647 views

Uploaded by mihailmi

© All Rights Reserved

- Bladegen Toturials
- Analysis of Radial Compressor Options For
- Radial-Inflow Turbine Tutotial
- 53530662-Turbomachinery
- ANSYS Turbomachinery CFD System - 14.5 Update
- Turbomachinery
- Solman Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Turbomachinery - S.L. Dixon - 5th
- Principles of Turbo Machinery
- M._Rades_-_Dynamics_of_Machinery_2
- Aerodynamic design of centrifugal compressor
- Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Tur (1)
- CFD applied to Turbo machinery
- Analytical Design of Radial Turbine Design-nasa
- Ansys Turbogrid
- Chapter 3 Two Dimensional Cascades 1975 Worked Examples in Turbomachinery
- Ansys Blade Modeler
- Turbomachine Course
- fluid mechanics and thermodynamics of turbomachinery 5 ed solution
- Ansys Advanced Analysis Technique
- BladeModeler 12.0 Lecture 1 Introduction

You are on page 1of 189

CARLETON UNIVERSITY

MECH 5401

TURBOMACHINERY

S.A. Sjolander

January 2010

CARLETON UNIVERSITY

Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering

MECH 5401 - Turbomachinery

COURSE CONTENTS

Week

1

Introduction. Review of similarity and non-dimensional parameters. Ideal versus non-ideal gases.

Velocity triangles.

Energy considerations and Steady Flow Energy Equation. Angular momentum equation. Euler

pump and turbine equation. Definitions of efficiency.

Preliminary design: meanline analysis at design point. Stage loading considerations. Blade

loading and choice of solidity. Degree of reaction.

Correlations for performance estimation at the design point for: axial compressors, axial turbines

and centrifugal compressors. Approximate off-design performance: compressor maps and turbine

characteristics.

Two-dimensional flow in turbomachinery. Spanwise flow effects. Simple radial equilibrium. Freevortex and forced-vortex analysis.

equations and computational implementation; role in design.

Blade-to-blade flow. Blade profile design considerations: boundary layer behaviour and diffusion

limits; significance of laminar- to turbulent-flow transition.

Dynamics (CFD) in turbomachinery design and analysis. Limitations of CFD.

Compressible flow effects: choking in turbomachinery blade rows; shock waves in transonic

compressors and turbine; shock-induced boundary layer separation; limit load in axial turbines.

Effects of compressibility on losses and other flow aspects.

10

Unsteady flows in turbomachinery. Fundamental role of unsteadiness. Significance of wakeblade interaction. Approximate analysis of unsteady behaviour of compression systems: dynamic

system instability (surge); factors affecting compressor surge.

11

Current issues in turbomachinery aerodynamics. Very high loading for weight and blade-count

reduction. Effects of gaps, steps, relative wall motion and purge flow on blade passage flows.

12

Passive and active flow control to extend range of performance. Aero-thermal interactions. Multidisciplinary optimization.

S.A. Sjolander

January 2010

CARLETON UNIVERSITY

MECH 4305 - Fluid Machinery

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.0

Course Objectives

Positive-Displacement Machines vs Turbomachines

Types of Turbomachines

2.1

2.2

Application to Turbomachinery

2.2.1

2.2.2

2.2.3

2.2.4

2.2.5

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

3.0

Effect of Reynolds Number

Performance Curves for Incompressible-Flow Turbomachines

Non-Dimensional Parameters for Compressible Flow Machines

Performance Curves for Compressible-Flow Turbomachines

Classification of Turbomachines - Specific Speed

Selection of Machine for a Given Application - Specific Size

Cavitation

THERMODYNAMICS

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

Angular Momentum Equation

Euler Pump and Turbine Equation

Components of Energy Transfer

Velocity Diagrams and Stage Performance Parameters

3.5.1

3.5.2

3.5.3

3.5.4

3.5.5

3.5.6

Degree of Reaction

de Haller Number

Work Coefficient

Flow Coefficient

Choice of Stage Performance Parameters for Design

3.6

Efficiency of Turbomachines

3.6.1

3.6.2

4.0

Incompressible-Flow Machines

Compressible-Flow Machines

4.1

4.2

Introduction

Control Volume Analysis for Axial-Compressor Blade Section

4.2.1

4.2.2

4.3

4.3.1

4.3.2

4.3.3

4.3.4

4.4

4.5

Loss Estimation Using Howells Correlations

Loss Estimation Using NASA SP-36 Correlations

Effects of Incidence and Compressibility

Relationship Between Losses and Efficiency

4.7.1

4.7.2

4.8

4.9

Introduction

Blade Design and Analysis Using Howells Correlations

Blade Design and Analysis Using NASA SP-36 Correlations

4.6.1

4.6.2

4.6.3

4.6.4

4.6.5

4.7

Meanline Analysis

Blade Geometries Based on Euler Approximation

Off-Design Performance of the Stage

Spanwise Blade Geometry

Empirical Performance Predictions

4.5.1

4.5.2

4.5.3

4.6

Force Components

Circulation

Surge

Analysis and Design of Low-Solidity Stages - Blade-Element Methods

5.0

AXIAL-FLOW TURBINES

5.1

5.2

5.3

Introduction

Idealized Stage Geometry and Aerodynamic Performance

Empirical Performance Predictions

5.3.1

5.3.2

5.3.3

6.0

6.1

6.2

6.3

Introduction

Idealized Stage Characteristics

Empirical Performance Predictions

6.3.1

6.3.2

6.3.3

6.3.4

6.3.5

6.3.6

7.0

Choice of Solidity - Blade Loading

5.3.2.1

Zweifel Coefficient

5.3.2.2

Ainley & Mathieson Correlation

Losses

Rotor Inlet Geometry

Rotor Outlet Width

Rotor Outlet Metal Angle - Slip

Choice of Number of Vanes - Vane Loading

Losses

7.1

7.2

7.3

Appendix A:

Appendix B:

Appendix C:

Appendix D:

Appendix E:

Appendix F:

Introduction

Static Stability

Dynamic Stability - Surge

Curve and Surface Fits for Howells Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades

C4 Compressor Blade Profiles

Curve and Surface Fits for NASA SP-36 Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades

NACA 65-Series Compressor Blade Profiles

Curve and Surface Fits for Kacker & Okapuu Loss System for Axial Turbines

Centrifugal Stresses in Axial Turbomachinery Blades

CARLETON UNIVERSITY

MECH 4305 - Fluid Machinery

Recommended Texts

S.L. Dixon, Fluid Mechanics, Thermodynamics of Turbomachinery, 5th ed., Elsevier ButterworthHeineman, 2005.

A short, inexpensive book which covers all the major topics, but sometimes a little too briefly.

Somewhat short on design information and data. Clearly written.

H.I.H. Saravanamuttoo, G.F.C.Rogers, H. Cohen, and P.V. Straznicky, Gas Turbine Theory, 6th ed.,

Pearson Education, London, 2008.

About gas turbine engines generally, but there are useful chapters on the three types of

turbomachines which are used most often in these engines: axial and centrifugal compressors and

axial turbines. These chapters contain methods and correlations which can be used in preliminary

aerodynamic design.

D. Japikse and N.C. Baines, Introduction to Turbomachinery, Concepts-NREC Inc./Oxford University

Press, 1994.

A recent book published for use with a short course offered by Concepts-NREC, a company in

Vermont which develops courses on various turbomachinery topics for industry. Reasonably

good. One of the few books on turbomachinery fluid mechanics which also addresses mechanical

design aspects (centrifugal stress, creep, durability, vibrations etc.).

B. Lakshminarayana, Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer of Turbomachinery, Wiley, New York, 1996.

A hefty, recent book written by the head (recently deceased) of turbomachinery research at Penn

State University. The emphasis is on more advanced topics, particularly computational

techniques. Brief and somewhat weak on fundamentals and the concepts used in preliminary

design. For these reasons, not well suited as a companion to this course. However, someone

continuing in turbomachinery aerodynamic design will probably want to have a copy of the book

in his/her personal library.

Additional Readings

The Library has a number of older textbooks on turbomachinery in which you may find material

of interest: see for example the books by Vavra, Csanady and Balje. The following books are ones I have

found particularly useful over the years. Some of them cover topics discussed in the present course while

others extend the material to topics which are beyond its scope.

D.G. Shepherd, Principles of Turbomachinery, Macmillan, Toronto, 1956.

A deservedly popular text book in its day. Now out of print, as well as somewhat out-of-date.

Nevertheless, it contains a lot of useful material and very lucid discussions on most topics it

covers.

The following two, relatively short books were written by the man who subsequently helped to

found the Whittle Turbomachinery Laboratory at Cambridge University. He spent a number of

years as its Director. Good discussion of the design techniques which were current at the time

(and which still play a part in the early stages of design). Lots of practical engineering

information. They remain in-print thanks to an American publisher who specializes in reprinting

classic technical books which remain of value.

J.H. Horlock, Axial Flow Compressors, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics, Butterworth, London,

1958, (reprinted by Krieger).

J.H. Horlock, Axial Flow Turbines, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics, Butterworth, 1966, (reprinted

by Krieger).

The next book is by a more recent Director of the Whittle Laboratory. In the Preface he explicitly

disclaims any intention to present design information. However, it presents a detailed, relatively

up-to-date discussion of the physics of the flow in axial compressors, which is still very useful.

N.A. Cumpsty, Compressor Aerodynamics, Longman, Harlow, 1989.

The following book on radial machines (both compressors and turbines) is also published

published by Longman, like Cumpsty and Cohen, Rodgers & Saravanamuttoo. It is the least

satisfactory of the three, and is apparently going out of print. Nevertheless, worth being aware of

since most other available books on radial turbomachinery are quite old and rather out-of-date.

A. Whitfield and N.C. Baines, Design of Radial Turbomachines, Longman, Harlow, 1990.

To the extent that they present design information, the books by Horlock and Cumpsty reflect

largely British practice. The North American approach to axial compressor design was developed

by NASA (then called NACA) through the 1940's and 50's. The results are summarized in the

famous SP-36, and many axial compressors continue to be designed according to it.

NASA SP-36, Aerodynamic Design of Axial Compressors, 1956.

AGARD, the scientific arm of NATO, organizes conferences, lecture series and specialist courses

on many aerospace engineering topics, including turbomachinery aerodynamics. The following

are two particularly useful publications which have come out of this activity.

A.S. Ucer, P. Stow and Ch. Hirsch eds., Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics of Turbomachinery,

Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, Vol. I and II, 1985.

AGARD-LS-167, Blading Design for Axial Turbomachines, 1989.

ENERGY TRANSFER TO THE FLUID

Fans

Blowers

Gases

Incompressible flow

Pumps

Liquids

Compressors

Gases

Compressible flow

Propellers

Both

Both

Turbines

Turbo-expanders

Wind mills/Wind turbines

Non-dimensional parameters allow performance data to be presented more compactly. They can also

be used to identify the connections between related flows, such as the flow around a scale model and that

around the corresponding full-scale device (sometimes called the prototype).

Two flows are completely similar (dynamically similar) if all non-dimensional ratios are equal for

the two flows. This includes geometric ratios, which are needed for geometric similarity. For example, if

the flows around two geometrically-similar airfoils are dynamically similar, then

lift force

L

=

Similarly for other force ratios, velocity ratios, etc.

For a given case there is only a limited number of independent non-dimensional ratios: these are the

criteria of similarity. If the criteria of similarity are equal for two flows, all other non-dimensional ratios

will also be equal, since they are dependent on the criteria of similarity.

Finding Criteria of Similarity:

(1)

List all the independent physical variables that control the flow of interest (based on experience,

judgment, physical insight etc.). For example, consider again the airfoil flow. Assume that the flow

is compressible and the working fluid is a perfect gas.

For a particular airfoil shape, the flow is completely determined by:

c - chord

- angle of attack

U - freestream velocity

- fluid density

- fluid viscosity

R - gas constant

a - speed of sound

Note that the pressure and temperature are not quoted.

U

For a perfect gas,

P = RT

a = RT

D

M

c

Thus, by specifying a, and R, we have implicitly specified T. Similarly, with and R specified, and

T implicitly specified, then P is implicitly specified through the perfect gas law. Therefore, for our

particular choice of independent variables, P and T are just dependent variables. All other quantities,

such as the lift, L, and drag, D, likewise depend uniquely on the values of the independent variables.

(2)

Buckinghams Theorem gives the number of independent non-dimensional ratios which exist:

If

r = no. of basic dimensions (eg. Mass, Length, Time, Temp. (), etc.)

Then

n=8

r = 4 (M, L, T, )

(n - r) = 4

ie. there are 4 criteria of similarity

eg. for the airfoil, we can non-dimensionalize the density as follows:

LT

M

L

L

3

M

T

L

U c

similarity

is also already non-dimensional

U

a

Mach number , M

Thus, for the airfoil 4 suitable criteria of similarity are: Re, M, , and . If these are matched between

two geometrically similar airfoils, the two flows will be dynamically similar.

(3)

All other non-dimensional ratios are then functions of the criteria of similarity.

Take each dependent variable in turn and non-dimensionalize it using the independent variables.

eg. for the drag of airfoil (per unit span), D

1

U2

1

=

c 1

L

L3

T2 M

T2

L2

1

LL

then C D = f ( Re, M , , )

D

U 2 c

or

D

1

U 2 c

2

( CD )

Similarly for all other dependent non-dimensional ratios (CL, Cm, etc.).

Any non-dimensional ratios we develop could also be combined, by multiplication, division etc., to

form other valid non-dimensional ratios. This does not provide any new information, simply a rearrangement

of known information. However, the resulting ratios may be useful alternative ways of looking at the

information. For example, for the airfoil, having derived CD and CL then

CL

CD

L

D

2.2

APPLICATION TO TURBOMACHINERY

2.2.1

For now, consider just pumps, fans, and blowers. Hydraulic turbines will be discussed briefly in

Section 2.4.

D

Q

W&

Q

For a given geometry, the independent variables that determine performance are usually taken as

.

D N (or ) Q-

fluid density

fluid viscosity

machine speed; revs or rads per unit time

volume flow rate through the machine

Note that the choice of independent variables is somewhat arbitrary. One way to visualize what are

possible independent variables and what are dependent variables is to imagine a test being conducted on the

machine in the laboratory. The variables which, when set, fully determine the operating point of the machine

is then one possible set of independent variables. In the laboratory test, one might set the rotational speed (by

controlling the drive motor) and the flow rate (by throttling at the inlet or outlet ducts). With N and Q set, the

head or pressure rise produced or power absorbed are then dependent functions of the characteristics of the

machine. Alternatively, if the throttling valve is adjusted to produce a particular pressure rise, then we lose

control over the flow rate and it becomes a dependent variable. The independent variables listed above are the

most common choices for incompressible flow machines that raise the pressure of the fluid. All other

variables are then dependent. For example

H W& T -

total head rise across machine (or sometimes, total pressure rise)

shaft power absorbed by the machine

torque absorbed by the machine

efficiency of the machine

H = f 1 ( D, N , Q, , )

W& = f 2 ( D, N , Q, , ) etc.

Applying Buckingham Theorem:

n=5

(1)

Flow rate:

1

N

L3

T

1

1

D

N D3

1

L3

(2)

N DD

=

N D2

All other non-dimensional ratios or coefficients then depend on these two criteria of similarity.

For power coefficient (non-dimensional work per unit time)

W&

1

N3

M L2

2

T

T

then

W&

N 3 D5

T3

1

=

L3

M

1

D5

W&

N 3 D5

1

L5

Q N D2

,

f

3

ND

Obviously, rather than could have been used to cancel the M appearing in W

the resultant power coefficient would be the one derived here multiplied by the Reynolds number.

Next consider the total head rise, H, across the machine. By definition, the total head H is given by

P V2

+

+z

g 2g

= static head + dynamic head + elevation head

H=

and H can be interpreted physically as the mechanical energy content per unit weight. However, the energy

content is more commonly expressed on a per unit mass basis:

g H = mechanical energy per unit mass

g H

L

T

T2

1

1

D

g H

N 2 D2

1

L2

Sometimes the head rise H is simply written H. As with the power coefficient, the head coefficient is a

dependent function of the two criteria of similarity:

gH

or 2 2

N D

g H

N 2 D2

Q N D2

,

f

3

ND

The g is also sometimes dropped to give H/N2D2, but the head coefficient is then dimensional and will take

different values in different systems of units.

A corresponding total pressure coefficient can be obtained from

g H

2

N D

g H

N 2 D2

P0

N 2 D2

Using the conventional definitions, efficiency is already non-dimensional. For pumps, fan and

blowers, the efficiency is usually defined as:

pump

input power

fluid power

shaft power

and

fluid power = mass flow rate mechanical energy change per unit mass

Thus

m&

Qg H

pump

gH

Qg H

W&

Q g H

N D3 N 2 D2

=

W&

N 3 D5

=

Power Coefficient

turb

=

=

shaft power

W&

=

fluid power

Qg H

Power Coefficient

Flow Coefficient Head Coefficient

2.2.2

We have shown that in general for incompressible flow:

g H

W&

,

, , etc. =

N 2 D2 N 3 D5

Q

N D2

fns

,

N D3

Q

fns

, Re

3

ND

The flow in most turbomachines is highly turbulent. Therefore, most frictional effects are due to

turbulent mixing. Viscosity has a minor direct effect and losses tend to vary slowly with Re: recall from the

Moody chart that in pipe flow the friction factor varies much more slowly with Re for turbulent flow than for

laminar flow. Thus, if the Reynolds numbers are high and the differences in Re are not too large between the

machines being compared, Re is often neglected as a criterion of similarity. We can then use, as an

approximation

g H

W&

,

, , etc. =

N 2 D 2 N 3 D5

Q

fns

only

3

ND

Where Re variations can not be neglected, a number of empirical relations have been proposed for

correcting for the effect of Re on efficiency. These corrections typically take the form

1 P Re M

=

1 M Re P

(1)

where ReM is the smaller of the two values of the Reynolds number and n varies with the type of machine and

Reynolds number level. For example, the ASME Power Test Code (PTC-10, 1965) suggests the following

values:

n = 0.1 for centrifugal compressors

n = 0.2 for axial compressors

if ReM$ 105, where Re = ND2/< (ie. the tip Reynolds number). Note that (1) indicates that efficiency improves

with increasing Re.

2.2.3

Relationships such as

g H

N 2 D2

Q

f

(neglecting Re)

3

ND

imply that if we test a family of geometrically-similar, incompressible-flow machines (different sizes, different

speeds etc.), the resulting data will fall on a single line if expressed in non-dimensional form. For example, the

non-dimensional coefficients for a pump of fan might appear as follows (we will discuss later why the curves

will have the particular trends shown):

Coefficients

W&

N 3 D 5

gH

N 2 D2

Q

N D3

The thick curves are used to suggest variations which could be due to the neglected Re effects, and perhaps

some secondary effects which were not included in the original list of independent parameters (e.g. mild

compressibility effects for a fan or blower). The dashed line indicates the likely "design point": the preferred

operating point, since the efficiency is best there.

Because of the universality of the performance curves, the tests could be conducted for a single

machine and the results used to predict the performance of geometrically similar machines of different sizes,

different operating speeds, and even with different working fluids.

Note again that there is flexibility in the choice of dependent and independent parameters. See P.S. #1

Q 1 for the form of non-dimensional parameters which are often used for hydraulic turbines.

2.2.4

We now develop the criteria of similarity for compressible-flow turbomachines. Assuming the

working fluid is a perfect gas, a suitable list of independent variables which control performance is as follows:

a 01 P01

N , D, m& , or , or , , R,

T01 01

where

m& = mass flow rate (rather than Q as measure of flow rate)

a 01 = RT01

P01 = 01 RT01

(perfect gas)

(N.B. temperatures and pressures must be absolute values)

Then from the Buckingham Theorem:

n=8

r=4

(M, L, T, )

n - r = 4 (4 criteria of similarity)

(1)

ND

a 01

(2)

m&

01 D 2 a 01

(3)

D 1

N D2

=

or we could use 01

again

m&

Re

(4) =

Cp

Cv

All other performance coefficients are then functions of these four coefficients (as always, geometrical

similarity is assumed).

The main change from incompressible-flow machines is in the form of the pressure change

coefficient. Instead of the head or total pressure coefficient, we conventionally use the pressure ratio:

P02

P01

Then

ND

m&

,

, Re, (1)

fns

2

a 01 01 a 01 D

P02

W&

,

, , etc. =

P01 01 N 3 D 5

The form of the independent coefficients used here is very general. The main assumption that has

been made is that the working fluid is a perfect gas. We can make use of some of the perfect gas expressions

to rewrite the independent parameters in a somewhat more convenient form:

(1) Speed coefficient:

ND

a 01

ND

RT01

D

T01 R

m&

01 a 01 D 2

m&

P01

RT01 D 2

RT01

m& T01

P01

R 1

D2

P02

W&

, , etc. =

,

P01 01 N 3 D 5

N

fns

T01

m& T01

P01

R 1

, Re,

2

D

(2)

This is the form of the parameters that is appropriate for the most general case, where we are relating the

performance of geometrically-similar, compressible-flow turbomachines of different sizes and operating with

different working fluids (both of which are perfect gases).

In practice, the parameters are often simplified somewhat according to specific circumstances.

In many cases, the same working fluid (eg. air) will be used for both the model and prototype. Thus,

R and are often known constants and it is somewhat tedious continually to have to include them in the

calculation of the coefficients. If we then omit the known, constant fluid properties we can write:

P02

W&

,

, , etc. =

P01 01 N 3 D 5

N D m& T01

fns

,

, Re

2

T01 P01 D

(3)

This form of the coefficients is suitable for relating geometrically-similar machines with different sizes but

with the same working fluid. Note that by assuming the same working fluid, we have reduced the number of

criteria of similarity by one. The main disadvantage to this form of the coefficients is that the speed and flow

coefficients are now dimensional and we must specify what system of units we are working in.

If the performance curves are intended to represent the performance of a particular machine operating

at different inlet conditions, then D is a known constant and is often omitted:

P02

W&

,

, , etc. =

P01 01 N 3 D 5

N m& T01

fns

,

, Re

P01

T01

(4)

This is the form of the independent coefficients typically used to present the performance characteristics of the

compressors and turbines for gas turbine engines.

As with incompressible-flow machines, it is sometimes possible to neglect Re as a criterion of

similarity (by the same arguments used in Section 2.2.2). Note that the speed and flow coefficients are again

dimensional.

2.2.5

If we can neglect the Reynolds number effects, Eqns. (3) and (4) indicate that our performance curves

will take the form:

P02

P01

ND m

& T01

,

f 1

2

T01 P01 D

etc.

Thus, whereas our performance tests for the incompressible-flow machines led to a single curve for each

dependent performance coefficient, for compressible-flow machines we will obtain a family of curves.

The resulting performance diagrams for compressible-flow compressors and turbines would then look

as follows (again, we will discuss the reasons for the detailed shape of the characteristics later in the course):

(a) Compressor ("Compressor Map")

P02

P01

LINE OF CONSTANT

ND

SURGE LINE

(UPPER LIMIT OF

STABLE OPERATION)

T01

CHOKING

ND

INCREASING

T01

& T01

m

P01D 2

Implicitly, this map applies for one value of some reference Reynolds number. If the effects of Re can not be

neglected, then we would have to generate a series of such graphs, each one containing the performance data

for a different value of the reference Re.

P02

P01

STATORS CHOKED

LINES OF CONSTANT

ND

T01

& T01

m

P01D 2

In a gas turbine engine, the pressure ratio developed by the compressor is applied across the turbine at

the hot end of the engine. The mass flow rate swallowed by the turbine and its power output are then

dependent functions of the turbine characteristics. That is, as far as the turbine is concerned the pressure ratio

is imposed and is effectively an independent parameter. When presenting performance data, we generally plot

independent parameters on the x axis and dependent parameters on the y axis, as was done on the

compressor map. By this argument, the turbine characteristic should be presented as:

& T01

m

P01D 2

CONSTANT

ND

T01

P02

P01

and this is in fact the way turbine characteristics are generally presented in the gas turbine business.

2.3

The performance diagrams discussed in the earlier sections present a wide range of conditions at

which the machine can operate. For example, the compressor in the last section can operate stably at any point

to the right of the surge line. The precise point at which a turbomachine actually operates depends on the load

to which it is connected.

(a)

The simplest case is a compressor or pump connected to a passive load (e.g. pipe line with valves,

elbows etc.). At the steady-state operating point we must have:

(1)

Qmachine = Qload (or, for compressible flow, m& machine = m& load )

(2)

& , characteristics

Thus, the operating point is where the machine and load H vs Q , or P0 vs m

intersect.

e.g. Suppose a pump is supplying flow to a pipe line. The head drop along the pipe varies with V2

(or Q2), as determined from the friction factor (e.g. Moody chart) and the loss coefficients of any other

components in the pipe system. The resulting H vs Q variation is known as the load line for the

system. The head rise produce by the pump is a function of the flow rate and the rotational speed.

Then if the pump is run at N1, the operating point will be A, etc.

