Axial Turbine 2D Theory

Theory of turbo machinery /
Turbomaskinernas teori
Chapter 4
Axial-flow Turbines: 2-D theory
Note direction of α2
FIG. 4.1. Turbine stage velocity diagrams.

LTH / Kraftverksteknik / JK
Assumptions:
• Hub to tip ratio high (close to 1)
• Negligible radial velocities
• No changes in circumferential direction (wakes and nonuniform
outlet velocity distribution neglected)
Continuity equation for uniform

steady flow:
ρ1 A1cx1 = ρ 2 A2 cx 2 = ρ3 A3cx 3
Assuming constant axial velocity

cx1 = cx 2 = cx 3 = cx
ρ1 A1 = ρ 2 A2 = ρ3 A3
Work done on rotor by unit mass of fluid

= h01 − h03 = U ( c2 y + c3 y )
m
ΔW = W
Please note: No work done in nozzle row:

h01 = h02
With (
h0 = h + c 2 2 = cx2 + c y2 ) 2
And using above equations:
(
h02 − h03 = h2 − h3 + cx2 + c y2 ) 2 = U ( cy 2 + cy3 )
Rewriting this in terms of relative velocity
c y 2 − U = wy 2
c y 3 + U = wy 3 cy 2
c y 2 + c y 3 = w y 2 + wy 3
wy 2
−U
Combining above equations:
(
h2 − h3 + wy2 2 + wy23 ) 2=0
with wx 2 = wx 3 = cx and wx + wy = w
2 2 2
(
h2 − h3 + w22 − w32 ) 2=0
Relative stagnation enthalpy, h0,rel , does not change across rotor

Nozzle row (1 to 2):
• Static pressure: p1 → p2
• Stagnation enthalpy: h01 = h02

• Stagnation pressure: p01 > p02
(isentropic: p01 = p02 )
Subscript ‘s’ denotes isentropic

change and ‘ss’ denotes both rows
isentropic
FIG. 4.2. Mollier diagram for a turbine stage.

Rotor row (2 to 3):
• Static pressure:
• Stagnation enthapy: h02 > h03
• Stagnation pressure: p02 > p03
p2 → p3 However:
• Relative Stagnation enthapy,
h02,rel = h02 + w22 2 = h03,rel
FIG. 4.2. Mollier diagram for a turbine stage.

Turbine stage total to total efficiency:
Actual work output h −h

ηtt = = 01 03
Ideal work output when operating to same back pressure h01 − h03 ss
For a normal stage, no changes in are made in velocities from

inlet to outlet: c1 = c3 and α1 = α 3 . Further assuming c3ss = c3 the
efficiency becomes:
h01 − h03 h −h
ηtt = = 1 3
h01 − h03ss h1 − h3ss
Defining enthalpy loss coefficients for the nozzle and rotor respectively:
h2 − h2 s h3 − h3s
ζN = and ζ =
c22 2 w32 2
R
Neglecting rotor temperature drop, the stage efficiencies may be

expressed as:
−1
⎡ ζ R w32 + ζ N c22 ⎤
ηtt = ⎢1 + ⎥
⎢⎣ 2 ( 1 3 ) ⎥⎦
h − h
−1
⎡ ζ R w32 + ζ N c22 + c12 ⎤
ηts = ⎢1 + ⎥
⎢⎣ 2 ( h1 − h3 ) ⎥⎦
Soderberg’s correlation:
• Large set of data compiled
• Design assuming Zweifel’s criteria for optimum space – axial chord ratio
Y
ΨT = = 2 ( s b ) cos 2 α 2 ( tan α1 + tan α 2 ) ≈ 0.8
Yid
• Result: Turbine blade losses are a function of

¾ Deflection ε
¾ Blade aspect ratio H b
¾ Blade thickness-chord ratio tmax l
¾ Reynolds number
• Deflection ε = α1 + α 2
• Blade aspect ratio: H b=3
• Blade thickness-chord ratio tmax l = 0.15 − 0.3
Re = ρ 2 c2 Dh μ Dh defined at exit throat Dh = 2 sH cos α 2 ( s cos α 2 + H ) = 105
tmax H is height of blade (radial direction)

b
For turbines:
• Deflection, ε = α1 + α 2 , is large, but α2 ≈ α2 '
• Deviation, δ = α 2 − α 2 ' , is small ε = α1 '+ α 2 '
FIG. 4.3. Soderberg’s correlation of turbine blade loss coefficient with

fluid deflection (adapted from Horlock (1960).
Corrections for
• Reynolds number Re ≠ 105
14
⎛ 105 ⎞
ζ cor
*
=⎜ ⎟ ζ
*
⎝ Re ⎠
• Blade aspect ratio

