1

NUMERICAL COMPUTATION OF FORCES ACTING ON BLADES AS A FUNCTION

OF AXIAL CLEARANCE AND MINIMUM THROAT AREA


J. C. Garca
UAEM
Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mx
F. Aboites
CIATEQ
Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx


F. Sierra
UAEM
Cuernavaca, Morelos,Mx
H. Morales
CIATEQ
Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx
M. Gonzalez
CIATEQ
Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx



ABSTRACT
Its well known that in any stage of steam turbine the working
fluid comes trough the nozzles, which direct the flow towards
the blades causing loads on the blade surfaces to move the
rotor and produce useful work. These loads are oscillating in
time in a harmonic pattern and could be computed by knowing
the pressure around the blades in every moment. The variation
in the loads are due because the interaction between the nozzle
wakes with the rotating blades. In this paper, a 2D numerical
computation of forces acting on blades as a function of the
axial clearance and minimum throat area is presented. The
pressure field in a Curtis stage of a 300 MW steam turbine was
numerically computed. The Navier Stokes equations were
resolved in 2D using a commercial program based on the finite
volume method. The sliding mesh technique was used to take
into account the interaction between the nozzle wakes and the
blade motion. The forces acting on the blades were computed
for several axial clearances and throat area variations. It is
showed how these forces are affected by the variability of these
distances. Dependence of the forces from the pressure field
variation in time in the axial clearance is investigated. These
forces, which cause forced vibrations on blades, are expressed
as Fourier series in order to investigate the changes in these
forces.


INTRODUCTION
During the operation of a steam turbine, there are dynamic
interactions between the fluid work and the internal parts like
nozzles and blades. Some of those interactions cause
unsteadiness downstream which may induce vibrations on
blades, affecting the operation and performance of turbines.
A lot of blade vibrations are caused by pressure variations in
the axial clearance. One of the most important sources of
pressure variations for a blade row is the upstream nozzle wake
[1, 2]. The nozzle wake could be affected by the length of the
axial clearance and by the nozzle throat area. If the blade
vibrations have large amplitude could cause high alternating
stresses on blades, leading to failures by fatigue.
In this paper, a 2D Curtis time dependant numerical
simulation was used to compute the forces acting on blades
and caused by the passing nozzle wake. The total force on
blades as a function of axial clearance and nozzle throat area
are showed. The total force computed for different cases of
axial clearance and nozzle throat area was expressed as
Fourier series.
NOMENCLATURE
density
angular velocity
viscosity
u
r
relative velocity
u absolute velocity
r vector of position
x spatial coordinate
t time
g gravity
F force
f
i
frequency Hz
A
i
constants in a Fourier series
| phase angle

GOVERNING EQUATIONS AND MATHEMATICAL
MODEL
The numerical computations of the pressure field in the first
Curtis stage of a 300 MW steam turbine was performed
applying Fluent CFD code, using the RNG-- turbulence
model. To predict non-stationary phenomena, in the blade-
nozzle flow interaction, the sliding mesh technique was used
|3,4,5|. A relative reference frame was used to evaluate easily
the force acting on the blades. The flow field was numerically
resolved under steady-state and time-dependent simulations
using 2-D geometric models. The force acting on blades was
calculated using a user defined function, which integrates the
static pressure around the blade walls at every time step.
These force time-dependent data were analyzed using a Fast
Fourier Transform (FFT).
2
The computation domain is defined by: a) the stator zone and
b) the blade zone.
The Navier-Stokes equations in rotating domains, as the turbine
stage, include an additional term to take into account the fluid
acceleration inside the moving zones |6|.
The absolute and relative velocities in the rotating domain are
related by:
) ( r u u
r
O = (1)
The continuity equation may be used either with the absolute or
the relative velocity:
0 ) ( =
c
c
+
c
c
i
i
u
x t

(2)

In the stationary domain the momentum equation is written as:
( ) ( )
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
c
c
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
c
c
+
c
c
=
c
c
+
c
c
j
j
i j
i
j i
i j i
j
i
x
u
x x
u
x x
p
g u u
x
u
t

3
1
Instead in the rotating domain the momentum equation must
include the relative velocity
r
u and the angular velocity Oas
follows:

( ) ( )
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
c
c
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
c
c
+
c
c
= O +
c
c
+
c
c
j
j
i j
i
j i
i j ri
j
i
x
u
x x
u
x x
p
u u u
x
u
t

3
1
) (



GEOMETRY AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
The Curtis stage of a 300 MW steam turbine under study has a
mean radius of 0.94 m. The stator has 56 nozzles and a mean
height of 0.0228 m. The rotor has 84 blades and a mean height
of 0.027 m.
Only a segment of the last stage was simulated and periodic
boundary conditions were applied at every side of the stage
segment. The stage segment was defined by 2 nozzle and 3
blades (as shown in Fig. 1).