H

LOAD LINE

PUMP CHARACTERISTICS

AT CONSTANT SPEED

B

N3

A

N2

N1

(b)

For a gas turbine engine, the operating points of the compressor and turbine are determined by

compressor/turbine matching conditions (a propulsion nozzle will also influence operating points - see

Saravanamuttoo et al., Ch. 8 & 9).

& fuel

m

COMBUSTOR

W& C

COMPRESSOR

&C

m

W& out

TURBINE

&T

m

For the simple shaft-power engine shown, the matching conditions would be:

m& T

NC

W&

NT

= W& C + W& out

(c)

In hydro-power installations, total head across the turbine is imposed by the difference in elevation

between reservoir and tailwater pond (minus any losses in the penstock). Since

W& T = T gQ H

to produce varying power (according to electrical demand), it is necessary to vary the equilibrium Q, at fixed

H. Furthermore, since the electricity must be generated at fixed frequency, we do not have the option of

varying N to achieve different operating points. The solution to this is to vary the geometry of the machine.

This can be done with variable inlet guide vanes or with variable rotor blade pitch.

DIFFERENT BLADE SETTINGS

H

1

LOAD LINE

NEGLECTING FRICTION

LOAD LINE

INCLUDING FRICTION

A pump is connected to the piping system shown. What flow rate of water will be pumped for

the two valve settings?

VALVE K = 1, K=10

K = 0.9

K = 0.9

K = 0.9

K = 1 (EXIT LO SS)

K = 0.9

6 m.

WATER

K = 0.9

PUMP

Pipe diameter:

dpipe := 50

Pipe length:

L := 125

Viscosity (water):

:= 10

mm

(smooth)

m

m2/s

The pump has the characteristics shown in the plot, and the following information applies to the

pump:

Pump speed:

Flow coefficient:

N := 1750 RPM

Q

3

3

N D

Head coefficient:

Pump Characteristics

D := 30 cm

g H

2 2

N D

Head Coefficient

Pump diameter:

1

0.002

0.004

0.006

Flow Coefficient

0.008

0.01

2.4

turbomachines the efficiency is a function of one criterion of similarity only. Normally we use the flow

coefficient as the independent parameter. That is

FAMILY B

FAMILY A

only

f

3

ND

Q

ND3

Thus, the maximum 0 will occur for this family (say family A) at some particular value of Q/ND3. For

another family of machines, the maximum 0 might occur at a different value of Q/ND3. We could therefore

classify turbomachines according to the value of Q/ND3 at which they produce the best efficiency. Then if we

knew the value of Q/ND3 that we required in a given application, we would choose the machine that gives the

best value of efficiency at that value of Q/ND3. Unfortunately, this idea presupposes that we know the

diameter of the machine. In general, this will not be the case. We therefore look for an alternative parameter

to Q/ND3 that does not involve the size of the machine to use as a basis for classifying families of

turbomachines.

We can always form valid new non-dimensional parameters by combining existing ones. Combine

the flow and head coefficients to eliminate D:

1

Q 2

3

ND

g H

2 2

N D

3

4

NQ 2

3

( g H ) 4

1

Q2

( g H )

3

4

where T is in radians/s so that S is truly non-dimensional. Conceptually, we could then plot the efficiencies

of various families of turbomachines against S (rather than Q/ND3) and note the value of S at which each

family achieves its best 0. This value of S is known as the specific speed for that family of machines. The

next figure (taken from Csanady) shows the values of specific speed that are observed for various types of

turbomachines:

A number of more detailed summaries of specific speed have been presented over the years.

Unfortunately, the non-dimensional form of the specific speed has not been used consistently. The following

table can be used to convert between the various definitions used:

AREA OF APPLICATION

FANS, BLOWERS AND

COMPRESSORS

(BRITISH UNITS)

SPECIFIC SPEED

N S1 =

RPM cfs

EQUIVALENT S

N S1

129

N S2

2730

N S3

42

ft 4

PUMPS

(AMERICAN

MANUFACTURERS)

HYDRAULIC TURBINES

(BRITISH UNITS)

N S2 =

RPM USgpm

ft

N S3 =

RPM HP

ft

HYDRAULIC TURBINES

(METRIC UNITS)

N S4 =

3

4

5

4

RPM metric HP

N S5 =

m4

FANS, BLOWERS AND

COMPRESSORS

(METRIC UNITS)

RPM m 3 s

3

N S4

187

N S5

53

m4

Several plots showing the specific speeds for various classes of machines are given on the next pages.

In addition to giving the values of specific speed, the plots can also be used for initial estimates of the

efficiencies that can be expected. These efficiencies apply for machines that are well-designed, correctly sized

for their applications, and operating at their design points.

Hydraulic turbines are usually characterized according to their output power rather than the flow rate.

Since shaft power output is related to the flow rate by

W& t = t Qg H

( g H )

3

4

W&

5

( g H ) 4

In practice, 0, D and g are usually dropped, and T is replaced by N (usually in RPM). Thus, the "power

specific speed" normally used with hydraulic turbines is

NS =

N W&

5

H 4

The following figure (from Shepherd, 1956) shows the variation of the power specific speed for hydraulic

turbines of different geometries.

The plots shown above were based on data that is as much as 50 years old. One might expect that

over time the efficiency of all types of machines would improve as a result of the application improved design

tools such as computational fluid dynamics. This is illustrated in the following figure which shows the

variation of efficiency with specific speed for compressors. The baseline data, taken from Shepherd (1956),

dates from 1948 or earlier. Japikse & Baines (1994) compared more recent compressor data with the plot from

Shepherd and concluded that efficiencies had improved noticeably since Shepherds time. They also projected

that there would be further improvements by 2000, as shown in the figure.

0.9

Axial-Flow

Machines

Efficiency,

0.8

0.7

0.6

Centrifugal

Machines

Positive-Displacement

Machines

0.5

0.4 1

10

10

Japikse & Baines (1994): 1990 Data

Japikse & Baines (1994): 2000 Projected

20

40

60

2

80 10

100

200

Specific Speed, N S

400

600

1000

103

2.5

The selection starts from the required duty: the conditions at which it is intended to operate:

For pumps, compressors

For turbines

N, W

In practice, a precise value of N may not be known, but it is often constrained to specific values by the fact

that, for example, electrical motors come with certain maximum speeds according to the number of poles.

There may also be mechanical constraints (e.g. maximum tip speed, because of centrifugal stress

considerations). Often the selection process will involve varying the speed to get a specific speed which

results in good efficiency.

From the duty, one can work out the specific speed and then use the figures in Sec. 2.4 to select an

appropriate type of machine. However, the efficiencies shown on the figures will be achieved only if the

machine is well-designed and correctly sized. Size is important because:

(a) if machine is too small: high flow velocities, and since frictional losses vary as 0.5DV2 (and with

gases, shocks can occur), the efficiency will be poor;

(b) if machine is too big: low velocities, low Reynolds numbers, boundary layers will be thick and

may separate, again reducing the efficiency; also, machine will be expensive.

In Sect 2.4, we noted that for a given family of machines the peak 0 occurs for a particular Q/ND3. In effect,

having chosen a suitable machine, knowing Q and N, we want to pick D to get the appropriate Q/ND3.

However, efficiency data for turbomachines has not in fact been correlated in this form. Instead of using

Q/ND3, we define a new parameter, the "specific size" ):

1

D( g H ) 4

Q

The specific size for a given machine is then the value of ) at which it achieves its best efficiency. The value

of ) depends on the machine type (i.e. S) and to some degree on its detailed design. However, in the early

1950s Cordier examined the data for a wide range of well-designed, actual machines, and found that )

correlated quite well with S alone: the correlation is summarized in the Cordier diagram (see over).

Summarizing:

To get best efficiency for a specified duty:

(1) Select the machine type such that its S is

Q

=

3

( g H ) 4

duty

(2) From S, read ) from the Cordier diagram and size the machine such that

1

4

D

g

H

(

)

duty

2.5

The selection starts from the required duty: the conditions at which it is intended to operate:

For pumps, compressors

For turbines

N, W

In practice, a precise value of N may not be known, but it is often constrained to specific values by the fact

that, for example, electrical motors come with certain maximum speeds according to the number of poles.

There may also be mechanical constraints (e.g. maximum tip speed, because of centrifugal stress

considerations). Often the selection process will involve varying the speed to get a specific speed which

results in good efficiency.

From the duty, one can work out the specific speed and then use the figures in Section 2.4 to select an

appropriate type of machine. However, the efficiencies shown on the figures will be achieved only if the

machine is well-designed and correctly sized. Size is important because:

(a) if machine is too small: there will be high flow velocities, and since frictional losses vary as

0.5DV2 (and with gases, shocks can occur), the efficiency will be poor;

(b) if machine is too big: there will be low flow velocities, low Reynolds numbers, boundary layers

will be thick and may separate, again reducing the efficiency; also, the machine will be expensive.

In Section 2.4, we noted that for a given family of machines the peak 0 occurs for a particular Q/ND3. In

effect, having chosen a suitable machine, knowing Q and N, we want to pick D to get the appropriate Q/ND3.

However, efficiency data for turbomachines has not in fact been correlated in this form. Instead of using

Q/ND3, we define a new parameter, the "specific size" ):

1

D( g H ) 4

Q

The specific size for a given machine is then the value of ) at which it achieves its best efficiency. The value

of ) depends on the machine type (i.e. S) and to some degree on its detailed design. However, in the early

1950s Cordier examined the data for a wide range of well-designed, actual machines, and found that )

correlated quite well with S alone: the correlation is summarized in the Cordier diagram (see over).

Summarizing:

To get best efficiency for a specified duty:

(1) Select the machine type such that its S is

Q

=

3

( g H ) 4

duty

(2) From S, read ) from the Cordier diagram and size the machine such that

1

D( g H ) 4

duty

A small hydraulic turbine is to deliver a power of 1000 kW. The total head available is 6 m. and the

turbine is directly connected to an electrical generator which is to deliver power at 60 Hz.

(a) What is the required flow rate?

(b) Determine a suitable type, size and speed for the turbine.

2.6

CAVITATION

If the local absolute static pressure falls below the vapour pressure of a liquid, it will boil, forming

vapour cavities or bubbles. This is known as cavitation. When the bubbles collapse, brief, very high forces

are created which can cause rapid erosion of metal surfaces. Cavitation will also cause significant

performance deterioration. Thus, cavitation should be avoided.

Cavitation is a danger on the low-pressure ("suction") side of the machine: the inlet for pumps, the

outlet for turbines.

Define the Net Positive Suction Head (NPSH):

H sv = H abs hv

where Habs is the absolute total head at the suction side of the machine, defined as

P

V2

H abs = abs +

2g suction side

g

where Pabs is the absolute value of the static pressure and V is the fluid velocity, both on the lower pressure or

suction side of the machine. hv is the head corresponding to the vapour pressure of the liquid,

hv =

Pvap

Note: Habs is not the usual total head H since it does not include the elevation term. In fact Habs = P0/g.

At the minimum pressure point on the suction side of the machine, the local static head will be less than the

total head, Habs, but directly related to it. Thus, the onset of cavitation will occur for some critical, positive

value of Hsv.

1

2

P01

1

V 12

2

P1

P01

1

V 22

2

gH SV

P2

P1

Pv

Pv

f (T )

1

V 22

2

P2

gH SV

critical

S=

Q

3

( gH sv ) 4

For a given machine there will then be some critical value of S ( = Si, i for cavitation inception),

corresponding to the critical value of Hsv, at which cavitation will start. If

S < Si

then there is no cavitation. The higher the value of Si, the more resistant the machine is to cavitation.

The value of Si can be found experimentally by holding Q and N constant (i.e. Q/ND3 constant) while

reducing the pressure on the suction side of the machine and observing the H or behaviour. For example,

for a pump a valve in the intake pipe can be used to reduce gradually the inlet total head while an outlet valve

can be used to maintain the constant the flow rate. Plot the results versus the resulting values of S:

Q

ND 3

INCEPTION

Si

At cavitation inception, the blade passages fill with vapour and H and drop drastically.

The value of Si depends in the detailed design of the machine (e.g. surface curvatures in the lowpressure section of the blade passage). However, for machines which have been properly designed to avoid

cavitation it has been found that the values of Si are fairly similar:

For pumps:

For turbines:

Si . 2.5 - 3.5

Si . 3.5 - 5.0

The Thoma Cavitation Parameter, , is also sometimes used:

H sv

crit

where H sv crit is the critical value of H sv : that is, the value at cavitation inception. However, the value of

will vary with the details of the design of the machine. This can be illustrated by considering two pump

impellers that have identical inlet geometries:

2

1

D2

D1

If the pumps are run at the same rotational speeds and flow rates, the flow in the inlet region will be identical.

Thus, they should cavitate at the same values of Hsv. Then since

S=

Q

3

( gH sv ) 4

it follows that the two machines have the same critical value of S: Si1 = Si2. However, the two rotors do not

have the same value of H. In fact, the larger rotor will produce a significantly larger H because of its

higher tip speed (H varies as (ND)2, as implied by the form of the head coefficient; see also later sections).

Thus, at cavitation

1 =

H sv

crit ,1

H1

> 2 =

H sv

crit ,2

H 2

since H1 < H2. Consequently, the Thoma parameter should be used only within a geometrically-similar

family of machines. For example, a critical value of determined from model tests can be used to predict the

conditions for the onset of cavitation in another member of the same family.

Since cavitation is a significant danger to the machine, checking for cavitation should be a normal

part of selecting a hydraulic machine for a particular duty.

EXAMPLE (Section 2.6): In Section 2.5 we selected a hydraulic turbine for the following service: W =

1000kW, H = 6 m. An axial-flow (propeller or Kaplan) turbine was chosen, with a diameter of 2.7 m, a flow

rate of 18.9 m3/sec and running at 180 RPM. What is the maximum height above the tailwater level that this

turbine can be installed if cavitation is to be avoided? The draft tube is a length of diffusing duct at the exit

of the turbine. Assume that the draft tube has an outlet area of 6 m2 and the outlet is 3 m below the turbine.

The water is at 20 oC for which Pv = 2.3 kPa. Patm = 101.3 kPa. Assume that the tailpond is large

compared with the draft tube outlet so that the flow is effectively being dumped into a very large reservoir at

the draft tube outlet.

6m

3m

TAIL POND

AND THERMODYNAMICS

3.1 STEADY-FLOW ENERGY EQUATION

Consider a control volume containing a turbomachine:

1

&

m

&

m

W& shaft

Q&

For steady flow, conservation of energy can be written

Rate of energy flow into CV + Rate of energy addition inside = Rate of energy flow out of CV

dm&

If the energy content is the same for all fluid entering or leaving the CV (or using mean values) SFEE can be

written

& 2

mE

where

(1)

m&

E

Q&

= energy per unit mass for fluid

= rate of heat transfer to the machine

W& shaft

The energy content of the fluid includes thermal and mechanical components:

P C2

= u + +

+ gz

2

thermal + mechanical

=h+

where

u

P/

C

C2/2

gz

h

=

=

=

=

=

=

C2

+ gz

2

flow work (pressure energy) per unit mass

absolute velocity of fluid

kinetic energy per unit mass

potential energy per unit mass

P/ + u = enthalpy per unit mass

(2)

For a turbomachine at steady state, the flow is essentially adiabatic, Q& = 0 . For gases, we usually

neglect potential energy changes. Then SFEE can be written

C2

C2

= m& h2 + 2 h1 + 1

2

2

W& shaft

where

(3a)

C2

= stagnation enthalpy

2

= C P T0 for perfect gases

= h+

h0

2

(3b)

For incompressible flow , temperature (i.e. internal energy, u) changes only due to frictional heating,

since is constant and we have already assumed the process is adiabatic. In order to separate the frictional

effects from other effects, we retain the internal energy separate from the flow work:

W& shaft

m&

P

C2

P C2

= or u2 + 2 + 2 + gz 2 u1 + 1 + 1 + gz1

2

2

(4)

u2 u1

= H L = " total head loss" due to friction inside the machine

g

The total head is a measure of the total mechanical energy content of the fluid

= total head

P

C2

+

+z

g 2g

Then for an incompressible-flow compression machine (eg. a pump or blower) (4) can be written

W& shaft

Q g ( H 2 H1 + H L )

Q g H + Q g H L

(5)

H = H2 - H1 is the total head rise that appears in the fluid between the inlet and outlet of the machine. It is

the H which was used in the head coefficient, (gH/N2D2), and QgH is what was referred to earlier as the

fluid power.

pump =

then

fluid power

shaft power

QgH

QgH + QgH L

1

=

H

1+ L

H

pump =

(6)

As shown later, we have ways to estimate the various contributions to HL (eg. frictional losses at the walls vary

as V2). We can then use (6) to estimate the resulting efficiency of the machine.

For incompressible-flow expansion machines (i.e. turbines),

W& shaft

= Q g H Q g H L

since the friction inside the machine now reduces the shaft power output compared with the fluid power

released by the fluid, as given by QgH. We then define turbine efficiency

turbine

fluid power

3.2

ANGULAR-MOMENTUM EQUATION

The energy transfer between the fluid and the machine occurs by tangential forces exerted on the fluid

as it interacts with the rotor blades. Although forces are also exerted between the fluid and the stators

(stationary blades), no energy transfer occurs since there is no displacement associated with the forces - thus,

stators can only redistribute energy among its components.

The angular form of Newtons second law (the angular-momentum equation) governs the interaction

(see earlier courses for derivation):

T0

out

&

r C dm

in

&

r C dm

rC

out

where

r =

Cw =

& rC w dm

&

dm

in

tangential component of absolute velocity

T

& (rC w ) in

= m

(7)

3.3

We will use the following nomenclature in this and the subsequent sections:

()

ROTOR

U

(+)

()

(+)

C

U

W

STATORS

()

C

W

U

= absolute velocity

= relative velocity (as seen in the rotating frame of reference)

= blade circumferential speed ( = r)

Subscripts:

a

r

w

= radial component

= "whirl" (circumferential or tangential) component (subscripts t and also used)

Angles:

= absolute velocity

= stator blade metal angles

= relative velocity

= rotor blade metal angles

The datum for all angles is the main flow direction: axial in axial-flow machines, radial in radial-flow

machines.

Sign conventions: The question of signs only arises with reference to velocity components and

angles in the tangential direction. Unfortunately, there is not much consistency in the use of signs in the

turbomachinery literature. When needed, we will use the following conventions:

(i) Tangential components of velocity are positive if they are in the same direction as the blade speed, U.

(ii) The signs of angles are consistent with the sign convention for the tangential velocity components.

The torque applied to the fluid as it passes through the rotor is given by (7):

rC

dm& rC w dm&

(7)

The torque is supplied at the shaft, transmitted through the disk and blades, and applied by the blades to the

fluid in the form of a tangential force. The corresponding shaft power is

W& shaft = T

and multiplying through by in (7)

= UC

rC

2

&

w dm

&

w dm

(8)

UC w dm&

But the SFEE also relates the shaft power, W& shaft , to the energy changes in the fluid. Equating the

shaft powers from Eqns. (3) and (8)

h dm& h dm& = UC

0

&

w dm

UC

&

w dm

(9)

If we approximate the flow quantities by their mean values, then we can write

h02 h01

= U 2 C w2 U 1C w1

(10)

g ( H 2 H1 + H L ) = U 2 C w 2 U 2 C w 2

and letting H = H2 - H1 (the total head rise seen across the machine) and HE = H2 - H1 + HL = H + HL

(the "Euler head") then

g H E = U 2 C w2 U 1 Cw1

(11)

Eqns. 9-11 are versions of the famous Euler Pump and Turbine Equation (or Euler Equation). The

Euler equation is the fundamental equation of turbomachinery design. It relates the specification (for example,

the head rise required) to the blade speed of the machine and the changes in flow velocity that it must produce

to achieve the required performance. As described later, these changes in flow velocity are directly related to

the rotational speed and geometry (eg. blade shapes, etc.) of the machine.

Note that the Euler equation involves the full energy transfer between the machine and the fluid,

including the energy that will be dissipated in overcoming friction. For a pump

H E =

pump

H will be specified to the designer. But from eqn. (11), HE is needed to determine the flow turning

(change in UCw) which will achieve the required H. Thus, to design the machine we need to know its

efficiency. As a result, the design process becomes iterative.

3.4

We now examine in more detail the process of energy transfer within the rotor. Recall that

absolute velocity = relative velocity + velocity of moving reference frame

C =W +U

The drawing shows a hypothetical velocity diagram at outlet (station 2) for the generalized rotor (a

similar diagram could be drawn for station 1)

W& shaft

m&

= g H E = h0 = U 2 C w2 U 1C w1

(12)

We then rewrite the velocity terms on the RHS in terms of the velocity vectors in the drawing

(a)

and similarly for the relative velocity (the components are not labelled on the figure to avoid clutter)

= Ca22 + (U 2 C w2 ) + Cr22

2

C22 C w2 2 = W22 U 22 + 2U 2 C w2 C w2 2

(b)

Then

U 2 C w2 =

1 2

C2 + U 22 W22

2

U 1 C w1 =

1 2

C1 + U 12 W12

2

W& shaft

m&

= g H E = h0 =

((

) (

) (

1

C22 C12 + U 22 U 12 + W12 W22

2

(1)

( 2)

(3)

))

(13)

Note that (13) is another (and useful) version of the Euler Equation.

Now consider the physical interpretation of the three terms on the RHS of (13).

1 2

C2 C12 is clearly the kinetic energy change of the fluid across the rotor. In a pump,

2

blower or compressor, the kinetic energy of the fluid normally increases across the rotor. Some of this kinetic

energy can be converted to static pressure rise in a subsequent diffuser or set of stators.

Term (1),

To see the physical meaning of the other two terms, apply the SFEE between the inlet and outlet of

the rotor again, assuming adiabatic flow and neglecting potential energy changes:

P C2

2

C2

= m& 2 + 2 + u2

2

Substitute for W& shaft from the Euler Eqn., (13), and solve for the static pressure rise through the rotor passage

P2 P1

1

1

U 22 U 12 + W12 W22 (u2 u1 )

2

2

(14)

Equation (14) shows that there is some direct compression (or expansion) work done inside the rotor blade

passage and it is associated with the changes in U and W that the fluid experiences as it passes through the

rotor. Note that if there is friction present, u2 > u1, and this reduces the pressure rise that would be achieved by

a compression machine, as one would expect.

1 2

U 2 U 12 is then energy transfer to the fluid due to the centrifugal compression (or

2

expansion) of the fluid as it passes through the rotor ("centrifugal energy" change). The rotation of the fluid

imposed by the rotor results in a radial pressure gradient to balance the centrifugal forces on the fluid particles.

Term (2),

For example, consider a centrifugal pump or compressor rotor for the limiting case where there is no

flow (say that a valve has been closed in the discharge duct). The fluid particles trapped inside the rotor travel

in circular paths. The force required to give the corresponding acceleration towards the axis of rotation is

supplied by the radial pressure gradient that is set up in the rotor.

(+)

F

2

(-)

P2 P1

1

U 22 U 12

2

Thus, a radial machine will produce a pressure rise even for no flow. The delivery pressure for this case is

sometimes known as the shut-off head.

When there is flow, the fluid particles that move through the radial pressure field will likewise be

compressed (or expanded) and the corresponding work per unit mass is accounted for by term (2) in Eqn. (13).

1 2

W1 W22 represents the change in pressure energy due to the change in fluid velocity

2

relative the rotor. Consider the flow in a the rotor-blade passage of an axial compressor. Neglecting friction

(u2 = u1) and if the stream tube is at constant radius (so that U1 = U2) then from Eqn. (14)

Term (3),

1

P2 P1 = W12 W22

2

(15)

cross-sectional area as the relative flow is turned towards the axial

(which is necessary in order to increase the Cw in the absolute frame).

From continuity, W2 < W1 and from (15) there is a corresponding

pressure rise. The passage is thus a diffuser. The forces exerted on the

fluid by the blade surfaces cause the static pressure to rise between inlet

and outlet, and since there is also displacement associated with these

forces (since the rotor is moving) work is being done on the fluid.

W2

W1

U

Note that the pressure rise along the rotor blade passage can cause separation of the blade boundary

layers and therefore stalling of the airfoils. We therefore find it necessary to limit the change in W that we

permit in a given blade passage.

Summarizing:

(a) Term (1) in Eqn. (13) represents the change in kinetic energy (dynamic pressure) of the fluid due

to the work done on it in the rotor.

(b) Terms (2) and (3) represent the direct static pressure changes (compression or expansion work)

which occur inside the rotor.

In general, all three components of energy transfer will tend to be present in all rotors. However, for

axial rotors the centrifugal compression tends to be small (since U1 U2 for every streamtube that passes

through the rotor), whereas it is large in radial rotors.

3.5

3.5.1

A turbomachinery stage generally consists of two blade rows, a rotor and a set of stators:

A compressor stage normally has a rotor followed by a row of stators. As noted in 3.4, some

static pressure rise can occur inside the rotor. The stators can produce a further static

pressure rise by reducing the fluid velocity.

A turbine stage normally has a row of stators ("inlet guide vanes" or "nozzles") followed by a

rotor. The nozzles impart swirl to the flow, accelerating it and thus causing a static pressure

drop. The rotor then extracts energy from the fluid by removing the swirl. This may be

accompanied by a further static pressure drop inside the rotor.

