ELSEVIER

Experimental Investigations on Tandem

Compressor Cascade Performance at
Low Speeds
U. K. Saha • Minimizing the number of axial flow compressor stages for a specific
B. Roy work output, and thereby lowering the engine size and weight, has always
Department of Aerospace Engineering, been the designer's goal. Recently, with the emergence of low aspect ratio
Indian Institute of Technology, blades, there has been a renewed interest in tandem blading for maximizing
Bombay, India the blade loading further besides improving its off-design performance
characteristics.
This paper presents aerodynamic performance evaluations of three as-
sorted cascades of single (CDA 43), tandem (CDA 21-21), and a newly
developed tandem (CDA 32-21) blading. Fundamental investigation has
been attempted in a low speed cascade wind tunnel to find the high
deflection capability of tandem cascades. Although limited performance of
tandem CDA 21-21 has been affected by certain grey areas covering both
geometric and aerodynamic shortfall, tandem CDA 32-21 derived from
CDA 43 and CDA 21-21 has shown high flow deflection characteristics and
hence high loading over a wide range of angle of attack. © Elsevier
Science Inc., 1997

Keywords: aspect ratio, axial compressor, boundary layer, cascade,

controlled diffusion, airfoil, diffusion factor, loss coefficient, tandem
blade

INTRODUCTION ratios beyond the present limits with a minimum number

For more than a decade, the quest for improved aero
engine gas turbine power and fuel economy has stimu-
lated much research interest in the design of high perfor-
mance compressor airfoils. This has helped the evolution
of the modern aircraft gas turbine engine into an attrac-
tive power plant in a small package. Axial flow-compres-
sors of compact design are obtained by increasing the
suction capacity and the stage pressure ratio. Aerody-
namic optimization with such a design is aimed at increas-
ing loading to a maximum, with minimum penalty of total
pressure losses, leading to a minimum number of stages in
a multistage arrangement and a minimum number of
blades per stage [1-4].
Intensive research to obtain compressor blade sections
conforming to prescribed velocity distributions on com-
pressor blades has resulted in the development of con-
trolled diffusion of airfoils [5-7] to meet the requirements
of high efficiency and high blade loading capability, thus
leading to reduced developmental cost. Current stage
designs are, therefore, very efficient (90%) with relatively
high pressure ratios ( > 1.6). However, increasing pressure
of blades forces higher aerodynamic loading and even the
controlled diffusion airfoil shows its limitation due to the
presence of incipient flow separation [8].
This has brought a renewed interest in tandem blading
[9-12] where boundary layer growth is expected to be
effectively controlled for the prevention of flow separation
and subsequent stall. This has been possible with the
inception of wide chord, low aspect ratio blades [13, 14]
for higher Mach number flow regime with the intention of
raising blade loading and improving off-design perfor-
mance characteristics.
Benefits of low aspect ratio blades, controlled diffusion
airfoil, and tandem blading have been appreciated in
terms of structural lifetime, high loading, and off-design
flow control; however, these individual effects are to be
unified together into an efficient design.
An innovative design of a high pressure ratio axial flow
compressor, however, requires systematic study, and to
begin with low speed testing provides qualitative informa-
tion with which to constitute a framework for high speed
analysis. An understanding of the two-dimensional linear

Address correspondence to Dr. Bhaskar Roy, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay 400 076, India.
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 1997; 14:263-276
© Elsevier Science Inc., 1997 0894-1777/97/$17.00
655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010 PII S0894-1777(96)00125-2
264 U . K . Saha and B. Roy
cascade model may provide qualitative information for
preliminary guidance in the design of three-dimensional
compressor blades. These studies may also help to develop
and validate computational codes [15-18].
The work reported here was aimed at finding high
deflection capability of a developed tandem cascade ( C D A
32-21), compared with that of a single ( C D A 43) and an
existing tandem ( C D A 21-21) cascade. The motivation
behind this investigation was to find a blade profile to
achieve an attached flow behavior on the rear half of the
blade under varying operating conditions (design and
off-design) either by controlled diffusion characteristics of
the airfoil or by setting two blades in tandem, keeping
similar aspect ratios.
The authors' earlier experimental studies [10, 12] with
single and tandem cascades ( C D A 43 and C D A 21-21)
showed interesting capabilities of the latter within a lim-
ited operating range. This motivated us to develop a new
tandem configuration so as to have a wide operating range
with good loading capability. The developed tandem cas-
cade was configured out of a thick C D A blade profile at
the front (for wider operating range), followed by a scaled
down blade profile at the rear, as shown in Fig. 1. The
gap-nozzle geometry was given a cusp shape to promote
necessary and sufficient flow guidance for efficient mo-
mentum transfer on the rear blade suction over a wide
range of angle of attack. C D A 32-21 tandem cascade was
cut out from an existing C D A blade profile (43 ° camber)
truncated at the middle, followed by an existing, C D A 21 °
camber blade profile. Detailed blade coordinates of C D A
32-21 are presented in the Appendices. Blade coordinates
of C D A 43 and C D A 21 profiles have already been
reported [7, 19].
In both cases, tandem cascades were set and tested at
48 ° camber (overall) to find an extra flow deflection of 5 °
compared with the single cascade with 43 ° camber. In the
present investigations, attention was focused only upon
the blade surface and wake flow behavior to evaluate the
cascade performance characteristics. A direct cascade per-
formance assessment was made for all three configura-
tions on the basis of static pressure coefficient (Cp) distri-
bution, diffusion factor, static pressure rise coefficient,
loss coefficient, and wake velocity profiles, as well as total
pressure loss profiles. Detailed cascade blade geometry as
given in Table 1, and the cascade notations showing
various geometric and flow parameters are depicted in
Fig. 2.
Table 1. Single and Tandem Cascade Geometry
Blade Single
Variables Notations CDA 43
Camber angle (degrees) q~, ~p,, 43 °
Stagger angle (degrees) 7, "Ye 22°
Blade chord (mm) c 100
c --
Blade pitch (mm) s 50
Blade span (mm) b 150
Solidity ( c / s ) tr 2 1.9
Aspect ratio ( b / c ) AR 1.5
No. of blades N 10
CDA 32-21
Figure 1. Blade profiles under present investigations.
EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
Test Facility
The present investigation was carried out in a low speed
cascade wind tunnel (Table 2). Essentially, the flow envi-
ronment under consideration is incompressible. This open
circuit facility (Fig. 3) is driven by a centrifugal blower
located at the upstream end, followed by a diffuser, a
header containing a honeycomb and four mesh screens,
and then a 12-to-1 contraction ratio nozzle. The nozzle
leads to the test section of a rectangular duct equipped
with end-wall movable flaps. The cascade along with the
circular disks could be rotated in the test section about a
c o m m o n axis to vary the angle of attack. Suction slits were
made on either side of the side walls 0.25 times blade
chord upstream for boundary layer removal. Additional
suction was created by employing two centrifugal blowers,
each driven by a 0.75-kW motor, on either side of the side
walls. End-wall movable flaps were used to improve the
desired flow uniformity and periodicity.
Measurement Procedure
All the measurements in the present study were made
with standard pitot static probes and static pressure tap-
pings. While the upstream pitot static probe was used to
record the inlet flow conditions and check flow uniformity,
the downstream probe was used to record wake total
pressure and velocity covering two blade passages. Static
pressure tappings made on the blade surfaces were used
to record static pressures and velocities (with respect to
Tandem New Tandem
CDA 21-21 CDA 32-21
48 ° (overall) 48 ° (overall)
220 (effective) 22° (effective)
60 (FB) 60 (FB)
40 (RB) 40 (RB)
50 50
150 150
1.9
1.56 1.56
2 × 10 = 20 2 × 10 = 20
 Experimental Investigations on Tandem Compressor Cascade 265