Nozzles: 1 + ζ cor
*
( )
= 1 + ζ * ( 0.993 + 0.021b H )
Rotors: 1 + ζ cor
*
= (1 + ζ ) ( 0.975 + 0.075 b H )
*
Tip clearance losses and disc friction not included
Design considerations
• Rotor angular velocity (stresses, grid phasing)
• Weight (aircraft)
• Outside diameter (aircraft)
• Efficiency (almost always)
• ………
Consider a case with given
• Blade speed U
• Specific work ΔW = U ( c y 2 + c y 3 )
• Axial velocity cx
ΔW
The only remaining parameter to define is c y 2 since cy3 = − cy 2
U
• Triangles may be constructed
• Loss coefficients determined from Soderberg
• Efficiencies computed from loss coefficients
ΔW
Stage loading factor:
U2
cx
flow coefficient:
U
H
Aspect ratio:
b
FIG. 4.4. Variation of efficiency with cy2/U for several values of stage loading
factor ΔW/U2 (adapted from Shapiro et al. 1957).
Stage reaction, R
• Alternative description to c y 2 U
• Several definitions available
• Here: R = ( h2 − h3 ) ( h1 − h3 )
E.g: R = 0.5
0.5 = ( h2 − h3 ) ( h1 − h3 )
h2 − h3 = h1 − h2
R = 0.5
For a normal stage, c1 = c3
R = ( h2 − h3 ) ( h01 − h03 )
Using eq. 4.4: h2 − h3 + ( w22 − w32 ) 2 = 0 and Euler
w32 − w22
R=
2U ( c y 2 + c y 3 )
R=
( w 3 − w2 )( w
3 + w2 )=w
3 − w2
2U ( c y 2 + c y 3 ) 2U
Relative tangential velocity
wy = cx tan β
w3 − w2 cx
R= = ( tan β3 − tan β 2 )
2U 2U
Or using c y 2 = wy 2 + U
w3 − w2 w3 + U − wy 2
R= = =
2U 2U
1 c
= + x ( tan β3 − tan α 2 )
2 2U
Zero reaction stage
cx
R= ( tan β3 − tan β 2 ) = 0 if β3 = β 2
2U
FIG. 4.5. Velocity diagram and Mollier diagram for a zero reaction
turbine stage.
50% reaction stage
1 cx
R= + ( tan β3 − tan α 2 ) = 0.5 if β3 = α 2
2 2U
FIG. 4.7. Velocity diagram and Mollier diagram for a 50% reaction
turbine stage.
FIG. 4.8. Velocity diagram for 100% reaction turbine stage.
FIG. 4.4
ΔW C y 2
R = 1+ −
2U 2 U
FIG. 4.9. Influence of reaction on total-to-static

efficiency with fixed values of stage loading factor.
FIG. 4.6. Mollier diagram for an impulse turbine stage.
Alternative representation for

specified reaction:
η = f (Ψ ,Φ ) where
ΔW
Ψ = 2
is the stage loading and
U
c
Φ = x is the flow coefficient
U
FIG. 4.10. Design point total-to-total

efficiency and deflection angle contours
for a turbine stage of 50 percent reaction.
FIG. 4.11. Design point

total-to-total efficiency
and rotor flow deflection
angle for a zero reaction
turbine stage.
Centrifugal stresses
dFc = −Ω 2 rdm
dm = ρ Adr
dσ c dFc
= = −Ω 2 rdr
ρ ρA
With constant cross section this may be

integrated
σc r U tip 2
⎡ ⎛ rh ⎞⎤
= Ω ∫ rdr =
2
⎢1 − ⎜
t
⎟⎥
ρ r h 2 ⎢⎣ ⎝ rt ⎠ ⎥⎦
FIG. 4.15. Centrifugal forces

acting on rotor blade element.
Tapering:
Reduction of cross sectional area
in radial direction, in order to
reduce stresses
Pure fluid dynamics would

recomend the opposit
FIG. 4.16. Effect of tapering on centrifugal stress at blade

root (adapted from Emmert 1950).
FIG. 4.17. Maximum allowable stress for various alloys (1000 hr

rupture life) (adapted from Freeman 1955).
FIG. 4.18. Properties of Inconel 713 Cast (adapted from Balje 1981).
Turbine blade cooling.
Why is the efficiency of the gas turbine comparable to that of a

Rankine cycle?
(given that we do have to pay a considerable amount of energy to the

compressor, whereas compression of water in the Rankine cycle is
cheap)
FIG. 4.20. Turbine thermal efficiency vs inlet gas temperature (adapted

from le Grivès 1986).

Axial Turbine 2D Theory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Axial Turbine 2D Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theory of turbo machinery /

FIG. 4.1. Turbine stage velocity diagrams.

Continuity equation for uniform

Assuming constant axial velocity

Work done on rotor by unit mass of fluid

Please note: No work done in nozzle row:

And using above equations:

Relative stagnation enthalpy, h0,rel , does not change across rotor

• Stagnation enthalpy: h01 = h02

Subscript ‘s’ denotes isentropic

FIG. 4.2. Mollier diagram for a turbine stage.

FIG. 4.2. Mollier diagram for a turbine stage.

Actual work output h −h

For a normal stage, no changes in are made in velocities from

Neglecting rotor temperature drop, the stage efficiencies may be

• Result: Turbine blade losses are a function of

¾ Blade thickness-chord ratio tmax l

• Blade thickness-chord ratio tmax l = 0.15 − 0.3

Re = ρ 2 c2 Dh μ Dh defined at exit throat Dh = 2 sH cos α 2 ( s cos α 2 + H ) = 105

tmax H is height of blade (radial direction)

• Deviation, δ = α 2 − α 2 ' , is small ε = α1 '+ α 2 '

FIG. 4.3. Soderberg’s correlation of turbine blade loss coefficient with

• Blade aspect ratio

Tip clearance losses and disc friction not included

For a normal stage, c1 = c3

Using eq. 4.4: h2 − h3 + ( w22 − w32 ) 2 = 0 and Euler

Relative tangential velocity

FIG. 4.8. Velocity diagram for 100% reaction turbine stage.

FIG. 4.9. Influence of reaction on total-to-static

FIG. 4.6. Mollier diagram for an impulse turbine stage.

Alternative representation for

FIG. 4.10. Design point total-to-total

FIG. 4.11. Design point

With constant cross section this may be

FIG. 4.15. Centrifugal forces

Pure fluid dynamics would

FIG. 4.16. Effect of tapering on centrifugal stress at blade

FIG. 4.17. Maximum allowable stress for various alloys (1000 hr

Turbine blade cooling.

Why is the efficiency of the gas turbine comparable to that of a

(given that we do have to pay a considerable amount of energy to the

FIG. 4.20. Turbine thermal efficiency vs inlet gas temperature (adapted

You might also like