Consider a thin streamtube passing through an axial compressor stage (say near the mean radius):

We then draw a hypothetical set of velocity vectors as they might appear in the axial plane:

Note that the inlet flow has been assumed to have some swirl (1 0.0). Therefore, there must be

another stage or a set of inlet guide vanes ahead of the present stage. The stators have also been shaped to

give a stage outlet flow vector equal to the inlet vector (C3 = C1). This is sometimes referred to as a normal

stage.

Even for an axial stage, as the flow passes through the stage, the streamtube may vary slightly in

radius. Thus, in general U1 U2. Also, due to the density changes and changes in the cross-sectional area of

the annulus, the axial velocity at different locations may vary (Ca1 Ca2). However, across a given axial rotor

blade, the radial shift in any given streamline tends to be quite small. For reasons discussed later, it is also

undesirable to have the axial velocity change significantly along the machine. The latter is the reason for the

tapering of the annulus which is seen in most multistage compressors and turbines.

For discussion purposes only, we may therefore make the following simplifying assumptions for axial

stages:

(i) Assume the streamline radius is constant through a rotor: U1 = U2.

(ii) Assume constant axial velocity through a given stage: Ca1 = Ca2 = Ca3.

The resulting velocity diagrams are sometimes known as the simple velocity diagrams (or velocity

triangles). For actual design calculations, we would not make these simplifications: we would use the true,

general velocity diagrams. But in practice most axial stages come close to satisfying the simplifying

assumptions and therefore the conclusions which we will draw about the stage behaviour, based on the simple

velocity triangles, will be quite realistic.

One convenient feature of the simple velocity triangles is that we can combine the inlet and outlet

triangles because of the common blade speed vector U. We can therefore draw the velocity triangles for the

axial compressor stage as follows:

3.5.2

Degree of Reaction

If the pressure is rising in the direction of the flow (ie. if there is diffusion), then there is a danger of

the boundary layers on the walls separating. When this happens on a turbomachinery blade, there is generally

a large reduction in the efficiency of the machine and an impairment of its ability to transfer energy to or from

the fluid. In the case of compressors, boundary layer separation can lead to the very serious phenomena of

stall and surge which will be discussed later.

Diffusion is present most obviously in compressors since they are specifically intended to raise the

pressure of the fluid. While overall the pressure drops through a turbine stage, diffusion may still be present

locally on the blade surfaces. Thus, the possibility of boundary layer separation is a concern in the design of

both compressors and turbines.

As evident from the velocity triangles, pressure rise can occur in both blade rows of a compressor

stage. Intuitively, it would seem beneficial to divide the diffusion fairly evenly between the blade rows.

Similarly, in a turbine stage both blade rows can benefit from the expansion. The choice of the split in

pressure rise or drop between the two blade rows is one of the considerations for the designer of a

turbomachinery stage.

We define the degree of reaction,

total rate of energy transfer

1

U 22 U 12 + W12 W22

2

(16)

(h02 h01 )

[(

)]

) (

h2 h1

h02 h01

(17)

where h = static enthalpy, h0 = total enthalpy. Using the Steady Flow Energy Equation or Euler Equation,

there are several alternative ways of expressing the denominator in (16) and (17).

If the flow is assumed incompressible and isentropic, and the stage inlet and outlet velocities are the

same (ie. if is a normal stage), (17) reduces to

Protor

Pstage

(18)

Thus, (16) and (17) are also approximate measures of the fraction of the static pressure change which occurs

across the rotor.

A well-designed pump, fan or compressor will then have > 0 in order to spread the diffusion

between the blade rows. A value of . 0.5 has often been used. In an open machine, such as a Pelton wheel

turbine, P1 = P2 = Patm and = 0. A machine with = 0 is known as an impulse machine. Impulse wheels are

sometimes used for axial turbines, particularly steam turbines.

The effect of the choice of on the machine geometry can be seen by examining the velocity

diagrams for a few examples.

Axial-Flow Impulse Turbine ( = 0):

Consider the mean radius. Assume incompressible flow, constant annulus area and no radial shift in

the streamlines. Thus U1 = U2 = U and from continuity, Ca0 = Ca1 = Ca2 since m& = Ca Aannulus . We therefore

have the conditions for simple velocity triangles. The turbine stage will look as follows:

Nozzles:

We must accelerate the flow through the nozzles, since all expansion is to occur in

here ( = 0): ie. we want C1 > C0. This can be done by turning the flow since this

will reduce the area of the flow passage from A0 to A1noz (for the constant height,

A1noz = A0cos1N). Bear in mind that Ca0 = Ca1 from continuity.

Rotor Blades:

obtained with 1N = 2N. Therefore, the impulse turbine will have equal inlet and

outlet metal angles.

What determines the value of 1N which is chosen? From the Euler Equation:

& C w

W& = m& (U 2 C w2 U 1C w1 ) = mU

Redraw the velocity triangles with the common blade speeds U superimposed. Note that Cw = Cw2 - Cw1 will

be negative, consistent with our sign convention that power in is

positive. The magnitude of Cw (for a given U) is clearly related to

Ca1 = Ca2

1. Thus, the required W& plays a direct role in determining the

velocity triangles, and ultimately the metal angles.

C2

the fluid leaves a blade row at the metal angle:

1 = 1 , 2 = 2

This is not strictly true, as will be discussed later, but is often a

reasonable first approximation. It is sometimes known as the "Euler

Approximation".

Cw2 (+)

1 (+)

U

W2

C1

Cw1 (+)

Cw

W1

Again assume constant streamline radius, constant annulus area and incompressible flow. Then U1 =

U2 and Ca1 = Ca2 as before. The nozzles will again impart swirl to obtain some expansion. To get expansion in

the rotor, need W2 > W1 and thus *2N* > *1N*. An example of the geometry of a reaction turbine is then as

follows:

Again, assume U1 = U2 and Ca1 = Ca2. To get static pressure rise across the rotor we need W2 < W1.

Examining the compressor used as an example in Section 3.5.1, it is evident that this compressor meets this

requirement:

3.5.3

de Haller Number

The importance of diffusion in compressor blade rows was discussed in Section 3.5.2. By selecting a

degree of reaction close to 50%, the diffusion is shared roughly equally between the rotor and the stators.

However, this does not address the question of whether the blade rows will be able to sustain the level of

diffusion which is being asked of them. We will later examine diffusion limits which are used in the detailed

design of the blade rows. However, it is useful to have a simple approximate criterion for diffusion which can

be applied at the point in the design where we are taking basic decisions about the velocity triangles.

An axial compressor blade row in effect forms a rectangular diffusing duct. Based on various

compressor designs of the time, de Haller in the mid 1950s suggested that the maximum static pressure rise

which could be achieved in axial compressor blade passages is given by

C p,max =

where P

V

P

= 0.44

1 2

V

2

(a)

= static pressure rise between inlet and outlet of the blade row

= velocity at the inlet to the passage (relative velocity for rotors, absolute for stators).

Taking a rotor blade passage and assuming no change in radius of the streamlines (so that there is no

centrifugal compression) and neglecting friction, from Section 3.4 the static pressure rise is

1

1

P2 P1 = W12 W22 .

2

2

Substituting into (a) and simplifying,

W2

= 0.75 .

W1 min

The ratio W2/W1 (or Cout/Cin for a row of stators) is known as the de Haller number.

The de Haller limit should be used as a rough guide only. It does not take into account details of the

blade passage design which can improve the diffusion capability of the passage. Successful modern

compressor designs have used values of the de Haller number as low as 0.65. The de Haller number should be

used mainly to alert the designer to the fact that the level of diffusion in a particular compressor blade row

may present a design challenge.

3.5.4

Work Coefficient

h0 = U 2 C w2 U 1C w1

= (UCw )

and for an axial machine with simple velocity triangles (so that U1. U2 = U)

h0 = UC w .

From the velocity triangles, if we vary U, adjusting Ca to maintain geometrically similar triangles, then

and

C w

h0

U2 .

Thus, the power transfer varies as U2. The head or enthalpy change "per unit U2" is a useful measure of the

stage loading and is known as the work coefficient, R, where

h0

U

(UCw )

U

gH E

U2

For high R, we are taking full advantage of the blade speed and we have high stage loading: we will

specify what constitutes high R for different types of machines in Section 3.5.6.

For a centrifugal machine, tip speed, U2, would be used in R.

For an axial machine with simple velocity triangles (so that U1. U2 = U)

UC w

U

Cw

U

Normally, R is taken as positive. For our sign convention, )h0 and )Cw are negative for turbines.

Therefore, we use absolute values in R

3.5.5

Flow Coefficient

Consider two compressor rotors designed for the same service (same Q, P0 and N):

The same mean radii have been used so that the rotors have the same blade speeds U. From the Euler

equation, h0 = UCw , and to achieve the same h0 , and thus the same pressure rise, they must therefore

have the same change in swirl velocity, Cw. As a result, the rotors have the same work coefficient

( = Cw/U) and thus the same loading. However, rotor B has twice the axial velocity of rotor A: this is

achieved by reducing the cross-sectional area of the machine. This change obviously has a significant effect

on the rotor blade geometry. It also has aerodynamic consequences:

(i) For rotor B, both the absolute and relative velocities have been increased. Since losses generally

vary as 0.5V2 (where V = W for the rotor), rotor B will, all other things being equal, have poorer

efficiency than rotor A.

(ii) All other things are not equal. Note that the increase in Ca in rotor B has had the effect of

increasing the de Haller number (W2/W1). Thus, the diffusion has been reduced in rotor B, which is

aerodynamically favourable.

We can thus identify an additional important parameter which must be chosen by the designer, the flow

coefficient, :

Ca

U

For a centrifugal compressor, we would use Cr2/U2, where Cr2 is the radial component of velocity at the rotor

outlet.

Note that for the compressors shown, the change in flow coefficient did not in fact change the degree

of reaction. As you will show in Problem Set 3, the symmetry of the velocity triangles for both machines

implies that they both have 50% reaction.

3.5.6

We have identified four useful performance parameters: the degree of reaction, the de Haller number,

the work coefficient and the flow coefficient. Experience shows that to design a stage with good efficiency, ,

and , and for fans and compressors, the de Haller number, should be kept within certain ranges.

Design

Parameter

Axial Turbines

Axial

Centrifugal

0.2 6 0.7

. 1 (at outlet)

0.4 6 1.2

0.3 6 0.6

0.3 6 3.0

<0.5 - Lightly Loaded

>1.5 - Highly Loaded

0.3 6 0.7

061

de Haller

with clean inlet flow)

>0.80 (simple design, poor inlet

flow uniformity)

N/A

For compressible-flow axial turbines, Smith ( S.F. Smith, "A Simple Correlation of Turbine

Efficiency," J. Royal Aero. Soc., Vol. 49, July 1965, pp. 467-470.) developed a very useful figure (the Smith

chart) which summarizes the influence of and on the efficiency of the stage:

The "Smith Chart" or "Smith Diagram" presents the results for a large number of turbine tests (for

both model and full-scale machines) conducted at Rolls-Royce from 1945 to 1965. Over that period, the flow

over the tip of the rotor blades ("tip leakage") was considerably reduced. The tip-leakage flow is an important

source of losses and as a result there was significant improvement in efficiency. To isolate the influence of the

stage loading and shape of the velocity triangles, the efficiencies were corrected back to their zero-clearance

equivalents. Thus, efficiencies for actual machines can be expected to be lower than those shown by a couple

of percentage points. Note that the degree of reaction is not mentioned on the Smith chart. The turbines used

to generate the chart had a range of degrees of reaction. However, the performance of turbines is not strongly

dependent on the degree of reaction, provided reasonable values are used.

The Smith chart is well known and is widely used by axial turbine designers during the preliminary

stages of design. The usefulness of the Smith chart makes it surprising that comparable charts are not more

widely used by axial and centrifugal compressor designers. Part of the reason lies in the important role played

by diffusion (expressed through both the degree of reaction and the de Haller number) in compressor

performance. Thus a single Smith chart for compressors is not feasible. However, it is possible to generate

a small number of charts, each for a different value of degree of reaction say, and then use these in design. In

the late 1980's Casey (M.V. Casey, A Mean Line Prediction Method for Estimating the Performance

Characteristics of an Axial Compressor Stage, Proceedings, I.Mech.Eng., C264/87, 1987, pp. 273-285.)

calculated compressor stage performance for a wide range of conditions. In a recent textbook, Lewis (R.I.

Lewis, Turbomachinery Performance Analysis, Arnold, London, 1996) took this data to generate Smith

charts for axial compressors for three values of degree of reaction: 50, 70 and 90%. Note the rapid

deterioration in efficiency when the de Haller number is less than about 0.7.

Smith Charts for Axial Compressors: (a) = 0.5, (b) = 0.7, (c) = 0.9.

The use of the guidelines presented in this section will be illustrated in the next chapter.

3.6

EFFICIENCY OF TURBOMACHINES

3.6.1 Incompressible-Flow Machines

The definitions of efficiency used for incompressible-flow machines have been discussed briefly in

earlier sections. The definitions are repeated here for completeness.

Fundamentally, the efficiency of a turbomachine is defined in terms of a comparison with a related

ideal machine in which there are no losses. However, there are small conceptual differences between the

definitions of efficiency used for incompressible- and compressible-flow machines. These will therefore be

clarified now.

(a) Pumps, Fans and Blowers

& H E = m& h0

W& shaft = mg

where

HE

=

=

Euler head = head equivalent of the shaft power input to the machine

head rise that would be achieved in the ideal (no losses) machine with the

same shaft power input as the actual machine.

The fluid power is defined as the useful, mechanical power that actually appears in the fluid across the

machine

& H

W& fluid = mg

where

The Euler head and the actual total head are related by

H = H E H L

where HL is the head loss due to friction inside the machine. Neglecting elevation changes, we can also write

P0,actual = gH

P0,ideal = gH E

We then define the efficiency for a pump, fan or blower as

pump =

P0,actual

Fluid power QgH

H

=

=

=

Shaft power

H E

P0,ideal

W& shaft

To help visualize the significance of this definition, and for comparison with the definition of efficiency used

for compressors, we represent the processes on the h0 versus s diagram.

fluid head by H, or the total pressure by

P0,actual = P02 P01 = gH . With the same shaft power

input per unit mass flow (h0), the ideal machine would raise

the pressure by P0,ideal = PN02 - P01. Thus, the efficiency for

pumps, fans and blowers is defined by comparing the head or

total pressure rises for the actual and an ideal machine that

have the same shaft power input. As described below, the

definition of efficiency for compressors is slightly different.

P02

h0

P02

h0

P01

ACTUAL

IDEAL

(b) Turbines

For turbines, the head drop, H, or pressure drop P0,actual that is available is normally specified.

However, some of the fluid power released by the fluid is used in overcoming friction inside the machine and

& H E . That is,

is therefore not available to be extracted as shaft power output, W& shaft = mg

H = H E + H L

turbine =

P0,ideal

Shaft power QgH E H E

=

=

=

QgH

H

P0,actual

Fluid power

h0 versus s diagram. The actual pressure drop is P0,actual = P01 - P02

& H E = m& h0 . In an

and the shaft power extracted is W& shaft = mg

ideal machine, a smaller pressure drop, P0,ideal = P01 - PN02, would be

needed to produce the same shaft power output. Thus, the turbine

efficiency is defined in terms of two machines that have same shaft

power output. The comparison is between the head or total pressure

drops required to obtain that shaft power output in the ideal and

actual machines. The similarity with the definition used for pumps,

fans and blowers is evident.

h0

P01

ACTUAL

h0

IDEAL

P02

P02

The efficiency of compressible flow machines is defined slightly differently. The comparison is again

between ideal and actual machines. However, instead of the shaft power input or output, the common basis is

the pressure rise or drop across the machines.

(a) Compressors

The h0-s diagram is again used to compare

the processes used to define the efficiency. For

compressible-flow machines, the pressure rise or

drop across the machine is generally expressed in

terms of the total pressure ratio. The h0-s diagram

shows the ideal and actual compression processes

needed to obtain the same pressure ratio, P02/P01. For

the ideal machine, the shaft power required is

h0

P02

h0,actual

P01

ACTUAL

h0,ideal

IDEAL

while for the actual machine

The compressor efficiency is then defined as the ratio of the shaft powers required to produce the same

pressure ratio in the ideal and actual machines:

c =

h0, ideal

W&ideal

=

=

&

Wactual m& h0, actual h0, actual

If we assume that the working fluid is a perfect gas, then h0 = CpT0, and it is common to present the

processes on a T0-s diagram, rather than the h0-s diagram. The efficiency can then be written

c =

C p T0, ideal

C p T0, actual

T02 T01

T02 T01

T0

P02

T02

T02

= const .

P01

ACTUAL

IDEAL

where = Cp/Cv, the specific heat ratio. Then using the perfect gas

law, P = RT, we can write

T02 P02

=

T01 P01

T01

Then

h0, actual =

C p (T02 T01 )

C p T01 P02

1

=

c P01

and this expression allows the shaft power required to drive the actual machine, W& actual = m

related to the specified pressure ratio.

(b) Turbines

The efficiency of compressible-flow turbines is similarly defined by comparing the shaft power

produced by the expansion through the same pressure ratio for an ideal and the actual machine. Following the

same procedure as for the compressor, we obtain

t =

=

=

T02 T01

h0, ideal

W&ideal

T0

and

P01

T01

ACTUAL

h0, actual

P02

= C p T01 t

1

P01

IDEAL

P02

T02

T02

Note the expression for h0, actual will be negative, consistent with

our sign convention that power into a machine is positive.

Consider a multi-stage axial compressor consisting of a number of stages with equal stage pressure

ratios. If the stages are designed using the same technology, it is reasonable that they will each have the same

stage isentropic efficiency. It is then possible to calculate the overall pressure ratio and isentropic efficiency

for the machine as a whole.

Let

s = stage isentropic efficiency

It can then be shown that the actual temperature at the outlet of the Nth stage is

T0 N +1

1

PR

(

)

s

= T01 1 +

PRc = ( PRs )

and the isentropic temperature rise for the whole compressor is then

1

= T01 PRsN

c =

T0N +1 T01

T0 N +1 T01

N ( 1)

PRs

PRs 1

1 +

s

For example, if PRs = 1.2 and s = 0.9, the resulting variation of the overall pressure ratio and overall

isentropic efficiency with the number

of stages is shown in the figure. As

EFFECT OF PRESSURE RATIO ON OVERALL ISENTROPIC EFFICIENCY

seen, the overall efficiency decreases as

the pressure ratio increases.

When cycles for gas turbine

engines are being investigated, it is

normal to examine the effect of varying

pressure ratio. It is evident that

assuming a constant value of the

overall compressor isentropic

efficiency is not valid for such

investigations. To account for the

effect of the pressure ratio on the

isentropic efficiency, the concept of the

small-stage or polytropic efficiency has

been introduced.

0.9 1

0.88

Number of Stages

10

11

0.84

Stage PR = 1.2

Stage isen = 0.9

0.82

0.8

dh0 =

Then for an isentropic process (ds = 0)

12

0.86

dP0

+ T0 ds

10

dh0 =

dP0

Define the polytropic efficiency, p, as the isentropic efficiency for the infinitesimal process

dh0 = p dh0

dP0

= p dh0

R

, and the fluid

1

d C p T0

dP0

= p

C p T0

0 C p T0

dP0

0 RT0

1

or

= p

dT0

T0

dT0 1 dP0

=

T0

p P0

T 1 P02

ln 02 =

ln

T01 p P01

1

or

T02 P02 p

=

T01 P01

c =

h0

h0

1

1

pc

h

=

C

T

PR

1

where

and h0 = C p T01 PR

1 where pc is the polytropic efficiency for

0

p 01

c =

PR

1

pc

PR

1

1

For a turbine,

t =

h0

h0

t =

P

1 04

P03

pt ( 1)

P

1 04

P03

The following figure shows the resulting variation of isentropic efficiency with pressure ratio for an assumed

polytropic efficiency of 0.9 and = 1.4, for both a compressor and a turbine. Also shown are the earlier

results for the multistage compressor with stage pressure ratio of 1.2.

VARIATION OF ISENTROPIC EFFICIENCY WITH PRESSURE RATIO

Polytropic Efficiency, p = 0.9, = 1.4

0.94

Isentropic Efficiency

Turbine

0.92

0.9 1

0.88

10

11

12

Compressor

0.86

1

10

Pressure Ratio

The concept of polytropic efficiency should be used with caution. It is only valid if the machine can

be considered to employ comparable technology and produce comparable performance as the pressure ratio is

varied. For this reason, it should be applied only to explore the influence of pressure ratio on performance for

multistage machines. It is assumed that the pressure ratio is varied by adding or removing comparable stages.

Polytropic efficiency should not be used to predict how the efficiency of a single stage will vary as its design

pressure ratio is changed. As will be shown later, stage performance is closely related to its tip speed. For

example, to increase the design pressure ratio of a compressor stage, the tip speed must normally be increased.

This in turn results in higher flow velocities generally. As these velocities reach and exceed the speed of

sound, shock waves will appear, providing a source of additional losses that is not present at lower speeds.

Thus, as the stage pressure ratio is changed, the technology cannot be considered to remain unchanged.

4.2.1 Force Components

Consider the control volume for the flow through one blade passage:

P1

y

A

B

C1

Ca1

Cw1

Cm

Y

m

Ca

Cwm

s

2

D

C2

Ca2

P2

Cw2

Take unit depth in the z direction. Also, make the following simplifying assumptions

(i) Incompressible flow

(ii) Constant axial velocity through the passage: Ca1 = Ca2 = Ca.

The blade exerts a force F on the flow thought the passage. This is divided into axial and tangential

components X and Y. By definition, the lift generated by a turbomachinery blade L is the component of the blade

force normal to the vector mean flow direction through the blade row. The drag D is the component of the blade

force parallel to the vector mean flow direction.

Then apply the linear momentum equation to the control volume. In the x direction:

Fx = m& (V x 2 V x1 )

Note that the pressure forces along the left and right faces of the control volume exactly balance each other in both

the x and y directions. Then since we have assumed Ca1 = Ca2, the x-wise momentum equation reduces to

X = ( P2 P1 ) s

For the y direction:

Fy = m& V y 2 V y1

(1)

and since the pressure forces on the control volume cancel each other in the y-direction, the only force in the y-

Y = Ca ( s 1)(( C w1 ) ( C w2 ))

= Ca s(C w1 C w2 )

(2a)

Since

C w1

,

Ca

tan 1 =

tan 2 =

C w2

Ca

(2b)

From the definition total pressure for incompressible flow, the total pressure loss through the passage is

given by

P0 = P01 P02 = ( P1 P2 ) +

1

C12 C22

2

) (

= (C w1 + C w2 )(C w1 C w2 )

P0 = ( P1 P2 ) +

1

(Cw1 + Cw 2 )(Cw1 Cw 2 )

2

P0 =

X 1

Y

+ ( C w1 + C w 2 )

s 2

Ca s

and using the vector mean flow direction through the passage, tan m =

P0 =

1

( X + Y tan m )

s

1

( tan 1 + tan 2 ) , we can write

2

(3)

From the force vector triangles, the drag D can be expressed in terms of X and Y as follows

D = Y sin m X cos m

= cos m ( X + Y tan m )

(4)

D = P0 s cos m

(5)

CD =

1

Cm2 c 1

2

P s cos m

= 0

1

Cm2 c

2

1

1

P0 = C D Cm2

2

cos m

(6a)

1

P0 = CD Ca2

cos3 m

2

(6b)

As will be seen later, some axial fan and compressor prediction procedures use the airfoil drag coefficient to express

the loss performance for the blade row. Equation (6a) or (6b) can then be used to express this as a total pressure

loss.

Returning to the lift force, from the force triangles the lift L can be expressed as

L = X sin m + Y cos m

(7)

X = Y tan m

D

cos m

D

L = Y tan m

sin m + Y cos m

cos m

Y

D tan m

cos m

L=

Ca2 s

( tan 1 tan 2 ) D tan m

cos m

By definition

CL =

L

L

=

1

1

Cm2 c 1 C 2 c

a

2

2

2

cos m

(8)

then

Ca2 s

( tan 1 tan 2 )

cos m

D

tan m

CL =

2

1

1

Cm c

Ca2 c 2

2

2

cos m

or

s

C L = 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 ) C D tan m

c

(9a)

Since the drag force is normally much smaller than the lift, the drag term is often omitted from (9a),

s

C L = 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 )

c

(9b)

4.2.2 Circulation

Any lifting surface has circulation. By definition, the circulation is

= VS dS

(10)

where the integral is evaluated along any closed contour enclosing the lifting surface. VS is the tangential

component of the flow velocity along the enclosing curve and S is arc length. For the axial-compressor airfoil, the

curve A-B-C-D-A shown on the control volume in the last section is a convenient curve for use in (10):

B

A

VS dS +

C

B

VS dS +

VS dS +

A

D

VS dS

Since B-C and D-A are periodic surfaces with identical lengths and velocity distributions,

C

B

VS dS =

A

D

VS dS

and their contributions to cancel. Along A-B and C-D, VS is simply Cy (= Cw) along the respective segments. The

direction of the integration changes so that the integrals will have opposite signs (since Cw1 and Cw2 have the same

sign for the control volume shown). Thus, we can write

= C y1 s C y 2 s

We are assuming constant axial velocity, and since tan = C y C x (and Cx = Ca), we can write

= Ca ( tan 1 tan 2 ) s

(11)

From Eqn. (8), neglecting the drag term and substituting from (11) we can also write

L = Cm

which is the expression given by the Kutta-Joukowski Theorem for an isolated airfoil. Note that in the case of the

blade row, the undisturbed velocity seen by the airfoil is in fact the vector mean velocity through the passage.