7 . I Y
z

~ plone

/ /'~t, I
/~IKI / ~ Axiol direclion, x l Figure 2. Cascade nomenclature.

inlet total pressure) at various chordwise positions to find
Cp distributions, the diffusion factor, and the static pres-
sure rise coefficient. The mass averaged loss coefficient
was evaluated by traversing the downstream total pressure
probe over a length of 150 mm covering the two blade
passages. Wake total velocity over the same length was
also recorded by the same probe.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Low speed studies were attempted in the present investi-
gation to find qualitative information on the tested cas-
cades on the basis of fundamental aerodynamic perfor-
mance parameters.
Static Pressure Coefficient
Single Cascade (CDA 43) Static pressure coefficient
(Cp) distributions of the single cascade (CDA 43) at
various angles of attack are presented in Fig. 4. At a = 0°,
after an initial acceleration on the suction surface (up to
30% of the chord from the leading edge), flow starts
diffusing toward the trailing edge (Fig. 4a). This accelera-
tion and deceleration effect diminishes at a = 5°, showing
a flatter Cp distribution (Fig. 4b). At a = 10°, steep
acceleration around the leading edge (LE) is followed by a
diffusion process at 6% of the chord from the LE, and
thereafter Cp remains constant (Fig. 4c). Between a = 0°

WAKE P R O B E r'-CASCADE 20x20MESH SCREEN "-~

TRAVERSE P L A N E UPSTREAM
WALL TAPS
/-.,,..FOR
- FLOW UNIFORMITY ~ - 25x25 HONEY COMB
, h.--\ ~.EC. u~,,~,, ,~ow ...-~,,,, ~-t-._ A S P L ' ' . ~ , o ~ L f l E~

I*--/
,
: SECTION ',
i
IIIIIB
x,..JI ! 1 1 I l l . L - -~
a
', !
i
' " -

. . . . . . . . . . . . I ,,o _1. ,o°o i J tl ,2soi=,wL ,so,, .V=sol.

B

SLITS lSOeAC.
(ALL DIMIENSlON5 ARE IN ram)

Figure 3. Low speed cascade wind tunnel.

266 U . K . Saha and B. Roy

Table 2. Cascade Wind Tunnel Data

Wind Tunnel Drive Suction System Drive Test Section Data
Blower type: radial Blower type: radial Size: rectangular
I)': 3.30 m 3 / s 12:0.056 m3/s Air velocity: 20.0 m / s
Pressure rise: 9.96 kPa Pressure rise: 2.98 kPa Mach No.: 0.06
Motor power: 55 kW Motor power: 0.75 kW Reynolds No. 1.369 × 105

Cp vs. c~ P l o t s

~-3.0
• • • • - Suction Surface • • • • • Suction Surface "• "•" S u c t i o n Surface
• ---- Pressure Surface • ~,•A Pressure Surface -•,•- Pressure Surface
~-2.0 I

-I.0

Cp m - 0 . 0

o~
o 1.0. ~E TE

co 2.0 ......... , ......... , ......... , ......... r ..... ~

20 4O flO 80 100 20 40 60 80 I00 0 20 40 60 BO 100
Percentage of Chord Percentage of C h o r d Percentage of Chord

(a) A n g l e of a t t a c k = 0° (b) Angle of attack = 50 (c) Angle of attack = lO °

~-3.0
v • • • • • Suction Surface • • • • • Suction Surface • =••= Suction Surface
"U "•''" Pressure Surface • A.., Pressure Surface " .4... Pressure Surface
~-2,0

~-I.0

Cp
m -0.0

1.0 LE TE

1
2.o .......
'2'd......i'd......'d'd......"gd......
f0o 0 20 40 60 80 100 o ....... '2'd ...... 'i'o ...... 'g'd ....... gd'"'Too
Percentage of C h o r d Percentage of Chord Percentage of C h o r d

(d) Angle of attack = 15 ° (e) Angle of attack : 180 (f) A n g l e of attack = 20 °

~-3.0
ID
• • • ~ • Suction Surface =••=•Suction Surface • • • • • Suction Surface
AAA.APressure S u r f a c e I &..A pressure Surface
~-2.0

- 1.1)

Cp
-0.0
P

1.0 E TE ~ LE TE
1
o~ 2.0 t.........i.........,...................,......... ......... r. . . . . . . . . v......... w......... , . . . . . ~
........ 2~....... 4~....... d'd.......e~......f0o 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of C h o r d Percentage of Chord Percentage of C h o r d

(g) Angle of a t t a c k = 220 (h) Angle of attack = 25 o (i) A n g l e of a t t a c k = 30 o

Figure 4. Static pressure coefficient (Cp) distributions of single cascade (CDA 43) at varying angles of
attack.
 Experimental Investigations on Tandem Compressor Cascade 267

and a = 10°, the cascade is operating at high negative ment. A separation bubble was also created in past experi-
incidences. As a result, sharp acceleration and diffusion ments with C D A [20, 21]. The suction surface pressure
processes were been observed anywhere on the blade gradient starts leveling off with an increase in the angle of
surfaces. At a = 15 ° to 22 °, this initial steep acceleration attack ( a = 25 ° and 30°), which is a precursor to flow
is followed by a sharp diffusion process, which is com- separation (Figs. 4h and 4i). Evidence of the onset of
pleted within 10% of the chord from the leading edge trailing edge separation is clearly observed in this range.
(Figs. 4 d - 4 g ) . This sharp acceleration and deceleration At a = 30 °, the Cp plot still shows the existence of a
evidently created a separation bubble. The separation separation bubble. At this angle of attack, the separation
bubble caused a local flow acceleration (between 10% and point has moved toward the LE and merged with the
35% of the chord), followed by a steady diffusion on the decaying separation bubble. The pressure surface Cp dis-
rest of the blade suction surface. The local separation tribution remains consistent at all angles of attack. This
bubble, while altering the Cp distribution, may have in- may be due to the controlled diffusion characteristics of
duced an early transition, which in turn, effected reattach- the cascade profile.

