Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2010: Power for Land, Sea and Air
GT2010
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2010: Power for Land, Sea and Air
THREE-DIMENSIONAL DESIGN METHOD FOR LONG BLADES OF STEAM
TURBINES USING FOURTH-DEGREE NURBS SURFACE
Shigeki Senoo
Energy and Environmental Systems Laboratory
Power Systems Company
Hitachi, Ltd.
Hitachi, Ibaraki, Japan
ABSTRACT
A new blade design method for steam turbines using the
fourth-degree NURBS surface was developed. The method
enables engineers to easily generate three-dimensional complex
blade shapes that have inherently good aerodynamic
performance and constraint satisfaction.
The developed design method has three steps. First, 2D
aerofoils are independently generated at each design height.
The convergent or convergent-divergent aerofoils are selected
on the basis of the outlet Mach number. The convergent flow
path is defined by a fourth-degree NURBS curve to preserve
the continuity of the slope of the curvature. The divergent flow
path for supersonic flow is generated by the method of
characteristic curves to avoid strong shock waves. The inlet and
outlet angles are constrained to coincide with the flow angle of
the velocity triangle. The design parameters, such as chord
length, stagger angle and control points of NURBS are
automatically decided using an evolutionary optimization
technique NSGA-II to minimize the loss by computational fluid
dynamics. Therefore, fewer man-hours are needed for design
work and better proficiency is not a significant requirement.
Second, the number of control points and knot vectors are
equalized for all aerofoils by inserting or removing knots and
fitting the divergent part by the fourth-degree NURBS curve.
Finally, all aerofoils are stacked radially, for example, along the
centroid axis, and the fourth-degree NURBS surface is
generated by interpolating the control points of the NURBS
curves of all the aerofoils.
This design method can easily generate long blades of the
last stage for steam turbines. The blade has a surface with
continuity of the slope of curvature in all directions and good
aerodynamic performance under constraints.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
June 14-18, 2010, Glasgow, UK
GT2010
June 14-18, 2010, Glasgow, UK
GT2010-22312
GT2010-
Koji Ogata
Tateki Nakamura
Naoaki Shibashita
Hitachi Works
Power Systems Company
Hitachi, Ltd.
Hitachi, Ibaraki, Japan
INTRODUCTION
Environmental issues, like global warming due to carbon
dioxide emissions and natural resource conservation, are
receiving much attention. As electricity generation is
responsible for a large proportion of carbon dioxide emissions
and consumption of resources, improvement of generating
efficiency is important.
Steam turbines are one of the core machines for electric
power generation in various types of power plants, including
coal-fired and combined cycle thermal power plants and
nuclear power plants. Steam turbines can work regardless of the
heat source as long as there is enough heat to generate high-
temperature and high-pressure steam. In addition, steam
turbines more effectively utilize the heat available until the
ambient temperature is reached because they have a low outlet
pressure due to water condensation. These features ensure that
steam turbines will remain important machines for years to
come. This encourages engineers to continuously improve the
internal efficiency and reliability of the turbines.
The rotating blades are the most important parts in a steam
turbine, since they transfer thermal energy of the steam to
rotational energy of the rotor. Among them, the blades of the
last stage of a low-pressure steam turbine most significantly
affect the internal efficiency because they generate about 10%
of the total output that is generated by the more than 20 stages
of the turbine. Figure 1 shows a double-flow type, low-pressure
steam turbine rotor. The blades of the last stage are the longest
ones at both ends of the turbine rotor. In addition, increasing the
annulus area of the last stage in steam turbines is an effective