4.3

rt

rm

1

rh

For preliminary design, we typically consider just the flow at the mean radius and treat the flow

through stage as one-dimensional. The mean radius is normally defined as the radius that divides the flow

area in half:

where rh = hub radius and rt = tip radius. This approach is known as meanline analysis.

The first step is to define the meanline velocity triangles, starting from the specification ( m& P0 or

Q H ) and using the guidelines for , etc. from Chapter 3. To illustrate the procedure, we will use a

semi-quantitative example. Assuming an incompressible flow machine, we will define the velocity triangles

for a stage, consisting of a rotor and a row of stators, that delivers a head rise H at a volume flow rate Q.

From the general guidelines, we choose the following values for the mean radius:

C

= a = 0.5

Flow coefficient:

U

gH E

Work coefficient:

Degree of reaction:

= 0.5

U2

= 0.4

Note that if we were using the Lewis charts from Section 3.5.6, we would probably choose a slightly higher

value of for this value of :

To proceed, we need the value of the Euler head rise, HE = H/. Therefore, we need to guess a

value for the stage efficiency . This can be done from experience, or from the specific speed plots in Chapter

2, or from the approximate correlations shown in Section 3.5.6. Later, we will see how to calculate the

efficiency of the stage we have designed. If this efficiency is different from the one we have guessed here, we

will have designed the stage with an incorrect value of the HE and it will not match the required performance

H. If this turns out to be the case, we will have to return to the beginning and revise the design. Thus, the

design of a turbomachine inherently tends to be iterative: to design the machine we need its efficiency, but we

do not know its efficiency until we have designed it.

Having estimated HE we can then calculate the absolute blade speed (at the mean radius) from our

chosen value of the work coefficient :

U=

gH E

With U determined, the axial velocity at mean radius follows from the chosen value of the flow coefficient :

Ca = U

The chosen value of also determines the relative magnitudes of Ca and U as they will appear in the velocity

diagram: in this case, Ca = 0.5U. Finally, having established Ca, the required annulus area for the stage

follows from one-dimensional continuity:

A=

Q

m&

=

Ca Ca

We will assume simple velocity diagrams, as defined in Section 3.5.1. That is, we assume that the

annulus is shaped such that Ca and U remain constant through the stage: U1 = U2 = U, Ca1 = Ca2 = Ca3 = Ca.

Then from the Euler equation

gH E = U 2 C w2 U 1C w1 = UC w

Knowing U, we now know Cw. Note also that for the simple velocity diagrams, can be written

C w

U

and we therefore also know the relative magnitudes of U and Cw in the velocity triangles: Cw = 0.4U.

Finally, we make use of the degree of reaction to completely define the velocity triangles. Since we

have chosen 50% reaction, equal amounts diffusion are

occurring in the rotor and the stators. Thus the de Haller

Ca1 = C a 2

numbers for the rotor and stators must be the same:

W2 C3

=

W1 C2

2 (+ )

1 (+ )

velocity diagrams, this is achieved by making the

velocity triangles for the inlet and outlet of the rotor

symmetrical, and by designing the stators so that C3 =

C1. That is, we design the stators so that the flow at the U

stage outlet is identical to the flow that entered the stage.

The rotor velocity triangles will then look as shown.

With the velocity triangles established, we can

determine the de Haller numbers:

W2 C3

=

= 0.678

W1 C2

This is approaching the limit of about 0.65 that was

Cw 1 (+ )

C1

Cw 2 (+ )

C2

W1

W2

1 ( )

2 ( )

Cw

recommended in Section 3.5.6 and we will therefore have to monitor our design for the possibility of stall. As

noted in Section 3.5.5, we could reduce the diffusion levels by increasing the flow coefficient .

Note that to achieve 50% reaction in this stage, the

inlet flow must have a swirl angle 1. Thus, there must either

be a stage ahead of the present one, or a set of inlet guide

vanes, that leave the required amount of swirl in the flow. The

flow from this stage will also leave with swirl 3 = 1, so that

C3 = C1 .

Suppose instead that the inlet swirl was specified. For

example, if this is the first stage in the machine then we will

normally have no swirl in the flow, 1 = 0. Using the same

values of and , the velocity triangles will then look as

shown. We can then show that the resulting degree of reaction

is = 0.8. This means that the diffusion is much higher in the

rotor than in the stators and this might at first be a matter for

concern. However, consider the values of the de Haller

numbers (we will assume that the flow leaves the stage with

no swirl, C3 = C1):

Rotor:

W2

= 0.699

W1

Stators:

C3

= 0.781

C2

C a1 = Ca 2

C1

2 (+ )

Cw 2 (+ )

Cw

C2

U

W1

1 = 0

W2

Cw 1 = 0

2 ( )

1 ( )

As expected, the value is lower for the rotor than for the stators. However, the diffusion is actually less than

for the 50% reaction machine. As a result, this stage may be just as feasible as the earlier stage, despite the

high value of degree of reaction.

Having determined the velocity triangles, the next step is to define the blade geometries that will

produce the required velocities.

For the idealized analysis, we define the blade geometry using the assumption that the fluid leaves the

blade row parallel to the metal angle at the trailing edge of the blades: this is known as the Euler

Approximation. In a later section, we will develop the procedures for estimating the actual outlet flow angle,

which will turn out to be slightly different. To bring the flow smoothly into the blade passage, we will also

make the leading edge metal angle parallel to the inlet flow angle. We can then define the shapes of the blades

for the 50% reaction stage as follows:

(i) 1 = 1 to bring the flow smoothly onto the leading edge of the rotor blades.

(ii) In the relative frame of reference, the flow must leave the rotor blade passage at 2 to produce the

required turning. Based on the Euler approximation, the flow will leave the trailing edge at the metal

angle and we therefore use 2 = 2 .

(iii) The stators see the flow in the absolute frame. To bring the flow smoothly onto the leading edge

of the stator blades we therefore make 2 = 2 .

(iv) Again, the flow is assumed to leave the stators at the metal angle, and we use 3 = 3 = 1 .

Note that with the assumptions made, the rotor and stator blade geometries are identical for the 50% reaction

stage.

The geometry of the idealized stage was defined to give the required performance at the design point:

that is, at the design flow rate and rotational speed. However, any turbomachine will often be operated away

from its design point. The idealized analysis can also be used to give reasonable predictions of how the stage

will perform for off-design operating points.

(a) Effect of Varying Flow Rate

Consider first the effect of a reduction in flow rate at fixed blade speed U (i.e. at constant RPM). The

resulting velocity triangles will look as follows:

(i) Based on the Euler Approximation, the flow will still leave the blade rows at the metal angle.

Therefore, 1, 2 (and 3) are unchanged. Recall that there must be a set of stators or inlet guide vanes

ahead of the rotor to account for the inlet swirl.

(ii) From continuity, Ca is reduced and thus so is C1. In a quantitative calculation, the new value of

Ca would just be obtained from Ca = Q A , where Q is the new volume flow rate, and A is the

annulus area as established at the design point.

(iii) The magnitude of W2 is also reduced, by continuity, but the direction is unchanged.

From the velocity triangles, Cw1 has decreased while Cw2 has increased. As a result, the change in

swirl velocity Cw has increased. From the Euler equation

gH E = UC w

and the head rise produced by the machine H = H E will be increased. Equivalently, for a compressible

flow machine, h0 , and the corresponding pressure ratio, P02 P01 , will be increased. Note that this is

consistent with the increase in incidence (angle of attack) at the leading edge of the rotor blade. As a result

of this, the blade should develop greater lift, do more work on the fluid, and thus increase the head rise. On

the other hand, increasing the incidence will eventually lead to stalling of the blade. Thus, reducing the flow

rate through a compressor stage will move it towards stall. Note that the incidence was also increased for the

stators, bringing them closer to stall as well.

Clearly, we can use the velocity triangles and the Euler equation to predict the quantitative stage

characteristic for the idealized stage. It is convenient to express the characteristic in terms of the work and

flow coefficients. The flow turning is

C w = C w2 C w1

and from the velocity triangles (noting that Ww2 is negative for the conventional compressor velocity triangles)

C w1 = Ca tan 1

Then

C w2 = U + Ww2 = U + Ca tan 2

C w = U + Ca ( tan 2 tan 1 )

and dividing by U

C w

C

= 1 + a ( tan 2 tan 1 )

U

U

or

= 1 + m

Thus, the versus curve (effectively, the head rise versus flow rate characteristic) is a straight line with

slope

m = tan 2 tan 1

For the present case, the symmetry of the velocity triangles implies that 2 = 1 and the slope is then

m = 2 tan 1 . For 1 > 0, as is the case here, this gives a negative slope and an inverse relationship between

head rise and flow rate, as inferred above.

Alternatively, since the characteristic

passes through the design point (say, D and D),

we can write

m=

1.0

D 1

D

determined by the choice of design point (note

also that in all cases = 1 at = 0 for the ideal

characteristic). Interestingly, the characteristic

will be steeper for a more lightly-loaded stage

(lower design work coefficient D) as illustrated in

the plot.

D3

0.5

D2

D1

INCREASING

DESIGN-POINT

LOADING

D

0.0

0.5

1.0

It is also worth looking briefly at the effect of varying the blade speed at constant flow rate. Using the

Euler Approximation again, it can be shown that the change in the velocity triangles will look as follows:

From the triangles, = Ca U > D since U has decreased. For the work coefficient, = C w U ,

Cw has clearly decreased, but so has U. However, Cw has decreased more rapidly than U; as can be seen, a

small further decrease in U would reduce Cw to zero. We therefore conclude that = C w U < D and

and are again seen to vary inversely. In summary, any deviation from the design point will cause the a given

compressor to move along the same versus characteristic.

It is also worth noting that the reduction in rotational speed has had a very strong effect on the

absolute work transfer:

gH E = UC w

Since Cw decreases directly with U (and in fact faster than U) the head rise varies approximately as

gH E kU 2

and the head rise delivered by the stage, at a fixed value of flow rate, will change strongly with the rotational

speed: for example, reducing the speed by a factor of 2 will reduce the head rise by about a factor of 4. Thus,

high rotational speed is essential to obtain high pressure rise from a compressor stage. This will be illustrated

further in later sections.

As seen, the Euler Approximation results in an idealized versus characteristic for the stage that is

a straight line with a negative slope.

We have already noted that some changes in operating point will result in positive values of the

incidence at the leading edge of the airfoils. If this incidence becomes too large, we would expect the airfoils

to stall. Also, we would expect the efficiency of the stage to be best when the rotor and stator blades are

operating at the design point. We can therefore project what the actual stage characteristic is likely to be

based on the idealized characteristic:

MAXIMUM

STALL

USING EULER

APPROXIMATION

LIKELY

ACTUAL

The characteristic shown applies for all rotational speeds. As noted, there is a strong effect of

rotational speed on the absolute performance (say H for a given Q). To emphasize this, the characteristics

& ) for constant values of

are often plotted in absolute terms as variations of H (or P0) versus Q (or m

rotational speed N. The corresponding curves are easily calculated from the non-dimensional characteristic.

The resulting map will look as follows.

max

CONSTANT

CONSTANT

On each of the constant speed lines, there will be a point that corresponds to the design point values

of and on the non-dimensional characteristic. At each of those points, the velocity triangles will be

similar, as indicated in the drawing. In each case, the relative velocity vector at the rotor inlet is lined up with

the metal angle and the flow comes smoothly onto the leading edge. As shown, we would therefore expect

that the machine will operate at its maximum efficiency at each of those points, apart perhaps for some small

effect of differing Reynolds numbers. Also, as we will see later, frictional losses vary as V2 and thus the

higher flow velocities with increasing rotational speed will result in higher frictional losses. This effect will

be partly offset by the fact that the Reynolds number is also increasing.

Later in the chapter, we will examine to what degree actual machines match the performance

characteristics we have inferred from the velocity triangles in this section.

Finally, we use the idealized stage analysis to give an example of how the blade shape will vary

across the span. For this example, we will take the case with no inlet swirl from Section 4.3.1. At the mean

radius, = 0.5 and = 0.4. For discussion purposes, we will also take the hub-to-tip ratio, HTR = rh/rt as 0.5.

Note that since the cross-sectional area is determined by the flow rate and the choice of flow coefficient ,

once we choose the HTR, we can calculate the various required radii, rh, rm and rt. Finally, with the mean

radius known and the mean blade speed Um fixed by the choice of work coefficient , we have the rotational

speed, = Um/rm.

To define the resulting spanwise geometry, we assume that the inlet axial velocity Ca is constant

across the span and that we want the same total head rise, gH E = UCw , at every spanwise section. This

fixes the Cw as a function of radius and allows us to draw the velocity triangles for each spanwise section.

The drawing shows the resulting velocity triangles and the blade geometry based on the Euler Approximation,

for three spanwise sections. The table on the next page summarizes the corresponding values of the

performance parameters.

C1

rt

W1

C2

W1

W2

C1

rm

C2

W1

U

W2

C1

rh

W1

U

C2

W2

Parameter

TIP

MEAN

ROOT

Flow Coefficient,

0.395

0.5

0.791

Work Coefficient,

0.25

0.4

1.0

Degree of Reaction,

0.875

0.8

0.5

0.788

0.699

0.62

0.845

0.781

0.62

Note:

(i) This blade design is clearly not acceptable. The work coefficient is far too high at the root and the de

Haller numbers there also indicate too much diffusion. The blade will need to be redesigned. If the stage is

still to produce uniform pressure rise across the span, the mean line work coefficient will have to be reduced.

(ii) The blade exhibits considerable twist across the span. Both this and the large variation in the design

parameters is a function of the hub-to-tip ratio, HTR = rh/rt. Increasing the HTR will make the blade more

uniformly loaded across the span, but since the cross-sectional area is fixed (by the choice of ), this has

consequences for the tip diameter of the machine and the rotational speed. This is demonstrated in the

following sketch, which shows three different blades with the same annulus cross-sectional area but different

values of HTR. In multi-stage compressors, the HTR will normally increase along the machine since the

cross-sectional area is decreased to keep the axial velocity high. This is illustrated by the cross-section of the

compressor from the GE LM2500+ gas turbine engine (17 stages, PR = 23.3).

HTR

0.3

RPM

Higher

0.5

0.8

Lower

4.4

The design parameters introduced in the last chapter apply to a stage or a blade row. Experience has

shown that it is possible to design a stage of good efficiency if the guidelines for those design parameters are

followed. The parameters also fully define the velocity triangles and the corresponding airfoil geometries.

However, the guidelines give no information about the number and the spacing of those airfoils: in other

words, about the solidity = c/s of the blade rows.

For a blade row, the larger the spacing between the airfoils the larger the mass flow that each airfoil is

required to turn. From the control volume analysis in Section 4.2, the resulting lift coefficient was given by

s

C L = 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 )

c

1

= 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 )

and it is seen to vary directly with spacing, or inversely with the solidity. Just as for an isolated airfoil, there is

an upper limit to the lift that a turbomachinery blade can develop before it stalls. For a given set of inlet and

outlet flow angles, it is possible to stay below the loading limit by making the solidity of the blade row large

enough. Thus, the solidity of the blade row is selected on the basis of a blade loading limit. This is in contrast

to the work coefficient, , which was a stage loading limit.

In the past, loading limits for compressor blades have sometimes been expressed in terms of the lift

coefficient (Horlock, 1958). In the early 1950s, Howell suggested that a well-designed compressor airfoil will

stall at

3

C

C L 1 3.3

C2

and designers of low-solidity fans have sometimes used the criterion

c

C L 11

.

s

However, expressing the loading limit simply in terms of CL has been found to be unreliable. Recent practice

has therefore taken a somewhat different approach.

Howell (British Practice)

In the 1950s, Howell conducted an extensive series of cascade measurements on the compressor

airfoils that were commonly used in British compressor design. The performance was measured for a wide

range of the design parameters, including the flow turning angle and solidity. Howell varied the amount of

flow turning up to the onset of stall. The corresponding total-pressure losses were also measured. Howell

suggested that a suitable design turning angle for a blade row was that which corresponded to about 80% of

the turning that would result in stall. He also found that the losses were close to a minimum at this condition.

He therefore presented a correlation that could be used to estimate the solidity that would result in the blade

row operating at 80% of the stalling turning angle. This correlation is shown in the next figure (taken from

Saravanamuttoo et al., 2001).

Knowing the design deflection and outlet flow angle from the velocity triangles, Fig. 5.14 can be used

to select a suitable value of solidity (note that the plot is expressed in terms of s/c = 1/).

Lieblein (NASA Design Practice)

Like Howell in Britain, in the 1950s NACA (now NASA) conducted an extensive set of cascade

measurements to determine the performance of compressor airfoils for a wide range of geometric and

aerodynamic parameters. As described later, these results became the basis for a compressor design system

which is now widely used, both in North America and in Europe (including Britain).

The drawing shows the hypothetical velocity distribution around a compressor blade.

C2

SUCTION SURFACE

Cmax

C1

C1

C2

0

0

x/c

1.0

The performance of the blade is limited by the deceleration (that is, the diffusion or adverse pressure

gradient) on the suction surface of the airfoil. If the diffusion is too great, the boundary layer separates, the

blade stalls, and the losses increase significantly. Lieblein proposed a parameter to measure the severity of the

diffusion:

C2

C

D = max

(1)

C1

As usual, relative velocities W would be used for rotor blades.

Unfortunately, Cmax is a function of the detailed flow around the particular airfoil, which would not be

known early in design. However, the larger the lift (or circulation) being generated by the airfoil the larger

Cmax must be. From Section 4.2.2, the circulation is given by

= s(C w1 Cw2 ) = sC w

and thus we can write

C max = C1 + f ( )

= C1 + f ( sC w )

D =1

C2

1

+

f ( sC w )

C1 C1

Experiments showed that the following form for D correlates the loss and stalling behaviour of a wide range

of blade geometries:

D =1

C w

C2

+

C1 2 C1

(2)

Note that (2) depends only on the upstream and

downstream velocities, which are known once

the velocity triangles are established.

The figure (taken from NASA SP-36,

1966) shows the variation of the total pressure

loss coefficient, 1, with D. As seen, the losses

rise sharply for D > 0.65, implying the onset of

stall. At the design point, the diffusion factor

should therefore be less than this. A suitable

value might be D = 0.3 - 0.4. With D chosen,

the only unknown in (2) is the solidity and it can

therefore be used to select the value of .

4.5

4.5.1 Introduction

The idealized stage analysis used in Section 4.3 made a number of assumptions that are not fully

satisfied in practice. For example, the flow angle at the trailing edge does not precisely match the metal angle,

as assumed in the Euler Approximation. Nor does matching the inlet flow angle to the inlet metal angle

necessarily result in the lowest losses. Finally, we need methods for estimating the losses generally, in order

predict the efficiency of the stage and thus complete its design. To accomplish a more realistic stage analysis,

we need to draw on correlations for the behaviour of actual blade geometries, as determined experimentally.

Such empirical correlations were alluded to in the discussion of blade-loading limits in the last section.

Two systems for empirical performance predictions of axial compressors have been used fairly

widely. The British system, connected mainly with the name of Howell, will be discussed since it is relatively

easy to apply in hand calculations. However, it omits the influence of a number of blade geometric

parameters, does not directly apply to all the families of blade geometries that are in common use, and has

somewhat limited ability to predict the influence of factors such as compressibility.

A more comprehensive, but less easily applied, prediction system was developed by NASA during the

1950s and 60s. This system is summarized in a famous document, NASA SP-36, Aerodynamic Design of

Axial-Flow Compressors published in 1965. SP-36 continues to form the basis for much practical axialcompressor design, both in North America and outside. The correlations presented in SP-36 have also been

re-evaluated and updated from time to time so that the system continues to be applicable.

It should be mentioned the largest gas turbine engine companies (eg. Pratt & Whitney, General

Electric and Rolls-Royce) have to some extent developed their own compressor design systems that reflect

their in-house design philosophies and proprietary blade profile designs. However, these systems are often

structured in similar ways and strongly influenced by the design systems that are available in the open

literature.

The figure shows the nomenclature used by Howell:

Nomenclature:

s

c

a

t

=

=

=

=

=

=

i =

=

=

blade spacing

blade chord

(solidity = c/s)

stagger angle

1' - 2' = camber angle

distance of maximum camber aft of blade leading edge

maximum thickness of blade

incidence = 1 - 1'

deviation = 2 - 2' = difference between outlet flow angle and metal angle

flow turning = 1 - 2

The nomenclature applies for a stationary blade row. For a rotor, replace by and use the relative

components of velocity.

Typical results obtained by Howell for a particular cascade geometry are shown in the following

figure. The figure (taken from Horlock, 1958) shows the variation of flow turning, and the total pressure

loss as a function of the incidence, i.

The cascade performance should depend on the blade and cascade geometry as well as the flow

conditions. Howell suggested that:

= f(

a c, ,

s c,

flow conditions)

i, 2

He also found that the results collapse well onto universal curves if they are normalized in terms of the results

at the "nominal" (or "design"or "reference") flow condition for each cascade. The nominal condition is

defined, somewhat arbitrarily, as the condition at which the flow turning, , is 0.8 of the value at stall. Stall is

the appearance of boundary layer separation, towards the trailing edge, on the low pressure side of the blade.

The appearance of stall manifests itself in a rise in the losses and an impairment of the ability of the blade to

turn the flow. For convenience, Howell defined the stalling incidence as the positive incidence at which the

losses have increased to twice their minimum value. This definition is fairly easy to apply to experimental

data. As the figure above indicates, it also seems to correspond fairly well to the point of maximum flow

turning. The latter point could perhaps have been use as an alternative for identifying the stalling incidence.

The superscript * is used designate nominal values of the flow quantities. Thus

* = nominal deflection = 0.8 stall

The corresponding values of i, and 2 are designated i*, * and 2*.

Howells correlations can be presented in a small number of formulae and graphs.

(a) Deviation at the trailing edge:

1

* = m

(1)

where

2

2*

a

m = 0.23 2 +

c

500

(2)

For normal compressor rotor and stator blades n = 0.5. For the inlet guide vanes (IGVs) ahead of a

compressor stage, Howell suggested using n = 1.0 and a constant value of m = 0.19. Unlike typical

compressor rotor and stator blades, IGVs form an accelerating flow passage. They therefore behave more like

a turbine blade row and this accounts for the difference in the behaviour of the deviation.

(b) Flow turning:

Howell found that the nominal flow turning, *, correlated quite well with just the flow outlet angle,

2*, and the solidity of the blade row, = c/s

* = f 2* ,

c

The correlation is usually presented graphically ( Fig. 5.14 from Saravanamuttoo et al.) and was used in

Section 4.4 to select the solidity.

The blade will often be used at other than the nominal (design) flow conditions. Howell was able to

correlate fairly successfully the off-design behaviour of the cascades by plotting the results against the nondimensional relative incidence, irel = (i - i*)/*. Figure 3.17 (taken from Dixon) shows the normalized flow

turning, /* as a function of irel. The figure also shows the variation of the losses (expressed as a drag

coefficient) with relative incidence. As seen, the losses are close to a minimum at the nominal condition.

Loss estimates will be discussed separately later.

Howell obtained most of his cascade data for a Reynolds number of 300,000 (based on blade chord

and upstream velocity). The resistance of the suction-surface boundary layer to separation is a function of the

thickness of the boundary layer and whether it is laminar or turbulent. Thus, the flow turning behaviour of the

blade row is a function of the Reynolds number, particularly at low values. Howell examined the dependence

of the flow turning on the Reynolds number. Figure 3.3 (taken from Horlock) shows the effect of Reynolds

number on the nominal turning.

The correlations presented to this point can be used to predict the flow turning capability of a

compressor blade row. As mentioned, loss estimates will be considered later.

The correlations can be used in two ways: for analysis or for design.

Analysis:

Predicting the performance of a blade row of specified geometry.

Design: Determining the geometry of a blade row which produces a specified performance.

The approach is a little different for each case. Each will be described and the analysis mode will then be

illustrated with an example.

Analysis Mode Calculations:

In this case, the inlet flow direction (1 or 1) is specified and the blade row geometry is known (1',

2', a/c, and = c/s). The goal is to predict the outlet flow angle, 2.

(i) The performance depends strongly on 2*. Since it is not known initially, it must be determined

(by iteration). Guess a value of 2*. Use equations (1) and (2) to calculate *. Then

2* = 2 + *

Compare this value with the assumed 2*, revise as necessary and repeat until 2* and * are

consistent.

(ii) Read the value of * from Fig. 5.14. Then

1* = 2* + *

i * = 1* 1

The nominal conditions are now known.