Cp vs. (x Ptots
~- 3.0
..~ • • • • • Suction Surface • • • • • S u c t i o n Surface I =~==• Suction Surface
- - . . 6 Pressure Surface 4A4~A4 Presaure Surface --*-- Pressure S u r f a c e
~-~.0
LE
~LE
Cp
- 1.0

-0.0
~ TE

~ 1.0. FRONT BLADE REAR BLADE FRONT BLADE DE FRONT BLADE JREAR
BIREAR
BLADE

m . Z.O ......... l ......... i ......... I ......... , .........

20 40 60 80 It 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of Chord Percentage of Chord P e r c e n t a g e of C h o r d
(a) Angle of attack = 0° (b) Angle of attack = 50 (c) Angle of attack = 10 °

-~- 3.0
..~ • • • • • Suction Surface I • ~• • • Suction Surface _~=~ Suction Surface
O -**-- Pressure Surface • - ~ * , Pressure Surface Pressure Surface
~-2.0

- 1.0

Cp m -0.0

o 1.0 DE

~o 2.0 . . . .

20 40 60 80 100 o........2~.......i'o.......66.......g'o......foo
Percentage of Chord Percentage of Chord Percentage of C h o r d
(d) Angle of attack = 150 (e) Angle of attack --- 1 8 0 (f) Angle of attack = 20 o

"~- 3.0 . • = • = • S u c t i o n S u r f a c e • • • • • • Suction Surface • • • • • Suction Surface

~.'~-2.0 --* Pressure Surface ~...A. Pressure Surface --~-- Pressure Surface

LE ]L~ LE

TE TE E
Cp~
m -0.0

c~
--~'
B 0" I'O FRONT
L BLADE
A [RII.:.,I..i~.,DE
D E ] .F:I,N.I
FRONT~ I,.I~.I.E.
BLADE
R A E PRI ~ : . , B . ~ FRONT BLADE REAR BLADE

Z.O ....... , ......... , .................. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20 40 60 80 100 0 Z0 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100
P e r c e n t a g e of C h o r d P e r c e n t a g e of C h o r d P e r c e n t a g e of C h o r d
(g) Angle of attack = 220 (h) Angle of attack = 250 (i) Angle of attack = 300

F i g u r e 5. S t a t i c p r e s s u r e coefficient (Cp) distributions of tandem cascade (CDA 21-21) at varying angles of

attack.
268 U . K . Saha and B. Roy

Tandem Cascade ( C D A 21-21) Static pressure coeffi- m i n i m a l static p r e s s u r e d i f f e r e n c e n e a r the trailing e d g e

cient distributions of the tandem cascade ( C D A 21-21) arc ( T E ) of the front blade suction and pressure surfaces, a
shown in Fig. 5. At a = 0 °, steady acceleration is notice- w e a k e r m o m e n t u m transfer by the gap-nozzle flow was
able on the front blade suction surface up to 3 0 % of the effected.
chord (total) from the L E (Fig 5a). The acceleration zone T h e m i n i m a l difference of static p r e s s u r e at low angles
diminishes gradually with an increase in c~ (Figs. 5a-5c). of attack was caused by the i n c o m i n g flow, which is
Within the range of a = 0 ° to I0 °, the front blade pres- incident well o n t o the blade suction surface r a t h e r than
sure surface shows almost a constant Cp distribution; high o n t o the LE. T h e flow s e p a r a t i o n t e n d e n c y toward the T E
deflection over the rear blade suction surface does not of the front b l a d e suction surface o b s e r v e d earlier is
sccm to bc effective in this range owing to inefficient p r e v e n t e d by the g a p - n o z z l e flow at c~ = 15 ° (Fig. 5d),
m o m e n t u m transfer by the gap-nozzle flow formed be- forcing r e a t t a c h i n g on the r e a r blade suction surface. This
tween the blades. At lower angles of attack, owing to f u r t h e r aids the d e c e l e r a t i o n process almost to the rear

Cp vs. G Plo'ts
~-3.0 • • • • • Suction Surface [ i I i I ~ u c ~ o n Surface ,,a.•. Suction Surface
• •* *- Pressure Surface ----- Pressure Surface • - • • - Pressure Surface
o ~HE
~_.-2.0
o
-l.0 ~ T E
P
Cp ~-0.0 1 ~ %'~%• TE

1.0, FRONT BLADE REAR BLAD[ FRONT BLADE REAR BLADE FRONT BLADE REAR~B~DE

w 2.0 ....... , ......... , .................. ,..,

40 80
20 40 80 flO tO0 . . . . . . . . 2 ~ . . . . . . . .fii . . . . . . . 6 d . . . . . . . 6 ~ . . . . . . i o o 0 20 60 I00
Percentage of Chord Percentage of C h o r d Percentage of Chord

(a) Angle of attack = 0° ( b ) A n g l e o f a t t a c k = 50 (C) Angle of attack = lO °

"~-3.0
¢J
. , - , , = Suction Surface i l i l l Suction Surface
*---- Pressure Surface • - - - - Pressure Surface
~.-2.0 -
~J HE
-I.0

Cp
~-0,0
e,
1.o FRONT BLADE REAR BLADE I RONT BLADE REAR BLADE FRONT BLADE REAR BLAD£

r.~ 2.0 ......... l ......... , ......... t ......... , ......... , .................. , .........