way of increasing power output and improving the efficiency
by reducing the amount of wasted kinetic energy. Therefore, the
1 Copyright © 2010 by ASME
 moving blades should be long, usually more than one meter.
The development of long, high-performance blades for the last
stage contributes significantly to improving the internal
efficiency of steam turbines.
Conventional methods for designing steam turbine blades
can generate long, high-performance blades, but they require a
lot of time and high level of proficiency of the designers. There
are three main difficulties in creating a three-dimensional (3D)
smooth blade surface. The first is that the blades are highly
twisted due to matching of the velocity triangles, as shown in
Fig. 2. Therefore, there should be a large number of two-
dimensional (2D) design sections. This leads to an increase of
design parameters. In addition, having a number of 2D sections
makes it difficult to create a smooth blade surface by the radial
stacking of them, for example, along the centroid axis. The
second is that cascade flow path shapes of 2D aerofoils differ
between the inner and outer parts. At the inner part, the aerofoil
has a convergent flow path, while at the outer part, the aerofoil
has convergent and divergent flow paths to adapt the supersonic
flow of the outlet to the desired flow path. This also makes it
difficult to create a smooth blade surface in radial stacking. The Figure 1. Low-pressure steam turbine rotor
third is that structural constraints are strict [1]. For example, the
stress is large due to the large centrifugal force on the blades,
therefore the cross-sectional area of the blade near the inner
part should be large and the cross-sectional area near the outer
region should be small. Avoiding resonance is another strict
constraint to the blade stiffness, mainly related to the number of
blades, because of the lower natural frequency of a large blade.
Three-dimensional blades are composed of free-form
surfaces. For axial turbines the surfaces are generally specified
by a series of 2D blades (hereafter 2D blade is called an
aerofoil). CAD curves such as Bezier curves and NURBS
(Non-Uniform Rational B-Spline) curves are used to define the
aerofoils in combination with an optimization technique [2],
[3], [4]. The NURBS curves are used in this paper because they
can reduce the number of design parameters without diluting
the representability and they are compatible with other CAE
systems such as CAD, CFD (Computational Fluid Mechanics)
and FEM (Finite Element Method). However few studies have
referred to an expression and a generation method of 3D
surfaces of a blade. Dutta et al. [4] used a bi-quadratic Bezier Figure 2. Blade of the last stage
surface for the 3D distribution of camber angle of a in a steam turbine
compressor; however it might be difficult to apply their
approach to long blades of steam turbine because there are only
nine control points. Arabnia and Ghaly [5] used a quadratic
rational Bezier curve for a 3D stacking curve; however they did
not mention surface representation. Another issue is the degree of the NURBS curves and
For small twisted blades which have convergent flow paths surface. The 3rd degree surface might be commonly used to
at all aerofoils, a smooth surface of the blade might be easily preserve the continuity of the curvature. However a continuous
generated by simple stacking. For greatly twisted long blades of slope of the curvature distribution along the suction and
steam turbines, however, it is difficult to generate smooth pressure surfaces is important in the design of a blade with high
surface by stacking different types of aerofoils which have aerodynamic performance because small discontinuities of the
convergent flow paths and convergent-divergent flow paths slope of the curvature distribution cause spikes or humps in the
depend on the height. pressure distribution on the blade surface. These spikes or
humps may introduce regions of local acceleration and
deceleration, flow separation, or undesirable loading