(iii) If the actual i = 1* - 1' is different from i* then the blade row is operating "off-design". Fig.

3.17 would then be used to determine the actual flow turning. The Reynolds number correction

would be applied to the turning if appropriate.

Design Mode Calculations:

Again, the inlet flow direction (1 or 1) would be specified. Typically, the shape of the camber line

(ie. a/c) would also be selected. The goal is then to choose a blade row geometry (1', 2', and = c/s) which

will give the desired outlet flow angle, 2. This application of the correlations is a little more complicated

since there is in fact a range of geometries which will satisfy the requirements.

One possible approach is to use the nominal values for the design point. This is reasonable since

nominal conditions give near-minimum losses and provide some stall margin. Then

2* = 2 1* = 1

and * = 1 2

With 2* and * known, Fig. 5.14 is now used to choose the solidity, (this was the way that Fig 5.14 was

used in Section 4.4). Since the blade row is operating at the nominal conditions, the deviation will also be that

given by Eqns. (1) and (2). However, * is also a function of the camber, . From the drawing of the cascade,

the flow turning is related to the camber by

=i +

Thus, the value of the camber will depend on the choice made for i*. Howells correlations indicate that there

is no unique choice for the design incidence, although he recommends that a value be chosen of a few degrees

at most. Reductions in camber can be compensated for by increases in incidence, and vice versa. Note that

these changes will also result in a change in the stagger of the blade row. In summary, according to the

Howells correlations a variety of blade geometries can produce identical aerodynamic performance. This

gives the designer some freedom to tailor the blade geometry to meet other possible requirements: eg. to

simplify the spanwise variation in the blade geometry, to alter a natural frequency, or to alter the stress level in

some region.

The Howell cascade measurements were made for the British C family of compressor blade profiles.

Therefore, a compressor designed according to the correlations is most likely to match the predicted

performance if the same blade profiles are used in the machine. The C4 profile, one of the most widely used

of the C-family profiles, is described in an appendix to these notes.

For use in computer programs or with analysis software (such as Mathcad or Matlab), the graphs for

the Howells correlations have been fitted by polynomials. These curve and surface fits are also given in an

appendix.

The NASA correlations are based on a large body of cascade data collected for blades using the

NACA 65-series airfoil profile shape (Emery et al., "Systematic Two-Dimensional Cascade Tests of NACA

65-Series Compressor Blades at Low Speeds," NACA Report 1368, 1958). The results are correlated and

design procedures are summarized in NASA SP-36 ("Aerodynamic Design of Axial-Flow Compressors",

1965). SP-36 also includes data for double circular-arc (DCA) blades which have been used to design

transonic compressors.

As noted, Howells correlations do not give clear guidance for the choice of design incidence. While

the nominal incidence, i*, is a reasonable choice for the design point, it is also clear from Fig. 3.17 that using

i* does not in general minimize the profile losses. Howells correlations also do not take into account some

geometric parameters which are known to affect the blade performance, such the ratio of maximum-thicknessto-chord, tmax/c. Finally, the Howells correlations are most suitable for analyzing the performance of a blade

row of specified geometry ("analysis mode") rather than determing a geometry which gives a desired

performance ("design mode").

By comparison, the NASA correlations are intended particularly for use in design mode, although

they can also be used for analysis. They guide the designer to a choice of design incidence which nominally

minimizes the profile losses. The correlations also account for more aspects of the blade geometry. The

drawback to using the NASA correlations is that reference must be made to more graphs than for the Howells

correlations.

For consistency with the SP-36 graphs, the procedures will be described in terms of the nomenclature

used by NASA.

As with the Howell correlations, the incidence and deviation are defined in terms of some reference

flow condition, although the definition of this condition is slightly different. Fig. 131 (from SP-36) shows the

definition of the reference incidence, iref. It is the

incidence half way between two off-design values of

incidence at which the losses are equal. SP-36

usually refers to this as the minimum-loss

incidence although the losses will only be a

minimum if the loss bucket is symmetrical. As

evident from Fig. 3.17, this is not normally the case.

Nevertheless, the reference condition will be near

minimum loss and thus would be a reasonable choice

for the design point. The deviation produced at the

reference incidence is designated as ref.

For specified inlet and outlet flow angles, 1

and 2, the required flow turning, = 1 - 2, is related to the camber, incidence and deviation by

= + i

If we use the reference values of incidence and deviation then

= + i ref ref

(1)

It was found that the deviation angle and the minimum-loss incidence vary linearly with the blade camber:

i ref = i 0 + n

ref = 0 + m

where i0 and 0 are the values for the same blade when it has zero camber. Substituting into (1), the required

camber is given by

+ 0 i 0

1+ n m

(2)

The correlations are then used to find the values of the four unknowns on the right-hand side of (2).

The minimum-loss incidence at zero camber is written

i 0 = ( K i ) sh ( Ki ) t (i 0 ) 10

(3)

where

(i0)10

minimum-loss incidence for a blade with zero camber and 10% thickness

(Ki)sh

shape correction to be applied when blades of other than the 65-series profile are

being used

(Ki)t

For 65-A10 series blades, the correlations for the incidence related quantities are given on the

following graphs from NASA SP-36 (the graphs are reproduced at the end of the section):

(i0)10

(Ki)t

f3(t/c)

Fig. 142

For 65-series blades the shape correction, (Ki)sh, is simply 1.0. However, it has been suggested that the same

correlations can be used to design C-series (C4 etc.) blades with circular-arc camber lines by setting

(Ki)sh = 1.1, and to design DCA blading by setting (Ki)sh = 0.7.

The zero-camber deviation, 0, is obtained in a similar way:

0 = ( K ) sh ( K ) t ( 0 ) 10

(4)

where

(0)10

reference deviation for a blade with zero camber and 10% thickness

(K)sh

shape correction to be applied when blades of other than the 65-series profile are

being used

(K)t

For 65-A10 series blades, the correlations are given on the following graphs:

(0)10

f4(1,)

Fig. 161

(K)t

f5(t/c)

Fig. 172

As with the incidence, for 65-series blades the shape correction for deviation, (K)sh, is simply 1.0. For C4 and

DCA the same values of the shape correction as for incidence have been suggested: 1.1 and 0.7 respectively.

The deviation gradient, m, is also a function of 1 and . It is usually obtained using a deviation rule

similar to that used in the Howells correlations:

m=

m =1.0

(5)

where

m=1.0

f6(1)

Fig. 163

f7(1)

Fig. 164.

Eqn. (2) defines the camber required for the blade if the reference conditions are chosen as the design

point. However, there may be a variety of reasons to choose a different incidence at the design point, in the

same way that nominal conditions might not be used when designing a compressor using Howells

correlations. If i is different from iref then will also be different from ref. The resulting value of can be

predicted from

d

= ref + (i i ref )

di ref

(6)

The procedures just outlined can be used by the designer to obtain a blade row with a geometry which

will result in the required performance: that is, they are suitable for use in design mode. Of course, some

decisions must already have been made concerning the type of blading (C-series, 65-series, DCA etc.), the

camber line shape, if other than 65-series blades are used, and the maximum thickness.

Eqn. (6) also allows the correlations to be used in analysis mode. For analysis mode calculations the

following approach would be used:

(i) For the specified geometry and design inlet-flow direction, 1, the reference conditions are first

determined.

(ii) For an off-design inlet value of 1, Eqn. (6) would then be used to predict the deviation. This

defines the outlet flow direction, 2, and the off-design velocity triangle is then known.

As with the Howells correlations, curve and surface fits for the SP-36 correlations are given in an

Appendix.

4.6

The drawing shows schematically the flow through the blade passage of a compressor rotor. In

addition to the frictional effects in the boundary layers on the surfaces of the rotor blades, there are a number

of other flow features that can generate losses. The losses due to each of these features are normally estimated

individually and then simply added to estimate the resultant losses through the blade passage.

For axial machines (both compressors and turbines), the losses are therefore subdivided into:

(i) Profile losses:

These are the losses generated by friction in blade-surface boundary layers, by the

sudden expansion in area at the trailing edge, and by the mixing out of the wake

downstream of the blade.

(ii) Secondary losses: The slower-moving flow in endwall boundary layers is "over turned" by the blade-toblade pressure field, as shown in the drawing. The fluid swept towards the low

pressure (suction) side of the passage is blocked by the blade surface and rolls up

into a "passage vortex" that generates additional losses through high shear stresses at

the endwalls and as it mixes with the downstream flow. The boundary-layer

separation around the blade leading edge also results in a "horseshoe vortex".

(iii) Annulus losses:

These are generated by friction on the endwalls, mainly upstream and downstream of

the blade passage. The endwall losses inside the passage are normally assigned to

the secondary losses.

(iv) Tip-leakage losses: There must be some clearance between the rotor blade tips and the compressor

casing. The flow that is driven through the tip gap rolls up into a "tip-leakage

vortex" as it interact with the main passage flow. There are viscous (frictional)

losses inside the gap, but most of the tip-leakage losses are generated through

downstream mixing with the surrounding fluid.

In transonic and supersonic compressors, there will be additional losses due to the presence of shock

waves.

Howell gave simple correlations, expressed mostly in terms of drag coefficients, to estimate the losses:

(i) Profile Losses:

The profile losses were expressed as a function of both the incidence and the spacing-to-chord ratio,

s/l (Howell used the symbol l for chord length), as shown earlier in Dixon Fig. 3.17 (repeated here).

Howell concluded that the secondary losses at the endwalls depended primarily on the lift being

generated by the airfoils, since this determined the pressure difference that drives the flow across the passage

to form the secondary flow. Thus

C DS = 0.018 C L2

s

C L = 2 ( tan 1 tan 2 ) cos m

c

and

tan 1 + tan 2

m = arctan

2

For the rotor flow, we would use the relative flow angles, $1 and $2, as usual.

(iii) Annulus Losses:

C DA = 0.02

s

sc

0.02

= 0.02

=

h

c h AR

(iv) Tip-Clearance Losses:

The tip clearance loss is found to be a strong function of the height of the clearance gap J compared

with the blade span h. Howell suggested that a 1% increase in the rotor clearance gap would reduce the stage

efficiency by 3%:

clearance = 3

With the drag coefficients corresponding to the losses determined, the corresponding total-pressure

losses can be calculated from Eqn. (6a) or (6b) from Section 4.2.1. Equation (6b) is usually the most

convenient:

1

P0, loss = C D Ca2

cos 3 m

2

(6b)

Section 4.6.5 explains how to use the estimated total-pressure losses to obtain the stage efficiency.

The NASA system for axial compressor loss prediction, described next, uses direct correlations for

total pressure loss coefficient, rather than for drag coefficient.

C

NASA SP-36 is associated with the name of

Lieblein, as were the blade loading limits

presented in Section 4.4. In that section, it was

seen that the profile losses correlated quite

well with the diffusion factor defined by

Lieblein, which was defined as

C C2

D = max

C1

C2

SUCTION SURFACE

Cmax

C1

C1

C2

0

0

(1)

x/c

1.0

However, Lieblein subsequently argued that the profile losses should depend primarily on the amount

of diffusion on the suction side of the blade. He therefore introduced an alternative parameter, known as the

equivalent diffusion ratio:

Deq =

C max

C2

(2)

Note that Deq resembles the deHaller number. Whereas the deHaller number defines the net diffusion between

the inlet and outlet of the blade row, Deq defines the local diffusion on the suction side of the airfoil. Lieblein

then correlated the profile losses with Deq and this approach has since been widely adopted.

As with the diffusion factor D, the exact value of the Deq is only known if the detailed flow around the

airfoil is known. For use in the early stages of design, an approximate value of Deq, estimated from the

circulation, is therefore used. The following correlation appears to be widely accepted:

Deq =

cos 2

. + 0.61

112

(

1

2 )

cos 1

(3)

y

in the wake, as measured by the momentum thickness 2

downstream of the airfoil:

C2,ref

s

C 2 (y )

s

0

C2

C2 ,ref

C

1 2

C2 ,ref

dy

corresponding total-pressure loss coefficient is then given by

2

cos 1

= 2

(4)

c cos 2 cos 2

where

P01 P02

1

C12

2

(5)

The loss correlation is then expressed in terms of the variation of the momentum thickness ratio, 2/c,

with equivalent diffusion ratio, Deq:

= f ( Deq )

c

(6)

The figure shows the original data set, obtained for NACA 65-series compressor airfoils, that was

used by Lieblein. Also shown are various curve fits for the function in (6) that have been proposed over the

years. Note that losses begin to rise sharply at Deq 2.0 and this would be interpreted as the onset of stall. For

the original diffusion factor, Eqn (1), the corresponding value was D 0.6 (see Section 4.4)

Comparison of Correlations with Lieblein Data

0.12

Aungier

Wilson & Korakianitis

Koch & Smith

Casey/Starke

Konig et al

0.1

0.08

0.06

Lieblein Data

0.04

0.02

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.2

2.4

2.6

Recently, Konig et al. (W.M. Konig, D.K. Hennecke & L. Fottner, Improved Blade Profile Loss and

Deviation Models for Advanced Transonic Compressor Bladings: Part I - A Model for Subsonic Flow,

ASME Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 118, January 1996, pp. 73-80.) investigated whether the Lieblein

correlation approach worked equally well for more recent compressor airfoil shapes. Their data are shown in

the next figure, along with the same curve fits.

Comparison of Correlations with Konig et al. Data

0.12

Aungier

Wilson & Korakianitis

Koch & Smith

Casey/Starke

Konig et al

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

Konig et al. Data

0.02

+

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.2

2.4

2.6

Although there is some evidence that more recent blade designs can tolerate somewhat higher values

of Deq before stalling, the curve fit suggested by Aungier (R.H. Aungier, Axial-Flow Compressors, ASME

Press, 2003) seems as reasonable as any, for both data sets:

2

8

= 0.004 10

. + 31

. ( Deq 1) + 0.4( Deq 1)

(7)

(1) Deq is estimated from the velocity triangles and the blade row solidity using (3).

(2) From Deq obtain the momentum thickness ratio, 2/c, using (7).

(3) The total-pressure loss coefficient T is then calculated from (4).

The method outlined here assumes that the blade is operating at its minimum-loss incidence, i* (see

Section 4.5.3). If i > i* then Lieblein suggested that (3) should be replaced by

Deq =

cos 2

. + 0.61

112

(

1

2)

cos 1

1.43

where a = 0.0117 for NACA 65-series blades and 0.007 for C4-series circular-arc blades.

NASA SP-36 does not provide clear guidance for estimating either the secondary losses or tip

clearance losses for the purposes of meanline analysis.

Instead, most recent text books (eg. Japikse & Baines) and papers seem to recommend a method

developed by Koch & Smith at General Electric (Koch, C.C. and Smith, L.H., Loss Sources and Magnitudes

in Axial-Flow Compressors, ASME J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 98, 1976, pp. 411-424). The method provides

combined estimates for the effects on stage efficiency of both secondary flows and tip leakage. This is

physically reasonable since, where both are present, the secondary and tip-leakage flows are in close proximity

and tend to interact significantly. Unfortunately, the method is somewhat difficult to apply since it requires a

fairly detailed knowledge of the stage geometry. It is also necessary to specify how close the stage is to stall

at the operating point for which the loss estimates are being made. Nevertheless, because of the importance of

endwall losses and the apparent widespread acceptance of the Koch & Smith method, it is worth examining.

The final output of the method is a correction to the stage efficiency, expressed in the form

2 *

1

h

=

P 1 2

h

where

P

*

=

=

=

(1)

average displacement thickness of the two endwall boundary layers

average tangential force-deficit thickness for the two endwall boundary

layers

The tangential force-deficit thickness is a measure of the reduction in blade force near the endwalls due to the

lower fluid velocity present in the endwall boundary layers.

Koch & Smith provide correlations, derived from very wide-ranging tests conducted on a large, lowspeed compressor test rig, for estimating the values of * and . The drawing defines some of the geometric

parameters that appear in the correlations.

s

=

=

=

=

spacing

stagger angle

staggered spacing

s cos

=

=

=

tip clearance

blade span

axial gap between rotor and stators

example, the staggered spacing used is the average value for the rotor and

stator blade passages. Similarly, the tip clearance would be the average of

the values for the rotors and the stators. Normally, this would result in the

clearance value being half of that for the rotor blades, since the stator

clearance is usually zero. However, stators are sometimes cantilevered

s

g

from the casing wall and have a clearance at the hub wall. If the stators are variable pitch, they will also need

clearance.

The Koch & Smith correlation is embodied in three graphs.

(a) Displacement thickness. The first graph is used to estimate the displacement thickness as a function of

the clearance and the pressure rise ratio:

C P

2 *

= f

,

g

C P ,max g

where

C P =

P

q

with P the static pressure rise across the stage and q the average of the inlet dynamic pressures for the rotor

and stator rows. C P,max is the maximum value of the static pressure rise coefficient for the same stage,

corresponding to the stalling of the stage.

The pressure rise ratio is probably the most difficult input to obtain. However, for preliminary design

it may be sufficient to choose a value that seems generally consistent with the stage and blade loading that has

been chosen. For example, if the deHaller numbers are low and the solidities have been selected to give

relatively high values of the diffusion factors, the pressure rise ratio would be expected to be towards the

higher end of the scale.

0.55

0.5

0.45

0.4

2*/g

0.35

0.3

/g = 0.10

0.075

0.25

0.050

0.2

0.025

0.15

/g = 0.0

0.1

0.05

0

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

C P/CP,max

0.9

0.95

(b) Effect of Axial Spacing. Koch & Smith concluded that the average displacement thickness of the endwall

boundary layer would vary with the axial spacing between the rotor blade and the stators. If that spacing is

different from 0.35s, then the following correction is applied to the displacement thickness given by the

previous figure.

1.1

1.05

2*/(2*)ref

0.95

0.9

0.85

0.8

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

(c) Force Deficit Thickness. Finally the force-deficit thickness is correlated against the displacement

thickness as given in the following figure.

0.9

0.8

0.7

2/2*

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0.75

0.8

0.85

CP/CP,max

0.9

0.95

the parameters in which it appears can be related to more familiar ones. For example,

hc s

=

g hcsg

AR

=

h cos

(2)

Values of the tip clearance are often specified as a fraction of the blade span h. Therefore, reasonable values

of /h would be known early in design. Eqn. (2) also implies that the Koch & Smith correlation can be used to

conduct parametric studies to investigate the influence on the endwall losses of common design parameters

such as the solidity and the blade aspect ratio AR = h/c.

For use in Eqn. (1), note that

2 * 2 * g s c

=

h

g s ch

=

2 * cos

g AR

The Howell correlation for the profile losses for C-series airfoils presented in Section 4.6.2 included

the influence of incidence. As seen, the losses rose more rapidly with positive incidence than with negative.

However, the precise behaviour of the losses with incidence is strongly influenced by the geometry of the

blade section.

In addition, the Howell results apply only for low subsonic values of the inlet Mach number. The loss

behaviour of the airfoil is also strongly influenced by the inlet Mach number.

We do not have time in this course to go into these issues in detail. Therefore, only some

representative results are presented to illustrate the complexities.

The figure (taken from SP-36) shows the variation of profile losses with both incidence and inlet

Mach number for four different airfoil and cascade geometries.

Note that the two examples of the British C4-series airfoils differ mainly in the shape of the camber

lines and yet their sensitivity to both the inlet Mach number and the incidence are significantly different.

The double circular arc (DCA) profiles were specifically developed by NACA for use in transonic

compressors. It is seen that their sensitivity to Mach number is delayed to a higher inlet Mach number than

some of the other shapes.

The strong influence of the detailed airfoil geometry on the behaviour at both off-design incidence

and with increasing inlet Mach number obviously makes it more difficult to devise simple correlations for the

losses, liked those presented in Sections 4.6.2 and 4.6.3. For a recent attempt, see W.M. Konig, D.K.

Hennecke & L. Fottner, Improved Blade Profile Loss and Deviation Models for Advanced Transonic

Compressor Bladings: Part II - A Model for Supersonicc Flow, ASME Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 118,

January 1996, pp. 81-87.

With the total-pressure losses across the stage P0,loss determined from the correlations described in

Section 4.6.2 or 4.6.3, the total-pressure rise across the stage is then:

P0 = P0, ideal P0 , loss

where )P0,ideal is the pressure rise that would have been obtained in an ideal machine having the same work

input.

(i) For compressible flow of a perfect gas, the ideal pressure rise is

where

P03 T03 1

=

P01 T01

and T03 is the (actual) final T0 corresponding to the work input: )h0 = Cp(T03 - T01)

T0

P03

P03

T03

T03

P01

T01

P03 = P03 P0, loss

The corresponding efficiency can be calculated by determining the power required to compress

through the same pressure ratio, P03/P01, in an isentropic machine:

T03 P03

=

T01 P01

Then

T03 T01

T03 T01

For hand calculations, the following approximation results in only a small error

P0

P0, ideal

If any of the loss components is expressed in terms of an efficiency decrement, as is sometimes the case with

tip-leakage loss, its contribution to the total pressure losses can be estimated from

P0, TL clearance P0, ideal

(ii) For incompressible flow, we can use

P0 , ideal = g H E = (U 2 C w 2 U 1 C w1 ) U C w

and

=

where, as before

P0

P0, ideal

P0 = P0,ideal P0,loss

4.7

As the flow rate through a compressor or fan is reduced at constant rotational speed, the velocity

triangles show that the incidence at the leading edge of the rotor blades is increased. If the incidence becomes

too large, the blades may stall.

The disorganized flow in the stalled region partially blocks the blade passage. As a result some of the

fluid that was previously passing through the stalled passage is diverted to the adjacent passages, as indicated

in the middle figure. This has the effect of increasing the incidence at the airfoil lying next to the stalled

region while reducing the incidence at the other adjacent airfoil. The increase in incidence on the one adjacent

airfoil may cause it to stall in turn. On the other hand, the airfoil which has its incidence reduced will move

further away from stall, or may unstall if it was previously stalled. Thus, there is a tendency for the stall cell

to migrate from blade passage to blade passage in the opposite direction to the rotation. This phenomenon is

known as rotating stall. The stall cells move in the opposite direction to the rotation at a relative speed which

is about half the rotational speed.

MIGRATION OF

STALL CELL

NORMAL ATTACHED

FLOW

SEPARATION OF

BLADE BOUNDARY

LAYER - BLADE STALL

ROTATING STALL

The rotating stall can take a number of patterns. It may involve only one blade passage, or a large

number of adjacent blade passages around the annulus. If the rotor is at the front of a multi-stage compressor,

it will have a relatively low hub-to-tip ratio. As seen in Section 4.3.4, the loading will then vary considerably

across the span and it will be the hub region that will have the highest loading and therefore be the most likely

to stall. In that case, the may stall cells may only involve part of the span of the blade. If the blades have high

hub-to-tip ratio, the stall is more likely to extend across the full span.

Particularly if the rotating stall occurs at low speed and only involves part of the span, it may not be a

danger to the machine. It is nevertheless undesirable since:

(i) The stalled passages, and therefore the stage, produce less pressure rise.

(ii) The stage losses will be higher, leading to lower efficiency.

(iii) The fluctuating forces on the blades as they successively stall and unstall will be a source of

noise.

For reasons discussed in Section 4.8, it is fairly common for the early stages of multi-stage axial

compressors to experience some rotating stall at low rotational speeds. If it is present only during start-up and

shut-down of the machine, this may be acceptable.

4.7.2 Surge

If the stall is very extensive, the pressure rise may be affected to the point that the slope of the P0

& characteristic becomes positive. As will be shown in Chapter 7, if this occurs the system of which

versus m

the compressor is a part can become dynamically unstable. If this instability is triggered, the result is known

as surge. The peak point of the compressor characteristic is therefore often identified as the surge point.

P0

SURGE

ROTATING

STALL

N const .

&

m

analysis identifies the various factors that will make the system more or less prone to surge. However, a

simple physical argument can illustrate the sequence of events that might occur during a surge event.

Consider a gas turbine engine that is operating at high speed and high power or thrust output.

At steady state, the combustor is being filled with gas by the compressor at the same rate as it is

being drained through the turbine. At any instant in time, there is a fairly large mass of gas present in the

volume of the combustor. Now suppose that the last stage of the compressor suddenly stalls. This might be

due to some disturbance that causes a drop in the mass flow rate through the machine. Since the last stage

normally has a high hub-to-tip ratio, the stall may involve the full span of the blades and all of the passages, as

described in the last section.

If the stall is very extensive, there will be an abrupt drop in the pressure of the gas delivered by the

compressor. The flow area through the turbine is relatively small and this limits the outflow through the

turbine. Consequently, the pressure in the combustor will drop somewhat gradually. It the rate of pressure

drop is too slow, the situation can occur that the pressure in the combustor is higher than the pressure at the

compressor outlet. Since fluid tends to flow from a region of high pressure to one of low pressure, it is

therefore possible for the high pressure gases from the combustor to flow back upstream into the compressor.

The pressure in the combustor will eventually drop to below the compressor discharge pressure, at which point

the flow in the compressor may re-establish itself. However, if the conditions that led to the initial stall are still

present, the whole process can repeat. The cyclic flow reversal in the compressor can result in very large

fluctuating forces on the blades which can destroy the machine. In the gas turbine engine, the abrupt drop in

compressed air supplied to the combustor can also lead to over-temperatures and resultant serious damage to

the turbines.