...................,
......... ~ ......... , ......... ,

20 40 60 80 I00 0 20 40 80 80 100 20 40 80 60 I00

Percentage of C h o r d Percentage of Chord Percentage of Chord
(d) Angle of a t t a c k = 15 o (e) A n g l e of attack = 18 ° (f) A n g l e of a t t a c k = 200

~-3.0 ~ •••'• SucUon Surface • "'" • Suction Surface t l O , , o Suction Surface

•~ ssure Surface - - - * , Pressure S u r a f c e , 8 * * , Pressure Surface
~12.o
v LE

Cp
~-L.O
~
~-0.0
~ ~ T E
~ E

e~
o l.O. FRONT BLADE REAR BLADE FRONT BLADE REAR B L A D E FRONT BLADE REAR BLADE

oq 2.0 .........,............................
,.........
0 20 40 60 O0 tO0 ........ ~'6....... gd....... 8d....... go...... i'oo 0"....... ~'6....... ~'6....... 8d....... S'0...... i'00
Percentage of Chord Percentage of Chord Percentage of Chord
(g) Angle of a t t a c k = 22 o ( h ) A n g l e of a t t a c k : 250 (i) A n g l e of a t t a c k : 300

Figure 6. Static pressure coefficient (Cp) distributions of new tandem cascade ( C D A 32-21) at varying
angles of attack.
 Experimental Investigations on Tandem Compressor Cascade 269

blade TE. Pressure surface Cp distribution at the same 0.8

angle of attack indicates continued flow attachment. Dif- o

fusion characteristics on the front blade suction surface 0.6

r=.
improve significantly at at = 18° and 20 ° (Figs. 5e and 5f);
the rear blade suction surface also indicates comparatively ~0.4
o
higher flow diffusion. From at = 22 ° to 30 °, the diffusion
process is milder on the front blade suction surface (Figs. ~ 0.2
5g-5i), whereas the rear blade suction surface shows its
attached diffusion characteristics. 0.0 .... , .... i .... ~ .... , .... i .... ) .... , ....
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Flow control, together with good diffusion characteris- Angle of a t t a c k (in degrees)
tics, effected by the gap-nozzle m o m e n t u m transfer was
realized in the range of angles of attack from at = 15 ° to (a) Single CDA 43
at = 30 °. The Cp distributions of C D A 21-21 within the
angles of attack from at = 15 ° to 30 ° do not indicate the
presence of a separation bubble, was observed for C D A
43. The absence of a separation bubble is presumably due 0.8
1. (~cX:K9 DFp.er.l ;~r
to the suction created by the gap-nozzle effect. ,~) : ~+ DFm.dm.a
2
~0.6
r..

N e w T a n d e m C a s c a d e ( C D A 32-21) Cpdistributions of the <~ 0 . 4

o
newly developed tandem cascade ( C D A 32-21) are pre-
sented in Fig. 6. At at = 0 °, steeper acceleration is notice-
able up to 40% of the chord (total) on the front blade
~ 0.2

suction surface after which flow decelerates until momen- 0.0

-5 0 5 10 15 20 2,5 30 35
tum exchange takes place by the gap-nozzle at 62% of the Angle of attack (in degrees)
chord (Fig. 6a). A kink believed to be due to local flow
separation and reattachment on the rear blade suction (b) T a n d e m CDA 21-21
surface is observed; this is clearly an indication of the
formation of a separation bubble, as observed in the
earlier investigations [20, 21]. Constant Cp distribution
was predominant on the blade pressure surface at the 0.8
same angle of attack. At at = 5 °, flow acceleration reaches (D(~D(~ DFgenera]
2 I I tt I DFmodifie d
to 30% of the chord, followed by continuous deceleration o 0.6
to the rear blade T E with the interim energy transfer by r.,

the gap-nozzle flow; pressure surface flow decelerates on ¢0.4

the front blade, whereas it accelerates on the rear blade
(Fig. 6b). The same effect with a milder acceleration and
deceleration is traced on the front blade at at = 10° and
15 ° (Figs. 6c and 6d). At a t = 18° and 20 °, the flow
undergoes sharp acceleration around the L E and then
decelerates on both suction and pressure surfaces of the
front blade, indicating a significant amount of diffusion on
the front blade suction surface while the flow sustains the
diffusion process on the rear blade suction surface (Figs.
6e and 6f). With an increase in the angles of attack from
a = 22 ° to 30 °, a separation tendency on the front blade is
initiated, thus limiting the diffusion process on the suction
surface. However, flow behavior on the rear blade suction
surface shows continuous deceleration, which is indicative
of an attached flow behavior. This implies flow reattach-
ment, showing high overall flow deflection and diffusion
characteristics of the cascade (Figs. 6g to 6i). At a = 30 °,
the leading edge separation is indicated on the front
blade, but, interestingly, this flow has been reattached and
diffused on the rear blade. In the entire range of angle of
attack, mild acceleration was observed near the TIE of the
rear blade pressure surface.
This newly developed tandem cascade shows its capabil-
ity for preventing flow separation under high angles of
attack. Also, the formation of a separation bubble was
been observed except at at = 0 ° on the front blade, which
is actually the front half of the C D A studied under the
single cascade scheme. This indicates that tandem effect
created a pseudosuction at the front blade TE, which, in
o
0.0
.... 8 .... ~'"i'd"'fs"2'6"z'g"a'0"as
Angle of attack (in degrees)
(C) N e w T a n d e m CDA 32-21
Figure 7. Variation of diffusion factor with angles of attack
of CDA 43, CDA 21-21, and CDA 32-21.
turn, prevented bubble formation on the front blade suc-
tion surface. A strong gap-nozzle flow on the rear blade
suction surface prevented the formation of the bubble on
the rear blade, and, even if there was a tendency to form a
bubble, it was captured within or carried away by the
accelerated gap-nozzle flow.
Diffusion F a c t o r
Variation of the diffusion factor (DF) with angles of
attack (at) for the tested cascades is shown in Fig. 7. C D A
43 shows a narrow useful range of angel of attack from
a t = 15 ° to a t = 2 5 ° (Fig. 7a), and this could also be
visualized from the corresponding Cp plots. The highest
amount of diffusion occurs between at = 15 ° and 25 °,
giving its maximum value of D F = 0.44 at at = 20 °.
270 U . K . Saha and B. Roy
Two definitions of diffusion factor have been used for
the tested t a n d e m cascades: (1) DFg. . . . . 1, based on classi-
cal definition, and (2) DFmodified, based on summation of
local diffusion factors of the front and the rear blades.
F o r both definitions, the D F values of C D A 21-21 are
much higher than those of C D A 43 within a range of
a = 15 ° to 20 ° (Fig. 7b) The highest magnitude of diffu-
sion factor DFg. . . . . 1 = 0.67 and DFmodified = 0.75 is ob-
served at a = 20 °. D F values drop sharply after 20 °, which
is also noticeable from the corresponding Cp plots. High
blade loading can be achieved by C D A 21-21 within a
range of a = 15 ° to 20 ° .
C D A 32-21 shows the highest D F at a = 18 ° and 20 °
(Fig. 7c). DFge,~ral shows a constant magnitude of D F =
0.42 at a = 18 ° and 20°; whereas, in the same range,
DFmodifie d shows a constant magnitude of D F = 0.50. The
D F vs a plot of C D A 32-21 traces a similar variation of
diffusion as that of C D A 43 with angles of attack, without
the peaky characteristics of C D A 21-21.
Static P r e s s u r e Rise Coefficient
The static pressure rise coefficient ( C a ) , which is also a
measure of the flow diffusion or loading capability, was
evaluated for the tested cascades (Fig. 8). C D A 43 shows a
reasonable a m o u n t of loading capability within the range
of angle attack from a = 15 ° to 25 ° (Fig. 8a). C D A 21-21
shows higher values of C R within a limited range (Fig.
8b). C R values for C D A 32-21 (Fig. 8c) trace a similar
path as those of D F with angles of attack, avoiding the
peaky characteristics of C D A 21-21. The observed varia-
tion of C R with D F from a = 5 ° to 15 ° was due to the
4.0
(.} 2.0
~-0.0
-z.o_d.. '6 .... g"" i g " ig'" ~-'g'"i~g" a'o'" a5
Angle of attack (in degrees)
4.0
m 2.0
-0.0
-2.0_d..
'6 . . . . d ' " i ' d ' " t ' 5 " ' ~ ' 6 " ' ~ , ' ~ " a ' 0 ' "
Angle of attack (in degrees)
(b) T a n d e m
Figure 8. Variation of static pressure rise coefficient with angles of attack of C D A 43, C D A 21-21, and C D A
32-21.
varying chordwise location of Vmax on the blade suction
surface. A t a = 20 ° to 30 °, Pl and Vmax a r e at the same
location, and as such both C R and D F show similar
loading characteristics.
Loss Coefficient
Mass averaged loss coefficients were calculated from the
wake survey by means of traversing a total pressure probe.
The survey was parallel to the cascade and very close to
the blade TE, where the flow is nonuniform. Data were
taken at close intervals in the wake region and over coarse
intervals outside the wake region (i.e., free-stream passage
flow.
The variation of loss coefficients with angles of attack
for the tested cascades are shown in Fig. 9. Loss coeffi-
cient values are found to be low for single C D A 43
cascade over the entire range. The tandem C D A 21-21
cascade, even though it showed higher magnitudes of the
diffusion factor, gives high loss coefficients. This may be
due to higher surface flow velocity, leading to higher skin
friction, and to mixing loss incurred in the process of rear
blade suction surface flow energization. The new t a n d e m
C D A 32-21 showed lower magnitudes of loss coefficients
than did C D A 43 over a range of a = 5 ° to 15 °. The high
loss coefficients over the rest of the angles of attack are
due to the thicker but attached growth of boundary layer
set by the t a n d e m configuration. This indicates that tan-
d e m cascade is capable of controlling the boundary layer
growth, thereby preventing the separation tendency, and
the expected rise in the loss coefficients also is held within
tolerable limits.
(a) Single CDA 43
4.0
2.0
-o.o
-z.0 d'"i'o"i's"z'6"'~'5"3ii"is
'"6 ....
Angle of attack (in degrees)
CDA 21-21 (c) N e w T a n d e m CDA 32-21
 Experimental Investigations on Tandem Compressor Cascade 271