2 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 distributions [6]. Korakianitis [7] proposed a 2D aerofoil design blade surface. Then, the fourth-degree NURBS surface is
method from a prescribed curvature distribution that has a generated by interpolating the control points of the
continuous slope of the curvature distribution. However, some NURBS curves of all aerofoils.
blades designed by this method may fail to satisfy constraints 2) The design parameters, such as chord length, stagger angle,
such as a chord length and blade area, because it is difficult to and control points of NURBS are automatically decided
imagine the blade shape from a curvature distribution. Corral using an evolutionary optimization technique to minimize
and Pastor [8] developed a 2D aerofoil design method using the energy loss coefficient by computational fluid
two chains of highly differentiable Bezier curves. The resulting dynamics.
blade surface should have a continuous slope of the curvature The first feature preserves the continuity of the slope of
distribution. In this method, the blade shape is more directly blade surface curvature and reduces the number of 2D design
designed, but the blade surface may undulate due to constraints sections. The second feature can reduce the design time and
at the connecting point of two Bezier segments. improve the ease of use.
The purpose of this study was to develop a 3D blade The overview flow diagram of the blade design system is
design method for the long and greatly twisted blades of steam shown in Fig. 3 and a detailed flow diagram of profile
turbines. The method should be easy to use and should generate generation is shown in Fig. 4. The flow pattern is designed and
a smooth surface of blade with continuity of the slope of the blade material is decided before the blade design begins. In
curvature in all directions. the flow pattern design, a meridional flow path and velocity
triangles are decided. Among these data, blade height, root
diameter, and three radial distributions, which include throat-to-
NOMENCLATURE pitch ratio, inlet flow angle and outlet Mach number, are used
C(u) NURBS curve as fixed external variables in the 2D aerofoil design. Several
cax axial chord length thermodynamic variables, such as radial distributions of inlet
CPi control point total pressure and enthalpy, are used for flow calculations to
dTE trailing edge diameter evaluate blade performance.
Mout outlet Mach number The blade design method has three steps. First, 2D
Ni,p(u) B-spline basis functions of pth-degree aerofoils are independently generated at each design height. For
NURBS Non-Uniform Rational B-Spline lower outlet Mach number sections, an aerofoil called a
p degree of NURBS curve or surface subsonic aerofoil with a convergent flow path is adapted. For
Pi, Pi,j control point in 2D or 3D Euclidean coordinate higher outlet Mach number sections, an aerofoil called a
Pwi,j control point in 4D homogenous coordinate transonic aerofoil with a convergent-divergent flow path is
P.S. pressure surface adapted. Design parameters shown as internal variables in Fig.
Ri,p(u) rational B-spline basis functions of pth-degree 4 are automatically decided using an optimization technique to
rTE radius of trailing edge arc minimize the energy loss coefficient under several constraints.
S(u,v) NURBS surface in 3D Euclidean coordinate The trailing edge thickness is fixed and the minimum trailing
Sw(u,v) NURBS surface in 4D homogenous coordinate edge wedge angle is specified to satisfy the manufacturing
S.S. suction surface tolerance and to avoid a large deformation. The cross section
s throat areas are determined so that the centrifugal stress of all sections
t pitch is less than allowable stress of the blade material. An aerofoil at
wi weight the hub should fit in the platform. The number of blades is
wLE leading edge width selected mainly to avoid resonance with the lowest natural
WELE leading edge wedge angle frequency mode of the blade. In addition to that, the moments
WETE trailing edge wedge angle of inertia of area at some aerofoil are restricted to avoid
αin inlet angle resonance. However estimation of vibration is not carried out
αout outlet angle concurrently with the 2D aerofoil design but after the 3D blade
αout_ss outlet angle of suction side design by FEM.
δ uncovered turning Second, all aerofoils are transferred to compatible fourth-
γ specific heat rate degree NURBS curves. Finally, these aerofoils are stacked
γstg stagger angle radially, for example, along the centroid axis, and the fourth-
degree NURBS surface is generated.