4.8

MULTI-STAGE COMPRESSORS

We now examine the aerodynamic behaviour of multi-stage compressors.

For arguments sake, we will consider a hypothetical four-stage compressor made up of stages with

identical aerodynamic characteristics and thus identical stage design points. Therefore, at design point for the

machine as a whole, each of the stages will be running at their individual design points, which occur for the

same value of the flow coefficient = Ca/U for all of the stages. Assume also that the mean radius, and thus

the blade speed U, is the same for all four stages. Since the density of the gas increases across each successive

stage, to maintain the constant axial velocity Ca needed to keep constant it is necessary to reduce the annulus

area along the machine. This variation in the cross-sectional area would be determined at the design-point

flow conditions.

Ca

U

U

Ca

DESIGN N

1

m& = Ca A

3

OR

Ca =

m&

VARIATION

DUE TO

COMPRESSION

Ca

TARGET Ca

VARIATION

A

AREA VARIATION

TO ACHIEVE

TARGET Ca

DESIGN POINT

Now consider what happens if the compressor is run at a rotational speed that is lower than the design

value. To see the effect, we will just consider the first two stages:

STAGE I

STAGE II

Since the annulus area has been adjusted such that at the design point the two stages have the same

flow coefficient:

I D = II D = D

For stage I

I =

D

CaI D

UD

P1 + PI D

RT3D

Ca 3 D =

m& D

3D A3

II =

D

Ca 3 D

UD

Now consider the effect of halving N (ie. halving U) while also halving m& (ie. halving Ca) to keep

Stage I operating at its design :

1

C a 1D

2

I =

= ID

1

UD

2

Thus, Stage I will also be operating at its design . However, the absolute h0 (and thus P0} varies as U2 and

the pressure rise is therefore reduced to

1

P1 + PD

1

4

P PD and 3 =

RT3

4

Neglecting the changes in T3, which will be relatively much smaller than the changes in P3, then

1

P + PD

3

4

.

< 10

3

P + PD

D

Ca 3

Ca 3 D

m&

3 m&

A

1

= 3 3 = D

= ( > 10

. ) = k

m& D

2

3 m& D

3D A3

II =

Ca 3 kCa 3D

k

=

= II D

1

1

U

UD

2

2

and since k > 1/2, II > II D . Thus, the non-dimensional operating point for Stage II shifts to a lower value of

than the design value. Stage I undercompresses the fluid due to the reduction in U2. But stage II

undercompresses the fluid even more than Stage I due to the reduction in both U2 and . This effect only

increases in the subsequent stages. For the 4-stage compressor with four identical stages we would therefore

expect to see the following pattern of operating points:

Ca

U

U

Ca

LOW N, STAGE 1 AT DESIGN

1

2

Ca =

m&

A

VARIATION

(UNDERCOMPRESSION)

Ca

DESIGN Ca

VARIATION

NEW Ca

VARIATION

A

AREA VARIATION

(FIXED)

If we now reduce the mass flow rate at the low speed operating

point, keeping N constant, the flow coefficient for Stage I will be

lowered. Stage I will then be producing slightly higher pressure rise.

However, the effect of the low U2 is much greater than the small

increase in and Stage I will still be producing much lower pressure

rise than at the design N. Consequently, Stage I is still undercompressing the fluid and the downstream stages will again be at

successively higher values of . We therefore conclude that if we

throttle the flow further, Stage I will be the first to reach its stalling

value of .

m&

LOW N, THROTTLED

1

2

3

arguments will lead to the conclusion that each stage is over-compressing the

fluid. Consequently, the Ca into successive stages decreases and so does the

flow coefficient . We would therefore expect to see the approximate pattern

of operating points shown. Note that if we throttle the flow further, it will now

be the last stage which stalls first.

4

3

2

Combining these arguments, we can plot the expected map for the compressor as a whole.

1

P02

P01

3

4

HIGH-SPEED

OPERATING POINT

max

HYPOTHETICAL

STEADY-STATE

OPERATING LINE

DESIGN

POINT

COMPRESSOR

SURGE LINE

CONSTANT

SPEED LINE

T01

3

m& T01

P01

Note that:

(i) Over most of the map, we assume that the stalling of any stage results in compressor surge. As a

result, when the onset of the stall switches from the front to the back of the machine (near the design

N), there is a discontinuity in the slope (or knee) in the surge line.

At low values of N, stall is expected to occur first in the first stage of the compressor.

However, since the early stages of the compressor have lower hub-to-tip ratios, the stall there is more

likely to be part-span, rotating stall (as discussed in Section 4.7). This, combined with the fact that

the absolute forces on the blades will be low at low N, means that some degree of rotating stall is

acceptable at low N. As a result, at the low end of the map the surge line has a kink, indicating that

some early-stage stall is allowed.

(ii) At the design point of the compressor, all of the individual stages are operating at their design

points and therefore have their maximum efficiencies. From the earlier discussion, it is evident that at

any other operating point at most one of the stages will be operating at best efficiency. Therefore, the

efficiency of the overall compressor will be less than its value at design. For this reason, the lines of

constant efficiency are shown as closed contours surrounding the design point.

The compressor map shown is a hypothetical one. In practice, the individual stages in a multi-stage

machine will not all have identical characteristics. Nor are the stall lines for the individual stages likely to

cross at exactly the same point on the map, and as a result the knee in the surge line will probably not be as

well defined. Nevertheless, many of the features are reproduced by actual compressor maps, as shown on the

following:

4.9

For solidities, F, less than about 0.4 each blade can be treated as an isolated airfoil. Note that F = 0.4

was the lowest value of solidity that appeared on the NASA SP-36 correlations (Section 4.5.3). Usually, the

blade is divided into a series of spanwise segments or blade elements. Three-dimensional flow effects in the

form of spanwise flows are usually neglected, although the downwash induced by the trailing vortex system is

sometimes taken into account. This approach, known as the "blade-element method", is commonly used to

design propellers and low-performance axial fans.

Consider the flow relative to a blade element. The element behaves like an isolated airfoil in a stream

in the direction of the vector mean of the inlet and outlet flows:

ZLL

Wm

=

=

vector mean velocity relative to blade element

Wm =

P

)L

=

=

=

)D

)X

)Y

CL, CD =

Ca

Q

tan 1 + tan 2

; m = arctan

; Ca =

A

cos m

2

lift force on blade element (perpendicular to Wm)

1/2DWm2c)rCL

(1)

where c = chord length of blade element

)r = radial width of blade element

CL = lift coefficient of blade element (as obtained from airfoil

characteristics and P)

drag force on blade element (parallel to Wm)

(normally )D )L)

axial component of force on blade element

)X . )L sin$m (see note at end of section)

tangential component of force on blade element

fns [P, section shape, Re]

- as obtained from airfoil data

The axial force is obtained from the momentum equation (with Ca = const.):

(2)

Fx = N B X = AP = (2 rr ) P

where NB

)P

=

=

(3a)

no. of blades

static pressure difference across the blade row

1

N B Wm2 crC L sin m 2rrP

1

N B Wm2 cC L sin m 2rP

(3b)

QP0

W&in = T =

Qh0 Q(UC w )

R

(4a)

)T

)Q

0R

)P0

=

=

=

=

volume flow rate through annulus width )r

rotor efficiency (0R =1 if CD = 0)

total pressure difference across rotor (usually )P0 . )P since C1 . C2)

Substituting for the torque in terms of the components of the lift and drag forces ()T = NBr)Y)

QP0

1

= Q(UCw ) (4b)

R

2

Rotor and stator blade rows can then be designed using Eqns. (1) - (4). Iteration will generally be

necessary since W2 is a function of )L, which is a function Wm, which in turn is a function of W2. The

analysis would be performed at enough spamwise sections to define the full blade geometry.

Propeller analysis usually takes into account the "downwash" induced along the blade span by the

trailing tip vortices from the blades. The downwash would slightly alter the effective flow incidence seen by

the blade and thus the lift it develops.

To make the velocity triangle diagram clearer, the blade was sketched with somewhat lower stagger

angle than would normally be found in practice. The diagram shows the force triangles for a more realistic

value of the stagger angle:

L

X F

Wm

Note that )D makes a noticeable contribution to the magnitude of )Y but has a much smaller influence on the

magnitude of )X. This is the reason that )D can be neglected when determining )X, but needs to included

when determining )Y.

5.2

The geometry of an axial-flow turbine blade is similar that of an axial-flow compressor blade, except

that camber is usually much larger. The stage consists of a set of stators ("nozzles") followed by a rotor. The

nozzles control the swirl in the flow entering the rotor and the rotor then extracts work from the fluid by

removing swirl. This arrangement of components results in stage aerodynamic characteristics that are very

different from those obtained for an axial compressor.

We begin again by estimating the stage performance based on an idealized stage:

(i) Simple velocity triangles are assumed: constant axial velocity through the stage and constant mean

radius, resulting in constant blade speed where the mean streamline enters and leaves the rotor.

(ii) Approximate blade geometries are obtained using the Euler Approximation.

Consider again the reaction turbine sketched in Section 3.5. The drawing shows the velocity

triangles:

Now reduce the mass flow at constant N, using the Euler Approximation to determine the outlet flow

angles. From the drawing shown over, the flow coefficient is reduced

Ca

< D

U

Clearly, Cw is smaller than at design. This is also consistent with the reduction in rotor blade incidence.

Thus

h0 C w

=

U

U2

< D

Therefore, varies directly with . Compare this with the case of compressors where they varied inversely.

Ca

U

> D

Cw

U

> D

and the same trend is found as when the mass flow rate was changed.

Now consider the absolute output. From the Euler equation

h0 = UC w

and from the velocity triangles, Cw increased as U decreased. It is not entirely clear whether the product

UCw has increased or decreased. However, it is clear that it, and therefore h0, has not changed very much.

Compare this with the compressor case, where a reduction in U resulted in a large reduction in UCw:

Summarizing, based on the velocity triangles, the aerodynamic performance characteristics of axial

compressors and turbines differ in two main ways:

(i) versus , and therefore P0 versus m& , is negative for compressors, positive for turbines.

(ii) The energy transfer h0 is a strong function of U for compressors, but only a weak function for

turbines.

The following figures show the actual characteristics of the gas-generator turbine of the Orenda OT-2

gas turbine engine. Note that it is conventional to use the pressure ratio as the independent variable for

plotting turbine aerodynamic characteristics.

The characteristics confirm that the mass flow-pressure ratio characteristic is only a weak function of

the rotational speed. However, this does not mean that the rotational speed is not important in order to have a

high output of useful work. As seen from the velocity triangles, if the rotational speed is reduced below the

design value, the energy released by the fluid, h0 = UCw, may not be changed very much, but this is also

accompanied by high incidence on the rotor. This will lead to higher losses and therefore poor efficiency.

This is confirmed by the OT-2 efficiency curves. Thus, to have high energy release by the fluid and to recover

most of that energy as useful shaft power output, it is necessary to have high rotational speed.

5.3

Cascade results are used for meanline analysis of turbines in much the same way as for axial

compressors. Again, primarily British results will be presented, but these are also widely used in North

America.

5.3.1

Turbine blade rows, for gas turbine engines in particular, often operate at choked conditions or with

mildly supersonic outlet flow conditions. The correlations for outlet flow angles for such blade rows are

generally divided into two sections: one for low speeds (usually taken as M2 # 0.5-0.7) and one for the sonic

condition (M2 = 1.0). For intermediate values of M2 the outlet angle is usually assumed to vary linearly

between the low-speed and the sonic values.

(i) Low Speed (M2 # 0.5)

As mentioned earlier, the Carter & Hughes correlation for deviation (used by Howell for compressors)

has also been used for turbines:

s

= m

c

where 2 = camber angle and the value of m is obtained from Fig. 3.6 (from Horlock).

For turbines, n is generally taken as 1.0, as used for compressor inlet guide vanes (as opposed to the value of

1/2 used for compressor rotor and stator blades). However, the Carter & Hughes correlation tends to overestimate the deviation for most modern turbine blades.

A more satisfactory (but less convenient) correlation is that due to Ainley & Mathieson (A-M). Their

correlation uses the so-called gauge angle 2g as a reference angle to which the actual outlet angle is related:

o

g = cos 1

s

thin blade which is straight from the throat to the trailing edge, the gauge

angle would define the direction normal to the throat line.

For low speed flow, A-M correlated the outlet flow angle "2

with the gauge angle. Fig. 7.13 (from Saravanamuttoo et al.) shows the

variation for a straight-backed blade: that is, a blade for which the

suction side is straight from the throat point to the trailing edge. The

curve in the figure can be approximated by

g

s

o

2 = 11625

.

cos 1 12

s

backed. Instead they have a certain amount of unguided

turning as defined by the angle 2u. In A-Ms day, if the

suction surface was not straight from the throat to the

trailing edge, it was usually defined by a circular arc. AM therefore corrected the outlet angle as follows:

o

s

2 = 11625

.

cos 1 12 + 4

s

e

where e is the suction side radius of curvature.

Unfortunately, modern turbine blades usually do not use

circular arcs to define their surface shapes. As a result, e

is not constant and generally not known. To use the AM correlation it is therefore necessary to obtain an

equivalent value of e. An approximate value can be

calculated from the unguided turning angle as follows:

s

=

e

u

o

180 1

s

For M2 = 1.0 and a straight-backed blade, A-M indicated that the outlflow angle would be equal to the

gauge angle:

o

2 = cos 1

s

For a curved-back blade, this was again corrected for the suction side radius of curvature. The results were

presented graphically but can be approximated by the following curve fit:

s

1.787 + 4 .128

e

o s

sin 1 o

2 = cos

s

e

s

As mentioned, for 0.5 # M2 # 1.0 the value of "2 is obtained by linear interpolation:

5.3.2

5.3.2.1 Zweifel Coefficient

In 1945, Zweifel introduced a tangential force coefficient to measure the loading of turbine blades.

Consider the control volume enclosing a single airfoil in a row of turbine blades. The CV extends unit depth

in the z direction.

Y

y

x

X

P1

C1

1 Cw1

Ca1

P2

Ca2

1

cx

Cw2

C2

Fy = m& V y 2 V y1

(1)

Because the top and bottom faces of the CV are periodic boundaries, the pressure forces on them exactly

balance each other in both the x and y directions. Thus, the only contribution to Fy is the blade force Y.

Then

Y = m& (C w 2 + C w1 )

(2)

C w1 = Ca1 tan 1

C w 2 = Ca 2 tan 2

and for unit span, m& = 2 Ca 2 s1 . Note that we are using here a common convention in turbine design

practice that 1, 2, Cw1, and Cw2 are all taken to be positive: that is, we are not rigidly following the sign

conventions introduced earlier. Then (2) can be written

C

Y = 2 sCa22 tan 2 + a1 tan 2

Ca 2

C

1

Y = 2 C22 (2 s)cos 2 2 tan 2 + a1 tan 2

Ca 2

2

(3)

The tangential force in (3) is just the integrated effect of the pressure distribution around the airfoil:

"IDEAL" DISTRIBUTION

P0

P1

1

P0 P2 = C22

2

PS

ACTUAL

DISTRIBUTION

P2

SS

Y=

cx

cx

Zweifel then defined a reference, ideal loading distribution. This corresponds to the maximum loading that

could be achieved with the same inlet and outlet conditions while avoiding adverse pressure gradients on the

suction surface. This distribution, which is not physically realizable, corresponds to a pressure on the pressure

side of P0 and a pressure on the suction side equal to the discharge pressure P2. The resulting ideal

tangential force is then

1

Yideal = ( P0 P2 )c x 1 = 2 C22 c x

2

(4)

The Zweifel coefficient is then obtained by taking the ratio of the actual to the ideal tangential forces

Z=

Substituting from (3) and (4) then

Y

Yideal

C

Z = 2 cos 2 2 tan 2 + a1 tan 1

Ca 2

cx

(5)

Note that this definition neglects the sign convention for angles. For a typical turbine blade, 1 and 2 have

opposite signs. If the signs of 1 and 2 are taken into account then the coefficient becomes:

C

Z = 2 cos 2 2 tan 2 a1 tan 1

Ca 2

cx

As usual, for rotor blades replaces . The normal definition of the solidity is = c/s. The way the Zweifel

coefficient is defined results in the solidity being expressed in terms in term of the axial chord length, cx,

rather than the true chord, c. The relationship between the true chord and axial chord can be seen from the

drawing, where is the stagger angle:

C

X

Zweifel (1945) concluded, based on European cascade data from the 1930s and 1940s, that Z .

0.8 gave minimum profile losses. Thus, for given velocity triangles, the optimum s/cx is that which gives the

value of Z which results in minimum profile losses:

If s/cx is too high (which corresponds to low solidity), losses will be high due to separation,

If s/cx is too low, profile losses are high because of excessive wetted area.

Using the Zweifel coefficient to choose s/cx is analogous to the use of the diffusion factor to select the solidity

for axial compressors. Since Zweifels time, profile design has improved and today turbines are often

designed with considerably higher values of Z ( Z = 1.00-1.05 is common).

Ainley & Mathieson developed a widely used loss system (see next section), based on British turbine

cascade data from the 1940s and 1950s. They likewise identified the geometries that gave minimum profile

losses for different combinations of inlet and outlet flow angles. These optimum geometries, expressed as

optimum s/c (spacing-to-chord ratio or pitch-to-chord ratio) were presented graphically as shown in Fig.

7.14 (from Saravanamuttoo et al.). This figure can therefore be used to choose solidity (as an alternative to the

Zweifel criterion).

solidity differently: cx/s versus c/s. This makes it difficult to compare

the geometries that would be obtained using each approach, for the same

set of velocity triangles. The two ratios are related through the stagger

angle, , of the blade row (see the figure on the previous page),

since cos = cx c . However, the value of the stagger angle is not fixed

by the inlet and outlet flow (or metal) angles. This is illustrated in the

figure at the right, which shows two actual, very highly-loaded (Z = 1.37)

low pressure turbine blade rows that were designed for identical inlet and

outlet flow angles (1 = 35o, 2 = 60o). The two blades clearly have very

different stagger angles. This is the result of different decisions regarding

the detailed pressure distributions around the blades. The blade with the

high stagger angle was designed to be forward-loaded: that is, to

develop most of its lift on the forward part of the airfoil. The one with

the lower stagger angle is much more aft-loaded. The two airfoils have

identical values of cx/s, and thus have the same values of Z. However,

they clearly have different values of s/c and therefore cannot both have

the optimum geometry according to Fig. 7.14.

Despite these difficulties, it is possible to make an approximate

Z = 1.37

comparison between the results obtained by the two different approaches

to choosing the blade spacing. Kacker & Okapuu (KO; see Appendix E)

provided a correlation that gives the typical values of stagger angle that would be seen for different

combinations of 1 and 2:

Using values of stagger angle obtained from K-O Fig. 5, the following figure shows the values of the

Zweifel coefficient for selected combinations of inlet and outlet flow angles. It is evident that the optimum

geometries based on the Ainley & Mathieson correlations lead to higher values of Z than Zweifel originally

recommended. Very high values of Z are obtained for impulse blades (1 = 2). Since the Ainley &

Mathieson loss system was specifically based on loss measurements made for impulse blades, these results

suggest that relatively higher values of Zweifel coefficient can be tolerated in the rotor blades for stages with

low values of degree of reaction, especially if the total flow turning is low.

Z = 1.028

Z = 1.034

Z = 0.911

Z = 1.56

Z = 1.26

Z = 0.990

Z = 0.909

5.3.3

Losses

In both North America and Europe, most loss estimates for axial-flow turbines are based on a loss

system developed by Ainley & Mathieson (AM) in the UK in the early 1950s (ARC R&M 2974, 1957; see

also Saravanamuttoo et al.). The AM system has been updated a couple of times to reflect improvements in

blade design: for the design-point conditions, this was done most recently by Kacker & Okapuu (KO) of Pratt

& Whitney Canada (Kacker, S.C. and Okapuu, U., A Mean Line Prediction Method for Axial Flow Turbine

Efficiency, ASME J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 104, January 1982, pp. 111-119).

The KO system will be summarized here. The figures from the paper have also been fitted to curves

or surfaces and these fits are given in Appendix E.

For turbines, the total-pressure loss coefficient Y is defined as

Y=

P0,loss

P02 P2

(1)

Note that in this case, the loss is non-dimensionalized by the outlet dynamic pressure, whereas the inlet value

is used in the loss coefficients for axial compressors.

As for compressors, losses are again divided into components and these are then added linearly to

obtain the total losses:

(2)

where the subscripts designate the components as follows: P = profile, S = secondary, TET = trailing-edge

thickness, TC = tip clearance. f(Re) represents a correction for the effects of Reynolds number on the profile

losses. The effect of Reynolds number on the other loss components is not well documented but it is believed

to be small.

The following figure shows the blade nomenclature used in the KO system. Note that they do not

follow the sign convention we defined earlier. Using that convention, the inlet and outlet flow and metal

angles will often have opposite signs because of the high turning that is normally present in turbine blade

rows. It becomes a nuisance to keep track of the signs and therefore it is common practice by turbine

designers to take both the inlet and outlet angles as positive, as shown in KO Fig. 3.

Profile Losses:

The profile loss is obtained as the weighted average of the losses for two extreme cases with the same

outlet flow angle: a nozzle blade (maximum blade-passage acceleration) and an impulse blade (zero

acceleration). In the original AM system, the expression took the form:

YP , AM

1

= YP ,nozzle + YP ,impulse YP ,nozzle

2

t

c 2

max

0.2

(3)

where tmax is the maximum thickness of the blade. Note that KO use for "air" angles, for "blade" angles.

The two reference loss coefficients were presented graphically by AM, as shown in Fig. 1 (for nozzles) and

Fig. 2 (for impulse blades). Note also that for a given value of the outlet angle 2 there is a value of solidity

= c/s that minimizes the profile losses. This was the origin of the "optimum " that is plotted on Fig. 7.14 in

Section 5.3.2.2.

Kacker & Okapuu compared the AM predictions of profile losses with those obtained from turbine

airfoils of more recent design. They concluded that the AM loss systems significantly over-estimates the

losses for modern turbine blades. The KO profile loss correlation therefore takes the form

YP , KO =

2

(0.914YP , AM )

3

(4)

where the factor of 0.914 was introduced to correct the AM loss estimate to that for zero trailing-edge

thickness (since KO handle trailing-edge losses separately) and the factor of 2/3 reflects the improvements in

profile design since Ainley & Mathiesons time.

As seen, Eqn. (3) includes a correction for the maximum thickness of the airfoil: the data in Figs. 1

and 2 apply for a maximum thickness of 20% of the chord length. Decisions about the maximum airfoil

thicknesses would not normally be made at the stage of a meanline analysis for the blade row. However, KO

examined the range of maximum thicknesses observed for a number of recent actual designs and provided the

correlation shown in Fig. 4. Knowing the flow turning from the velocity triangles, this figure can then be used

to obtain a reasonable value for the thickness, ahead of the detailed design of the blade.

The estimates obtained from the correlations described above apply for low speed flows. The turbines

in gas turbine engines normally operate under compressible flow conditions. The Mach number levels

encountered depend to some degree on where the turbine is located in the engine:

High Pressure Turbine (HPT). The HPT is located immediately downstream of the combustor and

drive the high pressure compressor. To minimize the number of stages, HPTs are typically designed

to operate at transonic outlet flow conditions.

Low Pressure Turbine (LPT). The LPT drives the low pressure compressor, and the fan stage in a

turbofan engine. The fan has a large tip diameter and to keep the tip Mach numbers acceptable, the

fan shaft must rotate at a much lower speed than the high-pressure spool. The tip diameter of the LPT

is much smaller than that of the fan and as a result it runs at a relatively low blade speed. This in turn

results in lower flow velocities generally. It is therefore normal for the flow around LPT airfoils to be

subsonic everywhere.

As a result of these differences, the strongest effects of compressiblity are normally seen in HPTs. The

following Schlieren photos (taken from E. Detemple-Laake, Measurement of the Flow Field in the Blade

Passage and Side Wall Region of a Plane Turbine Cascade, AGARD-CP_469, 1989) show the flow through

an HPT blade passage with exit Mach numbers of 0.9 (left) and 1.25 (right):

The profile losses can be affected by compressibility effects in at least two ways:

(i) Inlet Shock Losses. The high levels of curvature around the leading edges of turbine blades

result in high local velocities in this region. For inlet relative Mach numbers as low as 0.6, patches of

supersonic flow, terminating in a shock, can appear on the suction side of the airfoil.

(ii) Channel Acceleration and Outlet Shocks. A turbine blade passage is normally an accelerating

flow channel. As the outlet Mach number increases, there is a tendency for the blade surface

boundary layers to be thinned and their contribution to the losses actually decreases slightly. As the

outlet Mach number approaches 1.0, patches of supersonic flow, terminating in shocks, may begin to

appear on the aft suction surface. Finally, as the outlet Mach number becomes supersonic, expansion

waves and shocks appear in the trailing edge region. In addition to directly contributing additional

total pressure losses, it is common for one or more of the shocks to impinge on the surface of the

adjacent blade. This can cause boundary layer separation, which would further increase the losses.

