4,5
Since the blade now constitutes of 5 lines, we create blade AREA using these 5 lines
!************************* !COPYING THE BLADE !************************* Total of 5 Blades were created
AGEN , 5 , 1 , , , 0.036
The distance of 3.6 cm was kept between blades which is basically blade pitch.
Area number of original blade !*************************** !COPYING THE CONCAVE SIDE
71 !*************************** FLST, 3 , 40 , 3 , ORDE , 2 FITEM,3,1 FITEM,3,-40 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,-0.036,0,0, ,0 KGEN,2,115,,,-0.036 40 KPs of the original blade were copied to the left at a distance of 3.6 cm
!******************************* !COPYING THE CONVEX SIDE OF LEFT MOST BLADE !******************************* FLST , 3 , 51 , 3 , ORDE , 2 FITEM,3,65 FITEM,3,-115 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,0.18,0,0, ,0 Similarly, 51 KPs of convex side of the original blade were copied at a distance of 18 cm.
!******************************* !MODELING THE CHANNEL !******************************* K,180,-0.05757,0.28616 K,181,0.114843,0.38616 KDELE,178 L,180,177 L,181,179 L,180,181 KPs 180 & 181 make the inlet of fluid Channel. There position is set by specifying suitable x and y coordinates.
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------!Since the Keypoints of Convex and Concave sides of the original Blade were copied, splines !needed to be passed through them so that they can become a part of the fluid channel as well. !--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
72 FLST,3,40,3 FITEM,3,138 . . FITEM,3,n (where n = 139 to 176) . . FITEM,3,177 BSPLIN, ,P51X
!--------------------!Next Spline !--------------------FLST,3,49,3 FITEM,3,179 . . FITEM,3,n (where n = 182 to 228) . . FITEM,3,229 BSPLIN, ,P51X
K,230,-0.238,-0.1157722 K,231,0.022,-0.1157722 L,230,138 L,229,231 L,230,231 KPs 230 & 231 determine the shape of outlet of fluid channel. Their position is specified by their x and y coordinates.
73
AL,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33
Fluid Channel area is creatred.
ASBA,6,1 ASBA,7,2 ASBA,1,3 ASBA,2,4 ASBA,1,5 Blade areas are subtracted from fluid channel area, since solid material will act as void for fluid material.
!**************** !3D MESHING !****************
ET,2,FLUID142
ET,1,FLUID141 MSHKEY,0 MSHAPE,1,2D LESIZE,29,0.004 LESIZE,1,0.004 LESIZE,6,0.004 LESIZE,11,0.004 LESIZE,16,0.004 LESIZE,30,0.004 LESIZE,4,0.004 LESIZE,9,0.004 LESIZE,14,0.004 LESIZE,19,0.004 LESIZE,24,0.004 LESIZE,21,0.004
74 LESIZE,28,0.007 LESIZE,33,0.01 LESIZE,26,0.01 LESIZE,27,0.01 LESIZE,31,0.01 LESIZE,32,0.007 AMESH,ALL
EXTOPT,ESIZE,5,1, EXTOPT,ACLEAR,1 VEXT,ALL,,,0,0,-0.0896,1,1,1 !******************* !MATERIAL PROPERTIES !******************* MP,DENS,1,0.424 MP,VISC,1,8.4E-06 MP,C,1,1.068 Since the blade height is 8.96 cm, the whole fluid domain is extruded to the same height.
!******************************** !FLOTRAN SOLUTION OPTIONS !********************************
FLDATA1,SOLU,TRAN,0
Steady State Flow
FLDATA1,SOLU,FLOW,1
Flow equation will be solved
FLDATA1,SOLU,TEMP,0
0 indicates Adiabatic flow
75 FLDATA1,SOLU,TURB,1 1 indicates Turbulent Flow
FLDATA1,SOLU,COMP,0
0 indicates Incompressible Flow
FLDATA1,SOLU,RDSF,1
Radiosity Equations will be solved
!***************** !ALGORITHM CONTROL !***************** FLDATA37,ALGR,SEGR,SIMPLEN !******************************** !EXECUTION CONTROL !******************************** FLDATA2,ITER,EXEC,10 FLDATA2,ITER,OVER,0 FLDATA2,ITER,APPE,0 FLDATA3,TERM,VX,0.01 FLDATA3,TERM,VY,0.01 FLDATA3,TERM,VZ,0.01 Termination criteria for Pressure Termination Criteria for 3 components of velocity. Total number of Iterations