BLADE DESIGN SYSTEM TWO-DIMENSIONAL AEROFOIL DESIGN

The blade design method has two main features.
1) A fourth-degree NURBS curve is applied to define both
convergent type and convergent-divergent type aerofoils to
preserve the continuity of the slope of the curvature of
Two-dimensional aerofoil shape is expressed by a fourth-
degree NURBS curve to preserve the continuity of slope of
blade surface curvature. A pth-degree NURBS curve [9] is
defined as a weighted-average blending function of control
points CPi i=0,…,n,

3 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 ∑ N (u ) w CP
n
Flow Pattern

=∑R
i, p i i n

C (u ) ≡ i =0
(u ) CPi a ≤ u ≤ b , (1) Blade Design System

∑
n i, p

N (u ) w j, p j
i =0 Profile Generation Design Parameter

j =0 Optimization
2D aerofoil Estimation engine
where Ni,p(u) are B-spline basis functions of the pth-degree, wi Loss: CFD 2D

is weight and Ri,p(u) are rational B-spline basis functions Stacking Estimation

defined as 1D centrifugal stress
3D blade Surface smoothness

N i , p (u ) wi
Ri , p (u ) ≡ . (2)
∑N
n

j, p
(u ) w j
IGES format  data 3D CFD Grid

j =0
Cover 
Tie boss
CAD software Platform
Disk joint
Subsonic Aerofoil
A subsonic aerofoil is shown in Fig. 5. An aerofoil is Estimation Nozzle
expressed as a single 4th-dgree NURBS curve whose control
Stress Vibration
points consist of the following five parts in the design as shown (FEM) (FEM) 3D CFD
in Fig. 5.
(i) Trailing edge
(ii) Downstream in the throat on the suction side Figure 3. Overview flow diagram of
(iii) Upstream in the throat on the suction side the blade design system
(iv) Leading edge
(v) Pressure side External variables
The fixed design parameters given by the flow pattern are Fundamental design variables Vortex data Thermodynamic variables
(1) pitch t, Rotational speed Radial distributions of Radial distributions of
Blade height Throat / pitch ratio Inlet total pressure
(2) throat s , and Root diameter Inlet flow angle Inlet total enthalpy (temperature)
Blade count Outlet Mach number Inlet flow angle
(3) inlet angle αin . Outlet static pressure
The rough aerofoil size is decided by two parameters,
2D aerofoil design Material data
(4) axial chord length cax and
Density
Objective
(5) stagger angle γstg . minimize energy loss coefficient
Tensile strength
Safety ratio
The trailing edge, as shown in Fig.6, is an arc defined by :
(6) trailing edge diameter dTE and Constraints
strength (centrifugal stress is less than allowable, ⋯)
(7) trailing edge wedge angle WETE Structural data
vibration (avoid resonance, ⋯)
structure (fit in platform, ⋯) Cover shape
and it is expressed by a 4th-degree NURBS curve with 9 manufacturing tolerance(trailing edge thickness, ⋯) Tie boss shape
control points Pi as shown in Fig.7. Platform shape
Internal variables :
The surface downstream of the throat of suction surface Axial chord length
significantly affects the performance of a subsonic aerofoil. To Stagger angle
Trailing edge thickness, wedge angle
design the downstream part, the throat position on the suction Leading edge shape
side is designed first. The throat position is decided using the :
following two parameters in addition to pitch and throat 2D aerofoil shape definition

a) uncovered turning δ and Convergent path

Divergent path
4th-degree NURBS curve
method of characteristic curves
b) outlet angle of suction side αout_ss .
The uncovered turning is defined as the angle between two
tangent lines of the suction surface at the throat and at the subsonic aerofoil subsonic aerofoil ⋯ transonic aerofoil transonic aerofoil

trailing edge as shown in Fig. 8. The coordinates of the throat make all aerofoils compatible 4th-degree NURBS curves
with reference to the center of the trailing edge arc on the
suction side is calculated by subsonic aerofoil subsonic aerofoil ⋯ transonic aerofoil transonic aerofoil
⎧⎪ xthroat _ ss = xo _ TE1 − (throat + rTE )cos(δ + αout _ ss )
⎨
⎪⎩ ythroat _ ss = yo _ TE1 + pitch − (throat + rTE )sin(δ + αout _ ss )
. (3) 3D Blade surface 4th-degree NURBS surface

Figure 4. Flow diagram of profile generation

4 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 The throat convergent angle θ, which is defined as the
angle between two tangent lines of the throat on the suction
surface and on the suction surface, is also an important
parameter for performance. However, the throat convergent
angle θ is not an independent parameter because of its
geometrical relation to both uncovered turning δ and trailing
edge wedge angle WETE,
δ = θ + WETE . (4) Suction side
upstream from throat
CP8
The trailing edge wedge angle WETE has a minimum value CP7

under mechanical constraint. The larger throat convergent angle CP9

CP6
θ causes flow to accelerate more and leads to better CP10
performance in general. According to Equation 4, however, the CP11
centroid CP5
larger throat convergent angle θ leads to the larger uncovered CP12
CP15 s
turning δ which leads to worse performance in general. CP13 CP14 CP16 CP4
Therefore, an optimum balance between θ and δ should be αin Suction side
Leading  Pressure side CP3
decided depending on the blade load, Mach number, Reynolds edge downstream
from throat
number and so on. In the design method, CP17
t
(8) throat convergent angle θ CP2

is selected as the design parameter instead of the uncovered

CP1
turning to avoid an incorrect negative θ if δ is, by mistake,
smaller than WETE. γstg CP0
The outlet angle of suction side αout_ss has an affordable cax CP18
Trailing edge
range to preserve a convex suction surface downstream in the
throat. To clarify the range, a non-dimensional ratio from 0.0 to Figure 5. Subsonic aerofoil
1.0 is selected as a design parameter instead of αout_ss.

(9) ratio of outlet angle of suction side Rαout_ss

180°－WETE

(
αout _ ss = αout _ ss min + Rαout _ ss αout _ ss max − αout _ ss min ) (5)
out_ss

rTE
⎡ ⎛ throat + 2rTE ⎞ ⎤ =dTE/2 out_ss

αout _ ss min = max⎢sin −1 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ − δ, 0.0⎥ (6)