1.5 The total pressure loss curve for C D A 43 exhibited

t;II:IGGDSingle CDA 43
4 - - 4 - T a n d e m CDA 2 1 - 2 1 behavior (Fig. 11) similar to that of velocity profiles in the
: : : : ~ New T a n d e m CDA 3 2 - 2 1 /
.. s.o entire range of angles of attack ( a = 0 ° to 30°). Suction
surface at a = 30 ° indicates higher growth of the bound-
@
ary layer, which is also evident from the corresponding
~ 0.5 wake velocity profile.
0
The wake velocity profiles for C D A 21-21 are symmetri-
,,=1

0.0 cal about the wake center from a = 0 ° to a = 10°, which

-5 0 5
Angle
Figure 9. Variation of loss coefficient with angles of attack of
CDA 43, CDA 21-21, and CDA 32-21.
W a k e Profile Characteristics
Normalized wake velocity and total pressure loss profiles
are plotted for the tested cascades in Figs. 10-15. The
wake-measuring plane was selected in such a way that the
center of the horizontal axis (shown in the plots) corre-
sponds to the center of the blade pitch of the middle two
blades. Measurements were taken covering the two cen-
tral blades in either case. The wake velocity measured at a
distance of 45 m m aft of the cascade line is normalized by
the reference inlet free-stream velocity. Similarly, the
wake total pressure measured at a distance of 15 m m aft
of the cascade line was normalized by the reference total
pressure.
Wake velocity profiles at all angles of attack for C D A
43 are asymmetrical about the wake center, indicating the
differential growth of boundary layers developed on the
suction and pressure surfaces (Fig. 10). The defect in the
wake velocity profile is large at high angles of attack
( a = 30°).
10 15 20 25 30 35 distort slowly as the angle of attack increases (Fig. 12).
of a t t a c k (in d e g r e e s )
However, the flow seemed to be highly unstable from
c t = 2 2 ° to a = 3 0 °.
The loss distribution for C D A 21-21 (Fig. 13) is symmet-
rical about the wake center at lower values of angle of
attack ( a = 0 ° to 10°). The wake profile becomes flatter
and distorts highly as the angle of attack increases. It is
probable that the two adjacent wakes are coalescing to-
gether in the higher range of angles of attack ( a = 22 ° to
30°).
The wake velocity profiles for C D A 32-21 are more
asymmetrical about the wake center (Fig. 14) as compared
with the velocity profiles of C D A 43. Beyond a = 20 °, the
width of the wake increases, indicating a thicker growth of
boundary layer on the suction surface. The increase in
wake width could be ascribed to the additional 5 ° camber
of the newly developed cascade, where the boundary layer
grew but remained attached, giving efficient diffusion.
The loss profiles for C D A 32-21 (Fig. 15) show a thicker
wake profile compared with that of C D A 43, indicating a
thicker growth of suction surface boundary layer and
hence high losses of the cascade, which are reflected in
the mass averaged loss coefficient.

1.8
1.8
I~_^AAA ~ = 0 0 t ~ k : t ~ k ~ = ~ 0 O O O O O C ( = 1 0 0
c¢=0 ° ***** a=5 ° o o o o o ¢¢=10 °
~" 1.3
1.3
~' 0 . 8
,~. 0.8
I
;> 0.3
0.3 (2,
-0.2
-0.2 . . . . , . . . . | . . . . , . . . . i . . . . i . . . . , . . . . i . . . .