FLDATA3,TERM,PRES,1E-012
FLDATA3,TERM,TEMP,-1E-08
Termination Criteria for Temperature
FLDATA3,TERM,ENKE,-0.01
Termination Criteria for Turbulent Kinetic Energy
76
FLDATA3,TERM,ENDS,-0.01 FLDATA5,OUTP,SUMF,10
Termination Criteria for Turbulent Dissipation Rate
!************************* !FLUID PROPERTIES !************************* FLDATA7,PROT,DENS,AIR-SI FLDATA13,VARY,DENS,0 FLDATA7,PROT,VISC,AIR-SI FLDATA13,VARY,VISC,0 FLDATA12,PROT,COND,CONSTANT FLDATA13,VARY,COND,0 FLDATA12,PROT,SPHT,CONSTANT FLDATA13,VARY,SPHT,0 FLDATA8,NOMI,COND,-1 FLDATA8,NOMI,SPHT,-1
!******************* !REFERENCE CONDITIONS !******************* FLDATA15,PRES,REFE,101350 FLDATA16,BULK,BETA,1E012 FLDATA17,GAMM,COMP,1.4 FLDATA14,TEMP,NOMI,867 FLDATA14,TEMP,TTOT,867 FLDATA14,TEMP,BULK,867 TOFF,460 Reference Pressure value
!******************
77 !AMBIENT CONDITIONS !****************** FLDATA36,AMBV,VX,0 FLDATA36,AMBV,VY,-0 FLDATA36,AMBV,VZ,0 FLDATA36, AMBV, PRES,101350 FLDATA36,AMBV,ENKE,1.0000000133514e-010 FLDATA36,AMBV,ENDS,1.0000000133514e-010 !FLDATA36,AMBV,TEMP,293 Ambient temperature value Zero velocity indicates that the fluid outside the modeled channel is at rest. Ambient pressure value
!*************************************** !APPLYING ZERO VELOCITY TO CERTAIN AREAS !*************************************** ASEL,S,,,4 ASEL,A,,,8 ASEL,A,,,13 ASEL,A,,,18 ASEL,A,,,23 ASEL,A,,,28 ASEL,A,,,33 ASEL,A,,,14 ASEL,A,,,19 ASEL,A,,,24 ASEL,A,,,29 ASEL,A,,,34 ASEL,A,,,12 ASEL,A,,,17 ASEL,A,,,22 ASEL,A,,,27 ASEL,A,,,32 ASEL,A,,,15 All these areas are outer walls of blades. On these areas, the fluid will just stick and will not move. That is why we apply No-slip condition on these areas, which means that all the three components of velocity will be zero.
78 ASEL,A,,,20 ASEL,A,,,25 ASEL,A,,,30 ASEL,A,,,35 ASEL,A,,,11 ASEL,A,,,16 ASEL,A,,,21 ASEL,A,,,26 ASEL,A,,,31
DA,ALL,VX,0,1 DA,ALL,VY,0,1 DA,ALL,VZ,0,1
1 indicates that zero magnitude of velocity will not only be applied to the internal nodes, but also on the edges of areas selected for no-slip condition.
ASEL,S,,,10 DA,ALL,PRES,1.65E5,1
Applying a pressure of 1.65 bars at inlet.
ASEL,S,,,3 ASEL,A,,,9 DA,ALL,ENDS,-1
Applying Symmetry Boundary Condition to the inlet channel.
ASEL,S,,,10 DA,ALL,VX,110,1 DA,ALL,VY,-300,1 DA,ALL,VZ,0,0 The fluid should enter the channel in such a way that the velocity vectors are parallel to the channel
79
ASEL,S,,,6 DA,ALL,PRES,1.3E5,1
Applying a pressure of 1.3 bars at outlet.
ASEL,S,,,5 ASEL,A,,,7 DA,ALL,ENDS,-1
Applying symmetry boundary condition to the outlet channel.
ASEL,S,,,ALL
All the areas are selected for further operatio through GUI. i.e. Solution and Post processing
80
Vita
The author of this thesis, Ammar Shafiq was born on August 15, 1983 in Karachi. He did his matriculation from Garisson Boys High School, Lahore Cantonment in 1999. He did his FSc from P. A. F Intermediate College Malir Cantonment, Karachi in 2001 and did his BE Mechanical Engineering from College of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Rawalpindi in 2005. He got registered in MS Nuclear Engineering at Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences (PIEAS), Islamabad in 2006. Hobbies of the author are playing Play Station 2 games like Medal of Honour Vanguard, Need for Speed Most Wanted and EA Cricket 2005, and also likes to cook food in his free time. He is very fond of watching English movies and creating animations.