This effect can be seen from the following figure, which shows Detemple-Laakes cascade operating

at an outlet Mach number of 1.30.

The following figure shows the relative profile losses as a function of exit Mach number for another

HPT cascade (from Mee et al., An Examination of the Contributions to Loss on a Transonic Turbine Blade in

Cascade, ASME J. Turbomachinery, Vol. 114, January 1992, pp. 155-162).

The complexity of the compressibility effects makes it difficult to predict their influence on the

losses. Kacker & Okapuu provide procedures for estimating the contributions to the profile losses; see

the paper for details.

Finally, KO give the following Reynolds number corrections for profile losses:

Re c

f ( Re) =

2 10 5

0. 4

for

= 10

.

Re c 2 10 5

Re

= 6c

10

0.2

for

Re c > 10 6

where the Reynolds number is based on the chord length and exit velocity.

Secondary Losses:

As in Howells correlations for compressors, the AM/KO loss systems indicate that the secondary

losses in axial turbines are a function of CL2:

2

cos 2 C L cos 2 2

YS = 0.04 f ( AR)

cos 1 s c cos 3 m

(5)

where

CL

= 2( tan 1 + tan 2 ) cos m

sc

1

m = tan 1 ( tan 2 tan 1 )

2

The loss coefficients give the total-pressure losses as averaged over the total mass flow rate

through the blade passage. As the aspect ratio of the blade becomes larger, a smaller fraction of the span

is occupied by the secondary flow and the loss associated with it becomes averaged over an increasingly

larger mass flow rate. Consequently, the mass-averaged loss coefficient varies inversely with the aspect

ratio. This effect is embodied in the aspect ratio correction, f(AR) in Eqn. (5). Kacker & Okapuu found

that the AM loss system tended to over-estimate the effect of aspect ratio on blades of very low aspect

ratio (which are often used in modern HPTs). In the KO loss system, the correction for blade aspect ratio

therefore takes the following form:

f ( AR) =

1 0.25 2 h c

1

=

hc

hc

for h c 2

(6)

for h c > 2

2.5

2

Ainley & Mathieson

1.5

0.5

0.5

1.5

2.5

Kacker & Okapuu also provide a compressibility correction for the secondary losses (see the

paper).

Trailing-Edge Losses:

Due to the finite thickness of the trailing edge, the streamtube experiences a sudden increase in

area as it leaves the blade passage. The resulting sudden-expansion loss is correlated in terms of an

alternative form of loss coefficient, known as an energy loss coefficient, 2, as a function of the ratio of

the trailing-edge thickess to the throat opening. KO correlated the values for nozzle blades and impulse

blades separately, as shown in Fig. 14.

as for the profile losses, the

trailing-edge loss for an arbitrary blade is expressed as the weighted average of the values for nozzle and

impulse blades:

2

2

TET

2

TET ( 1 = 0 )

2

2

+ 1 TET

( 1 = 2 ) TET ( 1 = 0)

2

(7)

The energy loss coefficient is then converted to the usual total pressure loss coefficient as follows:

YTET =

1 2

1

M2

1

2

2

1 TET

1 2

M2

1 1 +

YTET =

1

2

TET

Tip-Clearance Loss:

For unshrouded blades, KO express the effects of tip-clearance losses as a correction to the

efficiency:

= 0.93

RTip

k

h cos 2 R Mean

(8)

where 0 is the efficiency for zero tip clearance and k is the tip clearance. Note that Eqn. (8) indicates

that a 1% increase in tip clearance, relative to blade span, will result in a 1% reduction in efficiency. This

is considerably lower sensitivity than the 3% reduction that is predicted by Howells correlation for axial

compressors. As seen, KO also found the loss to be a function of the hub-to-tip ratio of the blade, since

1

R Mean = RTip

1 + HTR 2 , where HTR = RHub/RTip.

2

Low-pressure turbine blades are often shrouded to reduce the tip-leakage flow and losses. KO

recommend the following expression to estimate the tip-leakage losses for a shrouded rotor blade row:

YTC

c k

= 0.37

h c

0.78

C L cos 2 2

s c cos 3 m

(9)

k =

( Number of

seals)

0.42

To illustrate the relative magnitudes of the various components of loss, the predicted loss

components for two different turbine stages, one subsonic and one transonic, will be quoted (taken from

Moustapha et. al., Axial and Radial Turbines, Concepts NREC, 2003, pp. 89-90). The table summarizes

the design parameters for the two stages:

Subsonic Turbine

Transonic Turbine

Pressure Ratio

1.97

3.76

Work Coefficient,

1.31

2.47

Flow Coefficient,

0.47

0.64

Reaction, (%)

50

30

88

83.5

Stators

Rotor

Stators

Rotor

0.67

0.82

1.1

1.14

60

78

76

124

0.71

1.25

0.70

1.44

Blade Aspect Ratio, h/c

Tip Clearance, k/h (%)

1.5

Zweifel Coefficient

0.74

1.5

0.88

0.84

0.76

Transonic Turbine

Subsonic Turbine

0.4

0.3

0.4

Stators

0.35

Rotor

Loss Coefficient, Y

Loss Coefficient, Y

0.35

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0.3

Stators

Rotor

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

Profile

Trailing

Edge

Secondary

Tip

Clearance

Loss Component

Total

0

Profile

Trailing

Edge

Secondary

Tip

Clearance

Loss Component

Total

PW100 Turboprop

95

1.8

90

1.6

, (Rotor Only)

, Efficiency (%)

85

1.4

Diffuser

Loss

80

75

1.2

1

(Rotor + Diffuser)

70

0.8

65

0.6

60

0.4

55

0.2

50

10

100

0

15

Data for rotor only: Senoo, Y., Hayami, H., Kinoshita, Y. and Yamasaki, H., "Experimental Study on Flow in a Supersonic Centrifugal

Impeller," ASME J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 101, Jan. 1979, pp. 32-41.

Data for rotor with PWC pipe diffuser: Kenny, D.P., "A Comparison of the Predicted and Measured Performance of High Pressure Ratio

Centrifugal Compressor Diffusers," ASME Paper 72-GT-54, 1972.

Influence of diffuser design and diffuser pinch on pressure ratio, surge line and choking mass flow rate: Japikse, D. Decisive Factors in

Advanced Centrifugal Compressor Design and Development, I.MechE, Orlando, FL, November 2000.

6.2

Consider the outlet flow from a centrifugal rotor with backswept vanes. Assume that there is no swirl

in the rotor inlet flow and that the fluid is incompressible. Assume also the Euler Approximation so that the

flow leaves the rotor parallel to the metal angle at the vane trailing edge.

U2

W2

2 (+)

C2

Cr2

'2 (+)

Cw2

h0 = gH E = U 2 C w 2 U 1 C w1

= U 2 Cw2

and

tan 2 =

Cw2 U 2

Cr 2

or

C w 2 = U 2 + Cr 2 tan 2

Q

= U2 +

tan 2

A2

Then

gH E = U 22 + U 2

Q

tan 2

A2

gH E

Q

= K1 + K 2

2

2

N D

ND 3

2

where

U2

K1 = 2 2 2 = = const .

60

N D

(1)

and

K2 =

U2D

tan 2

NA2

Equation (1) is the equation for the idealized head rise versus flow rate characteristic. Within the Euler

Approximation ($N2 = $2), the slope of the characteristic, K2, is constant and has the same sign as $2, as shown

in the sketch:

Note that whereas the slope of the )H vs Q characteristic for axial machines was always negative

(assuming R < 1.0, which experience has shown is necessary), radial machines can have charateristics with

either positive of negative slopes, depending on the geometry of the vanes at the outlet:

Forward-swept vanes:

dHE/dQ > 0 is destabilizing, but losses can provide some stable operating range (see later

section).

Suitable where want to maximize head rise, efficiency is not a serious concern and surge is

not a problem.

Radial vanes:

Simplest to manufacture.

No bending stresses in vanes due to centrifugal effects (were therefore favoured in early gas

turbine engine applications of centrifugal compressors).

Backward-swept vanes:

Recall from Section 3.4 that there will be a pressure rise through a radial rotor due to centrifugal

compression, even with no flow. From Eqn. (1), for Q = 0, )HE = U22/g (or )h0 = U22). The head rise at zero

flow is known as the "shut-off" head.

6.3

The rotor speed and size can be estimated from correlations using two different approaches: from

specific speed and specific diameter; or from the flow coefficient and work coefficient.

Specific Speed:

In Chapter 2, we have already used specific speed as a basis for selecting the type of turbomachine

that is suitable for a particular application. The following figures (from C. Rodgers, Specific Speed and

Efficiency of Centrifugal Impellers in "Performance Prediction of Centrifugal Pumps and Compressors" ed.

S. Gopalakrishnan et al., ASME International Gas Turbine Conference, New Orleans, March 1980, pp.

191-200.) show more specific data for unshrouded centrifugal rotors, including the effect of several geometric

and aerodynamic parameters.

The definition of specific speed used here is based average density (or average volume flow rate):

1

NS =

Q + Q2 2

1

2

3

( gH ) 4

1

2

1

( gH ) 4

If there are no constraints on the rotational speed, then one would normally choose the value of

N S that gives the highest 0 ( N S 0.6 0.8 ). With N S chosen and S estimated, the Cordier diagram can be

used to choose the diameter.

Work Coefficient and Flow Coefficient:

Aungier (R.H. Aungier, Centrifugal Compressors - A Strategy for Aerodynamic Design and Analysis,

ASME Press, New York, 2000) presents a convenient correlation of work coefficient versus flow coefficient

for industrial compressors of several configurations: with shrouded and unshrouded impellers; and with

vaneless and vaned diffusers. The correlations are based on results for compressors with pressure ratios up to

about 3.5, but can probably be extrapolated to somewhat higher values. Aungier defines the non-dimensional

parameters as follows:

Flow Coefficient:

&

m

Work Coefficient:

1r22 U 2

P =

h0ref

U 22

where )h0ref is the total enthalpy rise for the reversible process with the same pressure ratio. 0P is the stage

polytropic efficiency. Aungiers correlations are presented in the following two figures:

(a) Select N to give the best stage polytropic efficiency, 0P, and read the corresponding work

coefficient, :P. From

P =

h0ref

U 22

calculate U2.

(b) Then from the chosen N

&

m

1r22U 2

calculate r2.

With the tip radius and tip blade speed defined, the rotational speed is known. If the rotational speed

is constrained (eg. driving motors are only available for certain speeds) then Fig. 6-1 or Fig. 6-2 can be used to

select a compromise size and rotational speed that minimizes the impact on the stage efficiency.

From the Euler equation

h0 = gH E = U 2 C w 2 U 1 C w1

If there are no IGVs, Cw1 = 0 and the work transfer depends entirely on the rotor tip or outlet conditions. For

good efficiency, the impeller inlet must nevertheless be well designed (eg. the inducer inlet metal angle must

be matched to the inlet relative flow vector) and correctly sized.

Consider three rotors designed for the same m& , U2 and with the same outlet geometry so that all three

give the same h0. The critical region for frictional losses (which vary as V2), cavitation and compressibility

effects is at the vane tip at the inlet, since that is where the relative velocity is the highest and static pressure

the lowest. The drawing shows the resulting inlet tip velocity triangles for three different inlet sizes:

SMALL EYE

LOW U1t

HIGH C1t

LARGE EYE

HIGH U1t

LOW C1t

r2

r1t

r1h

C1t

W1t

C1t

U1t

W1t

C1t

U1t

W1t

U1t

To allow room for a shaft, or for a nut to hold the rotor to the end of the shaft, typically r1h = 0.2r2 to 0.35r2.

For a given r1h, it is evident from the inlet velocity triangles that there is an optimum r1t that minimizes the

inlet relative velocity and Mach number:

W1t

OPTIMUM

M1t

r1t

Consider the effect on the outlet velocity triangles of varying the rotor outlet width (or outlet vane

height) b2. The outlet metal angle is adjusted to maintain constant Cw2 and thus give the same pressure rise.

From continuity

m& = 2 Cr 2 A2 = 2 Cr 2 (2r2 b2 )

and thus for a fixed m& , the choice of b2 determines the radial component of velocity at the rotor outlet:

Cw 2

U2

C2

W2

Cr 2

SMALL b2

2

LARGE b2

C2

W2

b2

r2

LARGE b2

SMALL b2

C2

Lower

(Good)

Higher

(Bad - Larger diffusion

required downstream)

W2

Lower

Higher

W2/W1

Lower

(Bad - Larger diffusion

required in rotor passage)

Higher

(Good)

Higher

Lower

The value of b2 would thus be chosen to obtain a compromise between high diffusion inside the rotor

passage and high diffusion in the downstream diffuser (which serves the same function as the stators in an

axial compressor stage).

Note that W2/W1 is again the de Haller number. Various papers and textbooks provide guidelines for

choosing the de Haller number for centrifugal fan, compressor, and pump rotor passages:

(1) Aungier (2000)

Recommended:

Never exceed:

W2/W1 < 0.65

Recommended:

Recommended:

W2/W1 > 0.8

High PR compressors (up to 8.0) W2/W1 > 0.6

From Section 6.3.3, the required outlet flow angle $2 was seen to be related to the choice of b2. The

corresponding metal angle $2Ndepends on the deviation, which is called slip in centrifugal machines. The

slip in turn depends on the rotor solidity: that is, the number of vanes, Z. Thus, the choices for $2N and Z are

inter-related.

Consider a backswept rotor:

Because of slip, the rotor imparts less swirl to the flow than for the ideal case, for which $2 =$2N (that is, the

Euler approximation is taken to hold in the ideal case). Since Cw2 < Cw2N, the )h0 is reduced by this effect. We

then define the slip factor F as

Cw 2

C

w2

where F # 1.0.

A number of correlations have been proposed for F. The one due to Stodola has been widely used:

cos 2

Z

= 1

1 2 tan 2

where N2 = Cr2/U2 and $2N is the backsweep or forwardsweep angle (taken as positive in both cases). Stanitz

suggested a slightly simpler form:

0.63

= 1

1 2 tan 2

Wiesner (F.J. Wiesner, A Review of Slip Factors for Centrifugal Impellers, ASME Trans., J. Eng.

for Power, October 1967, pp. 558-572) reviewed the available slip factor correlations and pointed out that the

Stodola, Stanitz and similar correlations are only valid for impellers with long blades. Wiesner recommended

the Busemann correlation which takes into account the influence of r1/r2 and provided the following curve fit:

Letting , = r1/r2, and identifying a limiting value of , given by

1

lim it =

e

8.16 cos

2

= 1

sin 2

Z 0.7

= 1

cos 2 lim it

1

Z 0.7 1 lim it

for an example backsweep angle of 45o (taken from

Aungier, 2000), who provides an equivalent but

slightly different curve fit:

Wilson & Korakianitis (Design of High-Efficiency Turbomachinery and Gas Turbines, 2nd ed., PrenticeHall, 1998) provide a broad guideline for selecting the

number of blades, as function of the vane angle at the tip, as

shown in the figure at right.

More recently, Rodgers (2000) presented a

correlation for the number of vanes which, according to his

loss estimates, gives the best rotor efficiency:

Z=

25cos 2

Comparison with the Wilson & Korakianitis figure suggests

the Rodgers correlation is very conservative, leading to very

large numbers of vanes.

Aungier (2000) outlines a method of selecting the

number of vanes based directly on the vane loading. He

suggests the following limit:

2 W

0.9

W2 + W1

45

40

the vane. W can be estimated from

2 D2 U 2

Z LB

30

vane along the mean camber line. A reasonable initial estimate

of LB can be obtained from

b 1 D D1

L B = z I 2 + 2

2 2 cos

Number of Vanes, Z

W =

35

25

20

15

10

0

10

20

Rodgers, Ns = 0.6

Rodgers, Ns = 0.7

Rodgers, Ns = 0.8

Wilson Zmax

Wilson Zmin

30

40

Backsweep Angle (Deg.)

50

60

70

6.3.6 Losses

The actual stage characteristics are different from ideal due to slip and losses. Slip reduces output but

does not affect efficiency since the required input power is reduced along with the output.

Sources of losses:

(1) Disc friction:

(2) Leakage:

(3) Inlet:

(4) Impeller:

(5) Diffuser/Volute:

- since this torque is not exerted on the through-flowing fluid, it does not appear in

the Euler work, DgQ)HE

- fluid leaks through the tip gap leading to losses as in axial machines

- if the rotor is shrouded, compressed fluid can leak through the clearance back to the

inlet, to be recompressed over and over again

- thus, more fluid is compressed than is delivered by the machine, increasing the

power required and showing up as an apparent loss

- at other than design Q, flow angle and metal angle will be mismatched at the

leading edge, resulting in separation and additional losses

- a simple, inexpensive machine with no inducer will have significant inlet losses at

all operating conditions

- frictional and separation losses inside the impeller channels

- roughly " Q2

- frictional and separation losses roughly " Q2

- for vaned or pipe diffuser, additional leading-edge losses when Q Qdesign (like (3))

- for volute, sudden expansion losses due abrupt change in area

The figure shows the approximate trend of the loss components with flow rate:

The next figures show the resulting stage characteristics, taking into account slip and losses, for

backward-swept and forward-swept vanes:

(i)

Backward-swept vanes:

(ii)

Forward-swept vanes:

Note that due to the effects of the losses the machine with forward-swept vanes also has some stable

operating range (dHE/dQ < 0.0), although it tends to be narrower and does not include the design point.

Taking into account the losses, the required shaft power is

W& = gQH E ( th ) + gQl H E ( th ) + Disc & Bearing Friction Power

where

)HE(th) =

Ql

=

leakage flow (volume flow which leaks from outlet back to inlet, to be

recompressed) for a shrouded rotor

H = H E ( th ) H L

where

)HL

overall =

gQH

W& shaft

As usual, for compressible flow substitute m

CHAPTER 7

Static and Dynamic Stability of Compression Systems

7.1 INTRODUCTION

Thus, operating points A, B and D are statically stable

operating points.

dangerous to axial compressors. While centrifugal

compressors are more rugged than axial machines, surge is

still dangerous and should be avoided.

Point C is different. If m

& is disturbed to a larger value,

the machine delivers more )P0 than the load requires at the

& . The flow in the load will therefore increase even

new m

further and the operating point moves further from the

equilibrium point. Thus C is a statically unstable operating

point.

depends on not just the characteristics of the compressor but

also on the aerodynamic characteristics of the other

components to which it is connected. It is possible to develop

a simple lumped-parameter analysis for a compression

system. Such an analysis can provide useful insights into

which characteristics of the system encourage or delay the

onset of surge. For further information see Stenning (1980),

Greitzer (1980, 1981) and Cumpsty (1989).

finally settle at the original equilibrium operating point, only

that tend to move back towards the equilibrium point. The

system may overshoot and oscillate about the operating point.

If it eventually settles at the original operating point, the

system is dynamically stable.

7.3 DYNAMIC STABILITY - SURGE

A system is statically stable if, when it is disturbed by a

small amount from its equilibrium operating point, a reaction

arises which tends to restore it to the equilibrium condition.

Static stability is normally a necessary, but not sufficient

condition for dynamic stability

approximately the dynamic stability characteristics of a

compression system. A compressible flow system will be

examined. Only minor modifications are needed to make it

apply to an incompressible flow system.

Points A - D are all equilibrium operating points ()P0,load =

& ). Consider point A and suppose

)P0,machine at the given m

&:

that a small disturbance causes an increase in m

(i) The machine delivers less )P0 than required by the load

&.

at this m

(ii) The flow rate in the load must therefore decrease,

causing the system to move back towards A.

of four components:

(1) A compressor

(2) A duct

(3) A plenum, in which mass can be stored.

(4) A throttle, represented by a valve, which provides

the main pressure loss in the system. To a first

approximation, the throttle could also represent the

turbine in a gas turbine engine.

The flow through the components is treated as onedimensional. Thus, the flow at any point is characterized by

& etc. (if necessary, these would

a single value of P, T, C, m

be interpreted as the local average values). The analysis will

consider perturbations about an equilibrium operating point

and the perturbations will be assumed to be small.

The instantaneous value of any flow quantity is

represented by the sum of the mean value plus the

instantaneous (small) perturbation:

m2 = m2 + m2

d ( P2 P01 )

dm1

dC

=c

dm1

operating point are small, we can assume that c is constant in

our analysis. That is, we linearize the compressor

characteristic at the operating point of interest.

P3 = P3 + P3 etc.

draws fluid from a large, constant pressure reservoir) then

from (2)

for convenience). The goal of the analysis is to determine the

behaviour of the perturbations over time after some initial

disturbance has occurred. If m2N, P3N etc. eventually decrease

to zero, the system is dynamically stable at the operating

point in question.

=

=c

dm1 dm1 dm1

(3)

equilibrium point

method: equations for the behaviour of each component are

developed separately and they are then linked by the flow

conditions at the interfaces between the components.

Consider each component in turn:

P2

m1

dP = cdm

2

P2

m1

P2 P2 = c m1 m1

(1) Compressor

The pressure rise across the across the compressor,

represented by P2 - P01, is a function of the inlet mass flow:

P2 P01 = C(m1 )

(2)

P2 = cm1

(1)

(4)

characteristic (see Fig. 7.3). The gradient at any operating

point along the characteristic is

essentially no mass can be stored in the compressor, then m1

= m2 at all times and an alternative to (4) is

P2 = cm2

(5)

(2) Duct

We assume that the losses in the system occur primarily

in the throttle so that we can neglect the frictional losses in

the duct. We also neglect the volume of the duct relative to

the volume of the plenum. Therefore, the duct introduces

only inertia: a pressure difference is present between stations

2 and 3 only when the fluid in the duct is being accelerated or

decelerated.

The equation governing the behaviour of the duct can be

obtained either by performing a force balance on the free

body consisting of the cylinder of fluid in the duct or by

volume occupying the duct. For both analyses, we will

neglect density changes along the duct.

P2 P3 =

L dm2

A dt

(7)

(3) Plenum

d

(mu)

dt

d

P2 A P3 A = ( A Lu)

dt

d

= L ( Au)

dt

Fx

conservation of mass to the plenum:

m2 m3 = V

L dm2

A dt

(8)

mass in the plenum will be reflected in the density of the

stored gas. In a pump system, a reservoir with a free surface

or a surge tank would similarly act as a mass storage

component.

in the duct (since density changes are neglected), so that

P2 P3 =

d3

dt

(6)

If the compression or expansion process is isentropic,

then

Fx =

u dV + (mu)

d

dt

out

(mu)in

gas

inflows and outflows of momentum must be identical, and

only the first term, the momentum accumulation term,

remains on the right-hand side:

Fx =

d

dt

u Adx =

d

m2

dt

d3

dP3

= 3

dt

P3 dt

1 dP3

=

RT3 dt

dm

dx = L 2

dt

0

= const.

1 dP3

a32 dt

from (8)

pressures, (6) is again obtained.

m2 m3 =

We then substitute into (6) in terms of the perturbations

) (

P2 + P2 P3 + P3 =

L d m2 + m2

A

dt

V dP3

a32 dt

perturbation equation for the plenum is obtained:

m2 m3 =

and since there are no losses in the duct, the mean inlet and

outlet pressures must be the same. Thus, the perturbation

equation for the duct becomes

V dP3

a32 dt

(9)

(4) Throttle

The throttle is handled in exactly the same way as the

compressor: the load line is linearized at the equilibrium

operating point. If the valve is choked, the mass flow rate

it is not choked, the pressure downstream is assumed to be

constant. Then the perturbation equation for the throttle

becomes:

P3 = f m3

dP3 dP2 L d 2 m2

=

dt

dt

A dt 2

(10)

where f is the local slope of the load line (note that f will

always be positive).

dm

dP2

=c 2

dt

dt

Thus

the components in the system:

P2 = cm2

dP3

dm L d 2 m2

=c 2

dt

dt

A dt 2

(11)

L dm2

P2 P3 =

A dt

V dP3

m2 m3 = 2

a3 dt

or

(12)

f V dP3 c f V dm2

f V d 2 m2

=

a32 dt

a32 dt

a32 dt 2

(13)

P3 = f m3

(14)

These are four equations in the four unknowns m2N, m3N, P2N

and P3N. Solving for any one of the unknowns from (11) (14) leads to a second-order ordinary differential equation for

the variation in time for that unknown.

f V L d 2 m2 L c f V dm2

+ ( f c) m2 = 0 (19)

+ 2

a32 A dt 2

a3 dt

A

into (11):

cm2 f m3 =

L dm2

A dt

equation in m2N.

It can be shown that the corresponding equation for any

of the other three perturbations would have the save

coefficients as (19).

(15)

positive),

f m2 f m3 = f

V dP3

a32 dt

are constant and, given initial conditions for m2N and dm2N/dt,

(19) can readily be solved to determine the response of the

system. As noted earlier, if m2N tends to 0 with increasing

time, the system is dynamically stable.