,. 1.8
t.8 A&AAA 0f=15 ° t:Ct~:$ CC=[8 ° OOOOOCC=20°
&~,~z~& c¢=15 ° * * * * * or=IS ° o o o o o ¢t=20 ° K
0" 1.3
t.3
Z
A

oN 0 . 8
~,, 0.8 a,
I
;> 0.3
0.3 D.,
-0.2 . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . J . . . .
-0.2 . . . . i . . . . i . . . . , . . . . i . . . . , . . . . i . . . . i . . . .

t.8 [.8
auA4& = = 2 2 ° ~-~-,~-t c~=~.5 ° ooooo a=30 ° a&&&& a_-22 ° *~,~,* a=25 ° ooooo a=30 °

1.3 ~ 1.3
A

> 0.8 a,0~ 0 . 8

I
0.3 0.3
o.,
-0.2 . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . , . . . . i . . . . ; . . . . i . . . .

-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Trailing Edge Blade to Blade Direction, cm Trailing Edge Blade to Blade Direction, c m
Figure 10. Wake velocity profiles of CDA 43 at varying Figure IL W a k e total pressure loss profiles of C D A 43 at
angles of attack. varying angles of attack.
272 U . K . Saha and B. Roy

1.8 1.8
n ~ ¢(=0 ° ***** C1=5 ° o o o o 0 0 = 1 0 0 ,,~,at~ c<=O° **~** o~=5 ° n..tUL~_nc~=lO °

"d 1.3 1.3

a,

;> 0.8 0.8

N
;>.
0.:3 0.3

-0.2 -0.2
1.8 1.8
~zzzz ~x=15 ° **~, ~=18 ° ooooo c~=20 ° z z z z ~ c~=15 ° * * * * * (x=18 ° o o o o o o=200

1.3 1,3
~J
~e

0.8 ~.~ 0.8

t~
~> 0.3 z> 0.3

-0.2 -0.2
1.8 1.8
~zzz~ ~=:~2 ° * ~ k * * ~=25 ° o o o o o c~=30 ° ~t~,~t, ~x=22 ° ***~, c~=25 ° ooooo <~=30 °
1.3 1.3

> 0.8 ~ 0.8

e,l

~ 0.3 ;> 0.3

-0.2
-0.z_g,. '-'d'' ' - ' i ' ~ z ' '6 . . . . ~ . . . . i . . . . d . . . . a
Trailing Edge Blade to Blade Direction, c m T r a i l i n g Edge Blade to Blade Direction, c m

Figure 12. W a k e velocity profiles of C D A 21-21 at varying Figure 14, Wake velocity profiles of CDA 32-21 at varying
angles of attack. angles of attack.

1.8 1.8
~ 4 A 4 ~ 0~----.0° :,k*:,k:,k:,k 0 < = 5 ° o n o o o (x=].O ° ~e,z~z~ (x=O ° ***** 0~=5 ° 0 o 0 0 0 ~=lO °

~ 1.3 O" 1.3

~:~ 0.8 0.8

i I
0.3 0.3
0.,
-0.2 -0.2 . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . J . . . . i . . . . , . . . . i . . . .

1.8
~z~ c(=15 ° ***** o(=18 ° ooooo c~=20 °
O' 1.3 C~ 1.3

0.8 g 0.8
t I
0.3 N 0.3

-0.2 -0.2
1.8
~4z4~ ~=22 ° **~** (x=25 ° ooooo ct=30 ° ~,,~ 0<=22 o , ~ , ct=25 ° ovoov ~=30 °
O~ L,3

r~ 0.8 ~' 0.8

I I
0.3 0.3
P.
-0.2 . . . . i . . . . J . . . . , . . . . i . . . . i . . . . , . . . . , . . . .
- 0 . 2 8 -. ,'~- 6i ; " , , ,~ 4i . . . . - ~] , , , , 0i . . . . 2~ . . . . 4i . . . . 6~ ' ' ' -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Trailing Edge Blade to Blade Direction, c m Trailing Edge Blade to Blade Direction, c m