Figure 1 Geometrical aspects of the 2-D turbine Curtis
stage.

The boundary conditions at the stage were inlet pressure 15.7
MPa and outlet pressure was 11.1 MPa. The inlet and outlet
temperature of the steam were 805.55 K and 760.49 K,
respectively.


Figure 2 A 2D mesh of the Curtis Stage

The geometrical model was meshed with quadrilateral cells,
using a structured mesh. For meshing walls vicinity a
boundary layer was used. A zoom of the 2D mesh are shown
in Fig. 2. Meshes of different sizes were used to assure mesh
independence. A profile of static pressure, located at the
clearance nozzle-rotor, was used as a convergence criterion. A
mesh with 138 558 cells was selected after a convergence test
where another mesh of more than 750 thousands cells
converged to the same result.
A time step size of 1x10
-5
s was used during time-dependent
simulation, whereas that the rotor speed was 173.03 m/s.

RESULTS
The Figure 1 also shows as lines a through f, the spatial
location where the static pressure profiles were taken at the
axial nozzle-rotor clearance. These profiles were used to show
a 3D view of the pressure field in the axial clearance at given
instant. In order to show the pressure field as a time function,
monitors a-f were used.
These profiles and monitors were located in the axial
clearance as show in Table 1. For a giver profile or monitor
the dimensionless distance was calculated using the total axial
clearance and the distance between that profile or monitor and
the nozzle trailing edge.

Table 1 Dimensionless distance to locate the profiles and
monitors
Profiles or
monitors
Dimensionless distance in the axial clearance
a 0.009
b 0.17
c 0.35
d 0.5
e 0.7
(3)
(4)
3
f 0.9

In order to compute the total force on blades as function of
axial clearance, six different meshes were used. In each mesh a
different axial clearance was utilized as shown in Table 2. The
design axial clearance corresponds to the mesh labeled as AIII
D: 0.0163 m.

Table 2 Axial clearances used during the computations
Case Axial clearance [m]
AI 0.0113
AII 0.0123
AIII D 0.0163
AIV 0.0213
AV 0.0263
AVI 0.0313

In the case of the computations of blade forces as a function of
the nozzle minimum throat area, three different meshes were
used, as shown in Table 3. The design nozzle minimum throat
area corresponds to the mesh TH D: 0.000353 m
2
/nozzle. The
minimum throat area was calculated using the minimum length
T shown in Figure 1 and the nozzle height. The THI mesh
correspond to a increased throat area, caused by an
hypothetical nozzle wear, while the THII mesh correspond to a
reduced throat area, caused by an hypothetical deposit.

Table 3 Minimum nozzle throat area
Case nozzle minimum throat area
[m
2
]
TH D 0.000353
TH I 0.000418
TH II 0.000257

The static pressure profiles at a given time and for the design
axial clearance (AIII D) of the Curtis stage is shown in Fig 3.
The spatial position of the profiles inside the axial clearance
was shown in Fig. 1. The profiles show alternating zones of
low and high static pressure in the axial clearance (nozzle to
blade). The profiles of static pressure near (Fig. 3) the nozzle
trailing edge have two peaks which fall in the same position of
the nozzle. While the profiles near the blade leading edge have
three peaks which are coincident with the blade leading edge
position (Fig. 3). The profiles located at the middle of the axial
clearance (c or d) shows a transition in the number of peaks. It
is clear that the static pressure field in the axial clearance is
described by series of harmonic profiles that change their peaks
number.

Figure 3 Static pressure profiles in the axial clearance
design (Case AIII D)
Static pressure time variations across the axial clearance
monitored in fixed points, a-f, are shown in the Fig. 4. The
spatial location of fixed monitors was shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 4
shows how the static pressure field in front of blade is
changing as a function of time and since a relative reference
point of view. Figure 4 also shows that the peak magnitudes
of the static pressure are higher near the nozzle trailing edge
than near the blade leading edge.