Report

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

Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OPTIMIZATION OF TURBINE BLADE PROFILE BASED ON PITCH AND SHAPE

Department of Nuclear Engineering,

Signature: ________________________________ Name:___________________________________ Date: ____________________________________ Place: ___________________________________

OPTIMIZATION OF TURBINE BLADE PROFILE BASED ON

Signature: ________________________ PIEAS Co-Supervisor: Hafiz Laiq-ur-Rehman

History of Gas Turbines ...................................................................................... 2

Principle of Turbine Operation ........................................................................... 8

Velocity Triangles for Axial Flow Turbines..................................................... 10

Vortex Theory ................................................................................................... 11

Blade Profile ..................................................................................................... 16

Modeling the Channel of Fluid ......................................................................... 20

Fluid Properties ................................................................................................. 24

Execution Control ............................................................................................. 25

3.7.1 Termination Criteria.................................................................................. 25 3.8 Ambient Conditions .......................................................................................... 25 3.9

Boundary Conditions ........................................................................................ 26

Performing Analysis for Different Blade Profiles .................................................... 30

Mesh Convergence for 22 Profile.................................................................... 41

Mesh Convergence for 60o Profile.................................................................... 45

Mesh Convergence for 70 Profile.................................................................... 49

Comparison of velocity variation along the blade profile ................................ 53

Comparison of Pressure variation along the blade profile ................................ 54

Mesh Convergence Criteria for 4.0 cm Blade Pitch ......................................... 55

Comparison of velocity variation along the blade profile ................................ 59

Future Recommendations ......................................................................................... 62

APDL Program for Preprocessing of 60o, 3.6 cm pitch blade ......................... 64

Program ..................................................................................................................... 64 Vita.................................................................................................................................... 80

1.1 History of Gas Turbines

Heros Aeolipile [2]

1.1.1 Taqi al-Din and the First Steam Turbine

saniyya fi al-alat al-ruhaniyya (The Sublime Methods of Spiritual Machines) which he

Barbers British Patent 1791

1.1.2 Hurdles in Implementing Brayton Cycle

1.1.3 Reciprocating Gas Engine

1.1.4 Velocity Staged Steam Turbine by Charles G. Curtis

1.1.5 Gas Turbine by Armengaud Brothers

1.1.6 Holzwarths Design

1.1.7 Gas Turbine by Brown Boveri and Company

2 Axial Flow Turbines

2.1 Principle of Turbine Operation

Simple Gas Turbine System

2.2 Velocity Triangles for Axial Flow Turbines

One stage of an axial flow turbine

Velocity Triangles for the first stage

2.3 Vortex Theory

Changes in pressure and velocity across the annulus

2.3.1 Free vortex design

Variation of gas angles with radius

Blade profiles and velocity triangles at root and tip

3 Three-Dimensional Flotran CFD Analysis in ANSYS

3.1 Blade Profile

3.1.1 Keypoints in a Blade Profile

Blade Exit Angle Chord Blade Height Blade Pitch

2.98 cm 8.96 cm 3.6 cm

Keypoints tracing the blade profile

3.1.2 Passing B-Splines through Keypoints

B-Splines passed through Keypoints of Blade Profile

3.1.3 Creating Blade Area

Figure 3-3 Command: AL, L1, L2, , L10

Area created from B-Splines

3.2 Copying the Blade Area

Figure 3-4 Command: AGEN, 5, 1, , ,0.036

Five copies of the blade

3.3 Modeling the Channel of Fluid

is 60o. The fluid channel was modeled as shown in Figure 4-5:

Signature: ______________ Name:_ Date: Place: _______________