Figure 13. W a k e total pressure loss profiles of C D A 21-21 at Figure 15. W a k e total pressure loss profilcs of C D A 32-21 at
varying angles of attack. varying angles of attack.
 Experimental Investigations on Tandem Compressor Cascade
U N C E R T A I N T Y ANALYSIS
Extreme care was exercised to ensure the highest possible
reliability and accuracy of the acquired test data. Each
data point on the blade surfaces represents an average of
three repetitive pressure and velocity readings. The time
between successive readings was 5 s. In surveying the
wake flow manually, each time the probe was moved to a
new position, we allowed a settling time of 10-15 s to
record the data. The accuracy of the micromanometer was
0.1 mm H 2 0 for the pressure reading and 0.1 m / s for the
velocity reading.
The uncertainties relative to cascade parameters are as
follows: stagger angle (~/) = _+0.5°, angle of attack ( a ) =
+0.5 °, overall camber (~Po)= +1.0°, blade pitch ( s ) =
-+ 0.5 mm, blade profile tolerance = -+ 0.25 mm.
PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE/USEFULNESS
The results of the present study would be extremely useful
from a practical point of view because it provides signifi-
cant guidance for designing practical machines meant for
higher loading limits. The present data could be used as
guidance for designing machines for low speed applica-
tions, as in the case of air handling equipment, ventilation
fans, cooling fans, and so forth.
For high speed applications, further optimization of the
blade shape is necessary to take into account the forma-
tion of shocks and compressibility effects. Such high speed
data may be useful for designing tandem stator and rotor
blades for aircraft gas turbines, for vehicular gas turbines
(e.g., cars, trucks, hovercrafts, ships, etc.), and for indus-
trial power generating units. Potential can also be realized
in tandem vaned diffusers of centrifugal compressors and
in turbopump feed systems in liquid propellant rocket
engines.
CONCLUSIONS
In the present investigations, an attempt has been made
to achieve an extra flow deflection of 5 °, using a tandem
blade configuration, in comparison with a single blade
profile, with minimum loss penalty. CDA 43 has shown
good diffusion capability over a range of t~ = 15° to 25 °,
whereas CDA 21-21 has shown higher diffusion capability
within a range of a = 15° to 20 °. Thin airfoil characteris-
tics of CDA 21-21 configured out of two scaled down
CDA profiles were observed. A thin airfoil is character-
ized by a narrow range of operation. When used in a
tandem configuration, both the front and the rear blades
have a low leading edge radius to chord (total) ratio.
Hence, flow guidance over both front and rear blade
leading edges is limited to a narrow incidence range. This
was observed in the present experimental findings.
CDA 21-21 has a higher total pressure loss coefficient
than that of CDA 43. This may be caused by the mixing
loss incurred as a result of the suction surface flow ener-
gization. The other reason could be the lower magnitude
of thickness to total chord ratio, yielding poor flow guid-
ance, especially near the leading edges. Wake flow is
273
aggravated further by an extra camber of 5 °. Furthermore,
skin friction drag may be high because of a higher magni-
tude of surface velocity, especially on the rear blade. It
could be said that, after a judicious trade-off between
higher blade loading and higher losses, CDA 21-21 has
the potential compared with CDA 43 over a limited range
of angles of attack, and further optimization with the
cascade geometry is required for its improved perfor-
mance over a wider range. However, a compressor meant
only for design-point operation may stand to gain by the
use of the CDA 21-21 tandem blade.
The potential of CDA 32-21 was observed in maintain-
ing a sustained flow attachment within a reasonable range
of angle of attack from a = 5 ° to a = 30 °. This indicates
that its flow deflection capability is superior to that of
CDA 43. The reason for its efficacy could be attributed to
a guided flow energization by the cusp-shaped gap-nozzle
formed between the blades and to higher magnitude of
front blade leading edge thickness to total chord ratio. An
additional camber of 5 ° was added for higher flow deflec-
tion in the newly developed tandem CDA 32-21 cascade,
with acceptable loss coefficients over this range of angles
of attack.
FUTURE RESEARCH
Future research needs to address the cusp shape of the
front blade trailing edge and the consequent gap geometry
more accurately. The flow conditions near the gap are to
be accurately assessed through boundary layer studies,
and this knowledge could be pursued for developing a
suitable computational code. Such an investigation would
not only lead to accurate analysis of the flow in and
around the tandem cascade configurations, but also pro-
vide guidelines for future experimentation.
The present work has been addressed more to the
control of diffusion, which occurs on the rear half of the
blade surface. The front half, with high acceleration, sepa-
ration bubble, and onset of sharp diffusion, would require
close investigation, especially at high speed where com-
pressibility, turbulence, and shock interactions would be
significant.
Recently, research has been undertaken to find the
operational feasibility of the developed tandem cascade
for the off-design flow condition. Knowledge of off-design
performance of a high pressure ratio axial flow compres-
sor is extremely important because it affects operating
costs and component life. In case of aero engines, idling,
take-off, and cruise will always result in different flow
situations within the compressor stages. Similarly, other
modes of propulsion, such as marine and industrial gas
turbines, where axial compressors are employed often
need to operate away from the design point for significant
lengths of time. Thus to maintain the performance of the
machine at off-design condition, flexibility in the opera-
tion of the component is required. One way to improve
this situation is to operate the cascade in a variable
camber mode. In our next experimental venture, the de-
veloped tandem cascade will be tested at various camber
settings to assess its off-design flow control capability.
274 U . K . S a h a a n d B. Roy

APPENDIX A APPENDIX B

B l a d e C o - o r d i n a t e s o f C D A 43 ( t r u n c a t e d ) B l a d e C o - o r d i n a t e s o f C D A 21 ( s o l i d )

xss Xss xps Y~ xs~ x~ x~ r~s

- 0.02 0.53 0.34 - 0.36 - 0.42 0.69 - 0.39 0.51
- 0.06 1.00 0.82 - 0.65 -0.41 0.90 - 0.35 0.35
- 0.06 1.13 1.36 - 0.83 -0.39 1.13 - 0.28 0.23
O. 10 1.90 2.00 - 0.89 -0.31 1.42 - 0.20 0.12
0.28 2.74 2.71 - 0.90 - 0.12 1.89 0.00 0.00
0.59 3.56 3.49 - 0.86 0.07 2.24 O. 11 - 0.04
1.12 4.26 4.32 - 0.74 0.33 2.65 0.22 - 0.05
2.16 5.20 5.24 - 0.53 0.65 3.13 0.33 - 0.05
3.46 6.19 6.30 - 0.34 1.05 3.65 0.45 - 0.04
5.17 3.37 7.36 - 0.12 1.51 4.21 0.57 0.01
7.11 8.62 8.51 0.14 2.05 4.83 0.69 0.02
9.28 9.90 9.70 0.42 2.63 5.47 0.83 0.07
11.58 11.19 10.98 0.72 3.26 6.13 0.95 0.13
13.86 12.39 12.29 1.06 3.91 6.77 1.09 0.19
15.96 13.43 13.60 1.45 4.55 7.39 1.23 0.25
17.80 14.29 15.14 1.79 5.17 7.97 1.37 0.33
19.41 14.99 16.67 2.18 5.77 8.48 1.51 0.42
20.79 15.57 18.26 2.60 6.31 8.95 1.67 0.51
22.03 16.06 19.92 3.03 6.81 9.36 1.83 0.61
23.15 16.48 21.64 3.48 7.27 9.73 1.99 0.71
24.18 16.85 23.44 3.93 7.69 10.05 2.15 0.81
25.16 17.17 25.32 4.40 8.07 10.33 2.31 0.93
26.07 17.46 27.28 4.87 8.41 10.58 2.49 1.05
26.95 17.73 29.27 5.34 8.73 10.81 2.67 1.17
27.81 17.97 31.42 5.81 9.03 11.01 2.85 1.31
28.63 18.18 33.63 6.27 9.29 11.19 3.04 1.44
29.43 18.38 35.96 7.05 9.79 11.51 3.23 1.58
30.21 18.56 38.36 8.20 10.21 11.77 3.65 1.88
30.98 18.72 40.00 9.04 11.03 12.23 4.09 2.21
31.72 18.87 41.00 9.34 12.03 12.73 4.56 2.56
32.43 19.00 43.00 10.09 13.09 13.21 5.07 2.95
33.13 19.11 45.00 11.18 13.63 13.45 5.35 3.16
33.81 19.21 47.00 12.08 14.77 13.90 5.94 3.61
34.46 19.29 49.00 13.02 15.35 14.12 6.26 3.86
35.07 19.36 52.00 14.10 16.59 14.55 6.60 4.12
35.63 19.42 55.00 14.65 17.25 14.78 7.34 4.69
36.16 19.45 57.00 14.95 18.62 15.23 8.19 5.35
36.67 19.48 59.00 15.12 19.35 15.47 9.18 6.09
37.16 19.50 61.00 15.23 20.10 15.71 9.74 6.51
38.91 19.50 20.89 15.97 11.04 7.45
40.22 19.52 21.71 16.23 11.79 7.99
41.56 19.47 22.55 16.52 12.64 8.58
43.01 19.38 23.45 16.82 13.59 9.22
44.45 19.25 24.38 17.13 14.67 9.93
45.94 19.09 25.36 17.47 15.92 10.70
47.44 18.89 26.39 17.83 17.35 11.55
48.97 18.66 27.48 18.21 20.99 13.53
52.11 18.08 28.63 18.63 23.27 14.65
55.39 17.36 29.83 19.06 25.90 15.85
58.77 16.52 31.07 19.51 28.67 17.07
61.00 15.58 32.31 19.97 31.59 18.21
33.43 20.41 33.77 19.05
34.21 20.72 34.79 19.47
 Experimental Investigations on Tandem Compressor Cascade 275