Figure 4 Static pressure profiles in the axial clearance design
as time function (Case AIII D)
As expected, the static pressure field in the axial
clearance was affected by the variation of the length of axial
clearance and by the variation of the nozzle throat area. The
Figs. 5 and 6, shows the cases with major variation in the
pressure field. Fig. 5 corresponds to the case AI which has the
smallest axial clearance used during the simulations. Fig. 6
corresponds to the case THII which has the smallest nozzle
throat area used during the simulations. The maximum
amplitude variations for the static pressure profiles were
found in these two cases: AI and THII. These results also can
be observed in Fig. 7, which is a comparison of the f static
pressure profiles. Fig. 7 shows that the f profile has the
maximum amplitude for the cases AI and THII. At this point
one can infer that these two cases could cause vibrations with
major amplitude than the other cases.

0
.0
5
0
.0
6
0
.0
7
0
.0
8
0
.0
9
0
.1
0
0
.1
1
0
.1
2
0
.1
3
0
.1
4
0
.1
5
0
.1
6
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
f
e
d
c
b
a
Blade leading edge
Nozzle trailing edge

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
length into the simulation group [m]
s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
0.4570 0.4575 0.4580 0.4585 0.4590 0.4595 0.4600
0.74
0.78
0.81
0.85
0.89
0.93
0.96
1.00
s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
simulation time [s]
a
c
e
f

time variation of static pressure
across the axial clearance
4

Figure 5 Static pressure profiles in a reduced axial
clearance (Case AI)


Figure 6 Static pressure profiles in the a reduced throat
area (Case THII)

Figure 7 Comparison of the f static pressure profiles
in the axial clearance.

The forces acting on the blades were calculated by integration
of the static pressure on the blade walls using a defined user
function. The calculated forces for case A III D -design case-
are shown in the Fig. 8. The curves have a harmonic pattern
and can be expressed as a Fourier series.

Figure 8 Total force on blades in a Curtis stage as a
time function (Case A III D design case-)

Fig. 9 shows the total force as function of axial clearance. The
maximum total force was reached for the case AI, however
this case has the larger pressure amplitude across the axial
clearance (Fig 7). In contrast Fig. 10 shows the tangential
force as function of axial clearance. The tangential force
shows a minimum for the case AI, and reaches a maximum
for the case AVI (this has the maximum axial clearance)



Figure 9 Total force on blades in a Curtis stage as a
function of axial clearance

0
.0
5
0
.0
6
0
.0
7
0
.0
8
0
.0
9
0
.1
0
0
.1
1
0
.1
2
0
.1
3
0
.1
4
0
.1
5
0
.1
6
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
f
e
d
c
b
a
Blade leading edge
Nozzle trailing edge

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
length into the simulation group [m]
s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
0
.0
5
0
.0
6
0
.0
7
0
.0
8
0
.0
9
0
.1
0
0
.1
1
0
.1
2
0
.1
3
0
.1
4
0
.1
5
0
.1
6
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
f
e
d
c
b
a
Blade leading edge
Nozzle trailing edge

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
length into the simulation group [m]
s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
Nozzle trailing edge
Blade leading edge
s
t
a
t
i
c

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e


[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
length into the simulation group (m)
AIII D (Desing clearance)
AI (Reduced clearance)
AIV (Increased clearance)
THI (Increased throat area)
THII (Reduced throat area)
0
.5
0
1
0
0
0
.5
0
1
2
5
0
.5
0
1
5
0
0
.5
0
1
7
5
0
.5
0
2
0
0
0
.5
0
2
2
5
0
.5
0
2
5
0
0
.5
0
2
7
5
0
.5
0
3
0
0
0
.5
0
3
2
5
0
.5
0
3
5
0
0
.5
0
3
7
5
0
.5
0
4
0
0
0.73
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.91
0.96
1.00
f
o
r
c
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
simulation time [s]
total force
total force on blades in curtis stage as a time function
0
.0
1
0
0
0
.0
1
2
5
0
.0
1
5
0
0
.0
1
7
5
0
.0
2
0
0
0
.0
2
2
5
0
.0
2
5
0
0
.0
2
7
5
0
.0
3
0
0
0
.0
3
2
5
0.975
0.980
0.985
0.990
0.995
1.000
total force
t
o
t
a
l

f
o
r
c
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
axial clearance [m]
total force on blades in a Curtis stage
as functon of axial clearance
5

Figure 10 Tangential force on blades in a Curtis stage
as a function of axial clearance