(16)

system and a mass-spring-damper system for which the

governing equation is (for free vibrations)

V dP L dm2

f m2 cm2 = f 2 3

A dt

a3 dt

(18)

d2x

dt

(17)

+s

dx

+ kx = 0

dt

(20)

conditions must be met for the system governed by (20) to be

stable:

an expression for dP3N/dt:

The equivalent condition in (19) is that f > c, which is

positive value of c (large in comparison to f, for example) to

destabilize the system, but note that as L tends to zero c also

tends to zero. Therefore, a compressor which is connected to

a plenum by a very short length of duct will become unstable

essentially at the peak of the compressor characteristic. That

is why the latter is often used as a criterion for predicting

surge. In general, we would expect to encounter the

condition for dynamic instability near the peak of the

characteristic and probably long before we reach the

condition for static instability (operating point C on the

& diagram) .

original )P0 versus m

arrived at with qualitative arguments in Section 7.2.

(ii) s > 0 - that is, the damping must be positive

This is evident from the solution to the equation: the

system has a critical value of the damping coefficient, sc,

given by

sc = 2 k m

takes the form

x = Ae

s

sc

k

t

m

2

s

sin 1

sc

clearer. For a typical compressor characteristic, as the flow

rate through the machine is reduced the output peaks and

eventually begins to reduce. This is generally the result of

increasingly extensive stall: perhaps an increasing number of

rotating stall cells and/or cells of increasing spanwise extent

as the flow rate is reduced. Stall thus prepares the conditions

for surge. Note that the appearance of stall is a phenomenon

of the compressor itself, not the system. On the other hand,

surge is an unstable condition in compression system in

which flow quantities, including the compressor mass flow

and delivery pressure, undergo oscillatory fluctuations which

grow over time. In systems such as gas turbine engines, these

fluctuations can reach destructive magnitudes in a very small

number of cycles.

k

t +

m

magnitude of the peak displacement being controlled by

the exponential term.

Since m, k, and sc are all positive, if s > 0 the

exponential term decreases in time, the magnitude of the

fluctuations decays, and the system is seen to be

dynamically stable. If s > sc, the system is over-damped

and the solution is no longer oscillatory but it again

includes exponential terms which are a function of s.

Again, if s is negative the exponential terms grow in time

and the system moves away from the equilibrium point in

an unstable way.

References

Cumpsty, N.A., 1989, Compressor Aerodynamics, Longman,

Harlow.

Greitzer, E.M., 1980, Review - Axial Compressor Stall

Phenomena, ASME J. Fluids Engineering, Vol. 102, June

1980, pp. 134-151.

that there are two contributions to the system damping:

ASME J. Fluids Engineering, Vol. 103, June 1981, pp. 193242.

inertia of the fluid in the duct (the L/A term), and

(b) potentially negative damping is supplied by the term

involving the slopes of the compressor and throttle

characteristics.

Fluids Engineering, Vol. 102, March 1980, pp. 14-20.

controlled by the sign of the slope of the compressor

characteristic, c. If c < 0 (as it normally is at higher flow

rates) strong positive damping will be present and the system

will be stable. The condition for instability is then

L cfV

2 >0

A

a3

or

c>

La32

AV f

value of the slope of the compressor characteristic, the

precise magnitude being a function of a number of system

parameters.

APPENDIX A:

Curve and Surface Fits for Howells Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades

(a) Design-Point flow Deflection, ,* (C,R & S, Fig. 5.14)

With: A = 33.5293

D = 0.00209610

B = -0.530812

E = -0.677212

C = -15.2599

F = 0.187148

Applies for: 0 < "2 < 70o, 0.5 < s/c < 1.5 (or 0.666 < F < 2.0).

(b) Reynolds Number Correction for Design-Point Deflection (Horlock Fig. 3.3)

With

A = 0.664154 B = 22.1578

C = 1.03819

D = 4.71864

where Re is the Reynolds number based on inlet velocity and blade chord divided by 105.

where

The curve fit is applicable for -0.8 < irel < 0.8.

For values of irel from -0.7 to 0.3 the profile drag coefficient, CDp, is a function of solidity and irel:

1

CDp1B(irel,s/c) = -0.01542irel2 (s/c) + 0.02277 - 0.04429irel + 0.05002irel2 + 0.009207irel3

CDp1(irel,s/c) = CDp1A(irel,s/c) + CDp1B(irel,s/c)

This curve fit is applicable for 0.5 < s/c < 1.5 (or 0.666 < F < 2.0).

For values of irel greater than 0.3, CDp is a function of the relative incidence only:

CDp2(irel) = 0.01665 - 0.004181irel - 0.01908irel2 + 0.06477irel3 + 0.3949irel4 + 0.3426irel5

APPENDIX B:

C4 Compressor Blade Profiles

Like NACA 4-digit airfoils, the C-series compressor blades are defined by a symmetrical

thickness distribution which is superimposed on a specified mean, or camber, line. As indicated in the

Howell correlations, both circular arc and parabolic arc camber lines have been used with C-series

blades.

For the blade with a parabolic arc camber line, the point of maximum camber lies at other than

mid-chord. Typically, the point of maximum camber lies towards to leading edge; that is, a/c < 0.5.

The relationship between the camber angle 2 (= 21 + 22), a/c and b/c is:

(1)

and

The term parabolic arc camber line is somewhat misleading. The mean line is not defined by a

single parabola, or even by two joined parabolas. For example, to define a polynomial which passes

1

through (0,0) with slope tan21 and through (a,b) with zero slope requires at least a cubic. The following

discussion will consider mainly the circular arc camber line.

Setting a/c = 0.5 in Eqn (1),

(2)

The equations of the camber line and its inclination, Nc, are then

(3)

and

(4)

The co-ordinates of the upper and lower sides of the blade are then

(5)

where yt is the local thickness of the blade. For the C4 profile, the blade thickness distribution is given by

where t is the maximum thickness of the blade as a fraction of the chord length.

The geometry of C-series blade is designated using a shorthand notation. For example, a blade

designated 10C4/30C50 refers to a blade with a C4 profile and: 10% maximum thickness, circular arc

camber, camber angle 30o and maximum camber at 50% chord (the last piece of information is redundant

2

since circular arc camber has already been specified). The resultant geometry is shown:

APPENDIX C:

Curve and Surface Fits for NASA Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades

The surface fit gives the minimum loss incidence for a blade of zero camber and 10% thickness as

a function of inlet flow angle, $1, and solidity, F:

With:

A00 = -0.13571

A10 = 0.015986

A01 = 0.075795

A11 = 0.074959

A02 = 9.1315x10-4

A20 = -2.4954x10-4

Valid for: 0.4 < F < 2.0, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.

(b) Slope Factor, n, for Minimum-Loss Incidence (SP-36 Fig. 138)

With:

A00 = -0.066879

A03 = 0.033568

A11 = 7.402x10-3

A20 = -3.3001x10-5

A30 = 8.0286x10-7

A01 = 0.05897

A04 = -7.1706x10-3

A12 = -2.5749x10-3

A21 = -3.084x10-5

A31 = -1.2016x10-7

A02 = -0.054019

A10 = -6.0476x10-3

A13 = 2.6067x10-4

A22 = 1.3955x10-5

A40 = -9.1961x10-9

n1($1,F) = A00 + A01F + A02F2 + A03F3 + A04F4 + A10$1 + A11$1F + A12$1F2 + A13$1F3

n2($1,F) = A20$12 + A21$12F + A22$12F2 + A30$13 + A31$13F + A40$14

n($1,F) = n1($1,F) + n2($1,F)

Valid for: 0.4 < F < 2.0, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.

(c) Thickness Correction, (Ki)t, for Minimum-Loss Incidence (SP-36 Fig. 142)

Valid for: 0.0 < t/c < 0.12, probably usable up to t/c = 0.15.

With:

A00 = 0.053535

A03 = -0.75902

A10 = -3.838x10-3

A13 = 3.4149x10-3

A21 = 2.0917x10-4

A30 = -1.3124x10-5

A40 = 2.3356x10-7

A01 = -0.29275

A04 = 0.3706

A11 = 0.02838

A14 = 5.8448x10-4

A22 = 3.0519x10-4

A31 = -1.0755x10-5

A41 = 1.1718x10-7

A02 = 0.71879

A05 = -0.067233

A12 = -0.02068

A20 = 3.5333x10-4

A23 = -1.2273x10-4

A32 = 1.7229x10-6

A50 = -1.4651x10-9

*o1($1,F) = A00 + A01F + A02F2 + A03F3 + A04F4 +A05F5 + A10$1 + A11$1F + A12$1F2 + A13$1F3 + A14$1F4

*o2($1,F) = A20$12 + A21$12F + A22$12F2 + A23$12F3 + A30$13 + A31$13F + A32$13F2

+ A40$14 + A41$14F + A50$15

*o($1,F) = *o1($1,F) + *o2($1,F)

Valid for: 0.4 < F < 2.0, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.

(e) Parameters for Deviation Rule (SP-36 Figs. 163,164)

The slope factor for the deviation rule is given by

where

b($1) = 0.965 - 2.5464x10-3$1 + 4.2695x10-5$12 - 1.3182x10-6$13

(f) Thickness Correction, (K*)t, for Deviation (SP-36 Fig. 172)

Valid for: 0.0 < t/c < 0.12, probably usable up to t/c = 0.15.

(g) Gradient of Deviation Angle with Incidence, d*o/di (SP-36 Fig. 177)

2

Valid for: 0.4 < F < 1.8, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.

APPENDIX D:

NACA 65-Series Compressor Blade Profiles

The 65-series blade geometry is not represented by closed-form analytical expressions. Instead, it

is necessary to work with tabulated values:

x/c

Thickness

(for t = 0.10c)

yt/c

yc/c

dyc/dx

0.0

0.0

0.0

---

0.005

0.00752

0.00250

0.42120

0.0075

0.00890

0.00350

0.38875

0.0125

0.01124

0.00535

0.34770

0.025

0.01571

0.00930

0.29155

0.050

0.02222

0.01580

0.23430

0.075

0.02709

0.02120

0.19995

0.10

0.03111

0.02585

0.17485

0.15

0.03746

0.03365

0.13805

0.20

0.04218

0.03980

0.11030

0.25

0.04570

0.04475

0.08745

0.30

0.04824

0.04860

0.06745

0.35

0.04982

0.05150

0.04925

0.40

0.05057

0.05355

0.03225

0.45

0.05029

0.05475

0.01595

0.50

0.04870

0.05515

0.0

0.55

0.04570

0.05475

-0.01595

0.60

0.04151

0.05355

-0.03225

0.65

0.03627

0.05150

-0.04925

0.70

0.03038

0.04860

-0.06745

0.75

0.02451

0.04475

-0.08745

0.80

0.01847

0.03980

-0.11030

0.85

0.01251

0.03365

-0.13805

0.90

0.00749

0.02585

-0.17485

0.95

0.00354

0.01580

-0.23430

1.00

0.00150

0.0

(-0.23430)

The thickness distribution is given for a NACA 65-010 blade which has been modified to give a

finite trailing-edge thickness of 0.3% of the chord length. The baseline thickness distribution has zero

thickness at the trailing edge and therefore cannot be manufactured. The nominal maximum thickness is

10% of chord. For blades with other values of maximum thickness, the tabulated distribution is simply

scaled accordingly.

The table indicates that maximum camber is at 50% of chord. However, the camber line is not a

simple circular arc. In fact, the slope of the camber line tends to infinity at the leading and trailing edges.

At the leading edge, this gives a "droop" to the nose of the blade which is believed to reduce its sensitivity

to incidence.

Because of the camber line shape, there is no simple relationship between the camber angle, as

defined earlier, and the magnitude of the maximum camber. Instead, the camber line shape is related to

the nominal maximum lift coefficient which the blade shape would achieve as an isolated airfoil. The

camber line shape quoted applies for a nominal lift coefficient CL = 1.0. To generate compressor blades

with a desired camber angle, the following can be used to relate an equivalent circular arc camber angle to

the nominal CL:

(1)

for 2 in degrees.

To generate the geometry for a 65-series compressor blade with a particular camber angle, 2:

(i) From (1), determine the nominal CL.

(ii) Scale the camber line co-ordinates and slope values by (CL/1.0).

(iii) Calculate the blade-surface co-ordinates by superimposing the tabulated thickness

distribution (scaled as necessary if the maximum thickness is to be different from 10% of chord)

on the camber line using Eqns. (5) from Appendix B.

The drawing compares the 10C4/30C50 blade with the 65-series which has the same maximum thickness

and the equivalent camber:

APPENDIX E:

Curve and Surface Fits for Kacker & Okapuu Loss System

for Axial Turbines

Kacker & Okapuu ("A Mean Line Prediction Method for Axial Flow Turbine Efficiency," ASME

Trans., J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 104, January 1982, pp. 111-119) presented an updated version of the

Ainley & Mathieson loss system for axial turbines. The Kacker & Okapuu (KO) system presents a basis

for estimating the complete losses, and thus the efficiency, of an axial turbine at its design point. For a

complete outline of the loss system see the paper.

Some aspects of the loss system are presented only in graphical form in the paper. Therefore a

number of figures have been digitized and curves or surfaces fitted to the data. This appendix documents

the curve fits and, in some cases, demonstrates the quality of the fits graphically. The figure numbers

refer to the figures in the Kacker & Okapuu paper.

(a) Ainley & Mathieson (AMDC) Profile-Loss Coefficients (Figs. 1, 2)

KO use the AMDC correlation for profile loss coefficient, with corrections for Reynolds number,

exit Mach number, channel acceleration, and improvements in design. The AMDC loss coefficient is

obtained as a weighted average of the values for a nozzle blade ($1 = 0) and an impulse blade. These

values are obtained from the plots shown in Figures 1 and 2. The data in these figures have been fitted to

polynomial surfaces of the form:

(i)

Nozzle Blade,

(Fig. 1)

a0,0 = 0.358716

a0,1 = -1.43508

a0,2 = 1.57161

a0,3 = -0.496917

a1,0 = -0.0112815

a1,1 = 0.0548594

a1,2 = -0.0555387

a1,3 = 0.014165

a2,0 = 0.000175083

a2,1 = -0.000824937

a2,2 = 0.000652287

a2,3 = -7.30141E-05

a3,0 = -8.61323E-07

a3,1 = 3.95998E-06

a3,2 = -1.89698E-06

a3,3 = -4.9954E-07

(ii)

Impulse Blade,

(Fig. 2)

a0,0 = 0.0995503

a0,1 = 0.182837

a0,2 = 0.01603

a1,0 = 0.00621508

a1,1 = -0.0283658

a1,2 = 0.011249

a2,0 = -7.10628E-05

a2,1 = 0.000327648

a2,2 = -0.000122645

In the early stages of design, axial chord rather than true chord of the blades is often specified.

However, the profile loss correlations require the solidity of the blade row, which is based on the true

chord. KO present an approximate correlation for the stagger angle as a function of the inlet and outlet

angles. The true chord can then be calculated from the axial chord. The graphical data are again fitted to

a surface, using a polynomial of the form:

with coefficients,

a0,0 = -2.90463

a1,0 = 0.412797

a2,0 = 0.593956E-02

a0,1 = 0.307036

a1,1 = -0.355369E-01

a2,1 = 0.389157E-03

The surface fit and the digitized values are compared over.

a0,2 = 0.370176E-02

a1,2 = -0.194938E-03

a2,2 = 1.74147E-06

A correction is made for shock losses at the leading edge of the blade. Since the Mach number

tends to be higher at the hub than at midspan, KO present a correlation for the hub Mach number as a

function of the midspan value and the hub-to-tip ratio. The shock loss is then calculated from the

estimated hub Mach number. The following polynomials were fitted to the curves of Figure 6:

(i)

Rotors

(ii)

Nozzles

The trailing-edge losses are expressed in terms of the energy coefficient. This was correlated

with the ratio of the trailing-edge thickness to the throat opening. Curves were presented for nozzle and

impulse blades. The values from these curves are then averaged in a weighted way to give the coefficient

for a blade of arbitrary inlet and outlet flow angles.

(i)

(ii)

Nozzle

APPENDIX F:

Centrifugal Stresses in Axial Turbomachinery Blades

1.0

Introduction

As briefly mentioned in lectures, the design of a turbomachine involves a trade-off between often

conflicting considerations: aerodynamics, heat transfer, materials, stresses, and vibrations (not to mention

cost). While our focus is on the aerodynamics, it is obviously wasteful to develop even a preliminary

aerodynamic design for a turbomachine which cannot be built for stress reasons.

Turbomachinery blades experience significant unsteady forces which lead to vibratory stresses,

and both low cycle and high cycle fatigue are important considerations. However, the level of the steady

stress determines the margin which is available for these unsteady stresses. In turbines, creep distortion is

an important consideration and the steady centrifugal stress is also the starting point for a creep analysis.

Thus, if the steady centrifugal stresses are kept within established limits, the design is likely to be

mechanically feasible. Fortunately, the steady centrifugal stresses in the rotor blades can be estimated

fairly easily in the early stages of the aerodynamic design.

A later section gives some criteria for judging whether the centrifugal stresses are acceptable.

These criteria apply primarily to the high-performance machines used in gas turbine engines. The stresses

are particularly high in low hub-to-tip ratio fan blades and in turbine blades; they are much lower in

normal compressor blades. A survey of typical, industrial axial-flow fans from several manufacturers

shows that peak tip speeds are consistently below 120 m/s. It is believed that this limit is related to the

stresses which can be sustained by the rather simple blade attachments, rather than stresses in the actual

blades. Higher tips speeds can be used but these require a switch to a considerably more expensive

method of attachment.

2.0

Then

(1)

and this can then be integrated from radius R to the tip, RT, (with a specified blade area variation) to

obtain the centrifugal stress at R.

Constant Section Blade:

With dA = 0, integrating (1):

(2)

Tapered Blades:

The cross-sectional area of turbomachinery blades often varies from hub to tip. If the area

decreases, the root stress will be reduced from the value given by (2). Taking into account the taper, the

hub stress can be written

(3)

(a)

(b)

where

The cross-sectional area of the blade is roughly proportional to the product of the chord length (c) and the

maximum thickness (tmax). Thus, the area ratio can be approximated by

If both the chord length and the maximum thickness are tapered linearly from the hub to the tip, to

maintain constant maximum thickness-to-chord ratio, the cross-sectional area will in fact vary

parabolically. It can be shown that the resultant centrifugal stresses will be lower than for linear taper.

However, for HTR > 0.5 the stresses are very similar and the assumption of linear taper gives a good,

slightly conservative, estimate of the hub stress.

3.0

From Eqn. (3)

(4)

From the density and stress limits for currently available blade materials, values of the right-hand side of

(4) can defined by the structural engineer. The aerodynamicist can then use these to verify that the

proposed design is feasible mechanically. The following table gives values of KAN2 which are

3

KAN2

KAN2

(A in inches2,

N in RPM)

(A in m2,

N in RPM)

Compressor

8-10 x 1010

5.2-6.5 x 107

4-5 x 1010

2.5-3.2 x 107

6-8 x 1010

3.8-5.2 x 107

Unshrouded LPT

8-10 x 1010

5.2-6.5 x 107

MACHINE TYPE

- Bladegen ToturialsUploaded bykallurkar23
- Analysis of Radial Compressor Options ForUploaded bymrbookani
- Radial-Inflow Turbine TutotialUploaded byJamesaaaa
- 53530662-TurbomachineryUploaded byfleigen
- ANSYS Turbomachinery CFD System - 14.5 UpdateUploaded byPrabhuMurugesan
- TurbomachineryUploaded byHussam El'Sheikh
- Solman Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Turbomachinery - S.L. Dixon - 5thUploaded byThomy
- Principles of Turbo MachineryUploaded bynirooie
- M._Rades_-_Dynamics_of_Machinery_2Uploaded byrades3702
- Aerodynamic design of centrifugal compressorUploaded byJun GWan Park
- Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Tur (1)Uploaded byMK Angel Ruiz
- CFD applied to Turbo machineryUploaded bybakri10101
- Analytical Design of Radial Turbine Design-nasaUploaded bymrbookani
- Ansys TurbogridUploaded byFederico Bacchi
- Chapter 3 Two Dimensional Cascades 1975 Worked Examples in TurbomachineryUploaded byKarthik Selvam
- Ansys Blade ModelerUploaded byMustafa Can Güçlü
- Turbomachine CourseUploaded byC Lukas
- fluid mechanics and thermodynamics of turbomachinery 5 ed solutionUploaded byapi-238206145
- Ansys Advanced Analysis TechniqueUploaded byEddie Davis
- BladeModeler 12.0 Lecture 1 IntroductionUploaded byedwin7323
- Centrifugal Compressor TutorialUploaded byJackjinn
- PothiraajS VortexUploaded bysrinathcfd
- Aerodynamic Design of Centrifugal CompressorUploaded byRicky Tonny
- Turbine Design and Application Vol123Uploaded byapi-3827338
- hjhjhjUploaded byEslam Nagy
- Turbomachinery Design and Theory, Rama S. R. Gorla & Aijaz a. KhanUploaded byWing Hin Chan
- CFD eBooks ListUploaded byVasanth Dhanagopal
- Janes.aero.EngineUploaded byGutunoi
- Shapiro-The-Dynamics-and-Thermodynamics-of-Compressible-Fluid-Flow-Volume-2.pdfUploaded bymarcobriso
- Thermal Radiation Heat Transfer, Third EditionUploaded bySanjeevan Lakra

- Composite Laminate GuidelinesUploaded bypdhurvey
- StreamWare Basic Installation and User Guide v6.00Uploaded bymihailmi
- NI USB-6212 SpecsUploaded bymihailmi
- Inconel Alloy 625Uploaded bymihailmi
- Missile Aerodynamics - Jack Nielsen - 1960Uploaded byHenrique da Mata
- Basic Mechanics of Laminated Composite PlatesUploaded bySiva Bhaskar
- capitulo 1.pdfUploaded byJ Alexander A Cabrera
- Chapter01 Lecture HhUploaded byHai Haswani Saad
- Turbulence Models and Their Application to Complex FlowsUploaded byMason925
- Bl Analyses Agardag335Uploaded byKarkhia Lorissa
- 8-1ss-120801194722-phpapp02.pptxUploaded bymihailmi
- Variational VAMUploaded bymihailmi
- FlexuralTorsional Coupled ISIKUploaded bykyanboo
- Modeling of Aerodynamic FlutterUploaded bymihailmi
- Ali N. H (2012) the Effect of Laminated Layers on the Flutter Speed of Composite WingUploaded bykyanboo
- Mechanics of CompositeUploaded bymihailmi
- laminate modeller workbookUploaded byLan T Nguyen
- Beam TheoriesUploaded bycaacmg
- Volo Voi Hodges 2000Uploaded bymihailmi
- Advanced Composite Tow-Steered ShellsUploaded bymihailmi
- aeroelasticityUploaded byShanthipriya Guru
- Guide to Compositesv5webpdfUploaded byImamRN
- C230Uploaded bymihailmi
- ReadMe.txtUploaded bymihailmi
- Need for New Materials Aging Aircraft StructuresUploaded bymihailmi
- Static Aeroelasticity Oblique Composite WingUploaded bymihailmi
- HDBK-17-1FUploaded bymihailmi
- TRIO Manual EnUploaded bymihailmi
- Review FormUploaded bymihailmi

- asirusa WPS-P-002 1F.xlsxUploaded byWalter Rueda
- P3ht Pcbm BestsellerUploaded byNgan Nguyen Nguyen
- Acoustics and Vibration Web FEVUploaded byChitra Joshi
- Hydro Sverak Lecture2Uploaded byricljr
- What Are the Desirable Properties of ResinsUploaded byPerry Vignesh
- Bai Tap Dien Hoa Cho K43EUploaded byĐình Khanh
- Table 6-3 ProposalUploaded byRamraj Ramachandran
- L5 ColumnsUploaded bythusi
- Openfoam Training v5 1 EnUploaded byThang Hoang
- Validation of Magmasoft Simulation of the Sand Casting ProcessUploaded byvmgobinath
- Chapter 19.pdfUploaded byStan
- n,l,ml,msUploaded byclassicalcat
- Particle Density TestUploaded bysamir
- Basics of FiltersUploaded byneilstar
- Eco Homes PptUploaded byMihir Rambhia
- Ecg564 - Level 2b (1)Uploaded byNurin Adlina Mohd Roslan
- 9783642224799-c1Uploaded byEurus Chakraborty
- Static Pressure CalculationsUploaded bylionlikeman
- Grouted vs Bolted Flange Connections 27102014-LibreUploaded byLászló Arany
- First Announcement of International Workshop on Nanotechnology and Application IWNA 2011 - Mar 3 2011Uploaded byNL Huy
- seismicaUploaded byAlex Pantiru
- Welding Technology - Metallurgy BasicsUploaded byMuhammad Hassan
- Maxwell DistributionUploaded bySukumar Pani
- API 5L Grade X65 PSL 2Uploaded byjirafabg123
- Tigris Gas Manual en FinalUploaded byLuis13956353
- Solutions for SemiconductorsUploaded byOzan Yerli
- The Beer-Lambert Law - Chemistry LibreTextsUploaded byAhmad Daniel
- Stuctural Analysis of Helicopter Flight and Hangar DeckUploaded bynavalarchmarine
- TCV-101.docxUploaded byJuan Krloz Castañeda
- ValveUploaded byahmedalgalo