or solidity ( c / s ) , dimensionless
q~ camber angle, degrees
1 / ..... s.o,io° s°..oe % overall camber angle (for tandem blade), degrees
.............. ;'--'7 77"7 ..... Subscripts
-1 9 19 29 39 49 59 69 79 89 99
X-axis 1,2 cascade inlet and outlet planes
Controlled Diffusion Airfoil (32 g C a m b e r )
loc, ref local and reference conditions
max maximum on the blade suction surface
x, y, $ axial, tangential, and spanwise directions

REFERENCES
~t0 1. Wennerstrom, A. J., Highly Loaded Air Flow Compressors: His-
Suction Surface
/ / -~--~-e=Pressu,'e Surface tory and Current Developments. ASME J. Turbomachinery 112,
- 0 q~lr,. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 567-578, 1990.
-I 10 20 30 40 2. Cumpsty, N. A., Compressor Aerodynamics. Longman, Bombay,
X-axis
India, 1989.
Controlled Diffusion Airfoil (210 Camber}
3. Starken, H., Performance of Controlled Diffusion Blades, Axial
Flow Compressors, VKI Lecture Series 1992-02, 1992.
4. Behlke, R. F., The Development of a Second Generation of
Controlled Diffusion Airfoils for Multistage Compressors. ASME
J. Turbomachinery 108, 32-41, 1986.
NOMENCLATURE 5. Stephens, H. E., and Hobbs, D. E., Design and Performance
AR aspect ratio ( b / c ) , dimensionless Evaluation of Supercritical Airfoils for Axial Flow Compressors.
United Technologies Corporation Report FR 11455, 1979.
b blade span, m m
6. Hobbs, D. E., and Weingold, H. D., Development of Controlled
Cp static pressure coefficient (Cp = P l o c - P1/Q1) Diffusion Airfoil for Multistage Compressor Application. ASME
CR static pressure rise coefficient (C R = P2 - J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 106, 271-278, 1984.
P l / Q I ) , dimensionless 7. Bledsoe, M. R., The Method of Complex Characteristics for
CDA controlled diffusion airfoil Design of Transonic Blade Sections. Paper No. D O E / E R /
c blade chord, m m 03077-273/UC-32, Elsevier Science, Inc., New York, 1986.
8. Sturm, W., Scheugenpflug, H., and Fottner, L., Performance
DF diffusion factor ( D F = Vm~ - V 2 / V 1)
Improvements of Compressor Cascades by Controlling the Pro-
FB front blade file and Sidewall Boundary Layers. ASMEJ. Turbomachinery 114,
LE leading edge 477-493, 1992.
N n u m b e r of blades 9. Wu, C.-H., Zhuang, B., and Guo, B., Experimental Investigation
static pressure, kPa of Tandem Blade Cascades with Double Circular Arc Profiles.
P
ASME Paper No. 85-GT-94, 1985.
/'0 total pressure, kPa
10. Roy, B., Marathe, B. V., and Gangal, D. B., Comparative Cas-
PS pressure surface cade Studies of Some High Diffusion Compressor Bladings. Proc.
Q dynamic pressure, kPa Ninth Int. Symp. on Air Breathing Engines, Athens, Greece, pp.
RB rear blade 1281-1289, 1989.
SPRC static pressure rise coefficient, dimensionless 11. Sachmann, J., and Fottner, L., Highly Loaded Tandem Compres-
sor Cascades with Variable Camber and Stagger. ASME Paper
SS suction surface
No. 93-GT-235, 1993.
$ blade pitch, m m 12. Roy, B., Walvekar, A. K., Saha, U. K., and Marathe, B. V., Low
TE trailing edge Speed Cascade Studies of Highly Cambered Single and Tandem
V flow velocity, m / s Compressor Blading. Int. J. Turbo Jet Engines 12, 129-137, 1995.
volume flow rate, Cu m / s 13. Gostelow, J. P., Cascade Aerodynamics. Pergamon, Oxford, 1984.
14. Wennerstrom, A. J., Low Aspect Ratio Axial Flow Compressors:
Greek Symbols Why and What It Means. ASMEJ. Turbomachinery 111, 357-365,
angle of attack, degrees 1989.
flow angle, degrees 15. Wisler, D. C., Loss Reduction in Axial Flow Compressors
/3 Through Low-Speed Model Testing. ASME J. Gas Turbine Power
8 deviation angle, degrees 107, 354-363, 1985.
t u r n i n g / d e f l e c t i o n angle (~ =/31 -/32), degrees 16. Hirsch, C., Advanced Methods for Cascade Testing. AGARD-
T stagger angle, degrees AG-328, 1993.
% effective stagger angle (for t a n d e m blade), 17. Yocum, A. M., and O'Brien, W. F., Separated Flow in a Low
degrees Speed Two Dimensional Cascade I: Flow Visualization and Time
1" incidence angle, degrees Mean Velocity Measurements. ASME J. Turbomachinery 115,
409-420, 1993.
K blade angle, degrees 18. Yocum, A. M., and O'Brien, W. F., Separated Flow in a Low
ae0 total pressure loss, kPa Speed Two Dimensional Cascade II: Cascade Performance.
to loss coefficient (to = A P o / Q 1 ) , dimensionless ASME J. Turbomachinery 115, 421-434, 1993.
276 U . K . Saha and B. Roy

19. Marathe, B. V., Cascade Studies of Highly Loaded Compressor 21. Elazar, Y., and Shreeve, R. P., Viscous Flow in a Controlled
Blades. M. Tech. Thesis, Aero. Eng. Dept. Indian Inst. Tech., Diffusion Compressor Cascade with Increasing Incidence. ASME
Bombay, 1988. J. Turbomachinery 112, 256-265, 1990.
20. Sanger, N. L., and Shreeve, R. P. Comparison of Calculated and
Experimental Cascade Performance for Controlled Diffusion
Compressor Stator Blading. ASMEJ. Turbomachinery 108, 42-50,
1986. Received April 27, 1995; revised August 30, 1996