Fig. 11 shows the total and tangential forces on blades as
function of the nozzle throat area. The total force reach a
maximum for the increased nozzle throat area, however the
maximum tangential force is reached at the design condition.
The forces data for the case AI, AIIID, AVI, THI and THII
were analyzed using Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) and the
results are showed in the Table 4, where the results of
frequency, phase angle and amplitude are tabulated. The
frequency calculated with FFT shows good agreement with the
nozzle passing frequency (56 nozzles X 60 Hz=3360 Hz).
The frequency and constants given in the table are the first
terms of the Fourier series as indicated by the next equation:
( ) | |

=
+ =
n
i
i i
t f Cos A A F
1
0
2 | t (5)

Figure 11 Total and tangential forces on blades in a
Curtis stage as a function of minimum throat area

The term A
i
in the Table 4 states the force amplitude around the
term A
0
. Table 4 shows that the term A
i
with more amplitude
variation corresponds to the case AVI (reduced axial
clearance) and to the case THII (reduced nozzle throat area).
Table 4 Terms of the Fourier series calculated trough FFT
of the forces calculated using a 2D numerical simulation
Case A
0
|dimensi
onless|
A
i
|dimensi
onless|
f
i
|Hz|
|
A III D 1.000 0.119 3357.860 156.524
A VI 1.004 0.025 3365.301 -146.185
A I 1.019 0.254 3357.864 -118.353
Th I 1.072 0.130 3365.301 104.443
Th II 0.904 0.273 3365.301 33.231

Using the results tabulated in the Table 4 with equation (5),
one may reproduce the forces calculated using fluid dynamics
simulation in additional studies, like fatigue life estimation.


CONCLUSIONS
The two dimensional unsteady flow across the axial clearance
in a Curtis stage of 300 MW steam turbine was numerically
investigated. The computations show that the pressure
profiles in the axial clearance have an oscillatory pattern. For
a given instant, a picture of pressure field shows static
pressure profiles with different number of peaks or valleys
across the clearance. Near the nozzle trailing edge the profiles
have a number of peaks equal to the nozzles and at the
vicinity of the blade leading edge, the profiles pressure have a
number of peaks equal to the number of blades at that
segment.
The pressure profiles as time function in the axial clearance
show that pressure fields in front of the blades have harmonic
variations with a frequency equal to the nozzle passing
frequency.
In the case of the axial clearance variations, the maximum
total force was reached for the minimum axial clearance,
however this case has the minimum tangential force and
shows large pressure variations across the axial clearance,
which could cause forces acting on blades with large
amplitude.
Talking about of the nozzle throat variation, the maximum
total force was reached for the case with increased throat area
(THI), while the maximum pressure variations across the axial
clearance were find for the case with reduced throat area.
However this two cases show a tangential force lesser than the
case with the design nozzle throat area.

REFERENCES
|1| Rangwalla, A.A. and Rai, M.M., A numerical analysis of
tonal acoustics in rotor stator interactions, Journal of Fluids
and Structures, 1993.
0
.0
1
0
0
0
.0
1
2
5
0
.0
1
5
0
0
.0
1
7
5
0
.0
2
0
0
0
.0
2
2
5
0
.0
2
5
0
0
.0
2
7
5
0
.0
3
0
0
0
.0
3
2
5
0.950
0.955
0.960
0.965
0.970
0.975
0.980
0.985
0.990
0.995
1.000
tangential force on blades in a Curtis stage
as functon of axial clearance
t
a
n
g
e
n
t
i
a
l

f
o
r
c
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
axial clearance [m]
tangential force
0.00024 0.00027 0.00030 0.00033 0.00036 0.00039
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

f
o
r
c
e

[
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
]
minimum throat area
total force
tangential force
6
|2| Chaluvadi, V.S.P., Kalfas, A.I. and Hodson H.P., Vortex
transport and blade interactions in high pressure turbines,
ASME, Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol 126, 2004.
|3| Kosowski, K. and Stepien, R., Theoretical investigations
into flows in rotor blade shroud clearance, Transactions of The
Institute of Fluid-Flow Machinery, No. 113, Gdansk, Poland,
2003.
|4| Lampart, P.et al., Unsteady forces acting on rotor blades of
a large power steam turbine control stage at different levels of
partial admission, Transactions of The Institute of Fluid-Flow
Machinery, No. 114, Gdansk, Poland , 2003.
|5| Fluent users guide, version, 6.1, 2003
|6| Pantakar, S.V., Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow,
McGrawHill, NY, 1980.
7