⎢⎣ ⎝ pitch ⎠ ⎥⎦

⎡ (throat + rTE )cos δ − rTE ⎤ out

α out _ ss = sin −1 ⎢ ⎥ (7) = out_ss+WETE/2

⎣ pitch ⎦
max

WETE

If Rαout_ss approaches 1.0, the intersection point of the two

tangent lines of the suction surface at the throat and at the
trailing edge move closer to the trailing edge, and the curvature
of the suction surface is smaller near the throat and is larger
near the trailing edge. Figure 6. Trailing edge
If a leading edge shape is defined as a circular or elliptic
arc, the slopes of curvature have discontinuity at the connection P5
P6 P4
points to downstream surfaces. These discontinuities degrade P3
aerofoil performance [6]. Therefore, the leading edge curve is
P7 P2
defined as part of a 4th-degree NURBS curve in the design
method. To preserve the symmetry to inlet angle direction,
however, five control points Pi (i=0,..., 4) are symmetrically P8 P1
designed as shown in Fig.9 with the following five design
parameters θ θ/2
P0
Figure 7. Trailing edge arc expressed
by 4th-degree NURBS curve

5 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 (10) leading edge width 1 wLE1 ,
(11) leading edge width 2 wLE2 , P.S.
(12) leading edge wedge angle 1 WELE1 , δ+αout_ss
(13) leading edge wedge angle 2 WELE2 , and
(14) leading edge wedge angle 3 WELE3 . throat+rTE TE2
Defining the inlet angle direction as the x-axis, the x- S.S.
coordinates of these five control points are determined from the
condition that the NURBS curve passes through the leading
edge point. pitch
−1 ⎡ 77 wLE 1 wLE 2 − w LE 1 ⎤ αout_ss
x2 = ⎢ + ⎥ (8)
192 ⎣ 2 tan (WE LE 1 / 2 ) 2 tan (WE LE 2 / 2 ) ⎦
P.S. uncovered
wLE1 turning δ
x1, 3 = x2 + (9)
2 tan(WE LE1 / 2 ) TE1

wLE 2 − wLE1 throat

x0 , 4 = x1 + (10)
2 tan (WELE 2 / 2) convergent throat
angle θ line
To specify the throat position on the suction surface, one of
the control points corresponds to the throat position using
quartic multiple knots, which is CP4 in Fig. 5. Three control y WETE parallel to
throat line
points upstream in the throat are determined so that the
continuity of slope of curvature at the throat is preserved. The x
control points are CP4, CP5 and CP6 in Fig. 5. Therefore the
aerofoil curve has the C3 continuity except for the two Figure 8. Downstream in the throat
connecting points to the trailing edge where the slope of the
of a subsonic aerofoil
curve is continuous. However it does not gain any losses
because flows separate at connecting points between blade
surfaces and a trailing edge arc.
Other control points are used as design parameters, but
their coordinates are not directly specified to avoid warping the P0
blade surface. If the coordinates and angles have been specified P‐1
at both ends, ratios of length and angle are specified to P1
determine their intermediate control points. An example with
six control points is shown in Fig 10. First, the intersection
point Q0 between two gradient lines from both end points is
calculated. Length ratios R0 and R5 are designated as design
WELE2
wLE1 wLE2
parameters and control points P1 and P4 are calculated from WELE3 P2
P1 P0 = R 0 × Q 0 P0 and P4 P5 = R 5 × Q 0 P5 . Next, angle ratios Rθ1 inlet angle
and Rθ4 are designated as design parameters and directions WELE1
direction
P1 P2 and P4 P3 are calculated from ∠P4 P1 P2 = Rθ1 × ∠P4 P1Q0
and ∠P1 P4 P3 = Rθ 4 × ∠P1 P4 Q0 . Then the intersection point Q1
is calculated, length ratios R1 and R4 are designated as design P3
parameters, and control points P2 and P3 are calculated. P5
Designers can know whether the NURBS curve is convex or
P4
concave and intuitively change the control points with this
Figure 9. Leading edge
technique.

6 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Transonic Aerofoil
A transonic aerofoil is shown in Fig. 11. An aerofoil is
expressed as a single 4th-dgree NURBS curve whose control
points consist of the following five parts in the design as shown
in Fig. 11.
(i) Trailing edge
(ii) Downstream in the throat on the suction side
(iii) Upstream in the throat on the suction side
(iv) Leading edge
(v) Upstream of throat of pressure side
(vi) Downstream of throat of pressure side
Most design parameters are the same as those for the subsonic
aerofoil. Another fixed design parameter given by the flow
pattern is Figure 10. Specification of control points
(1) outlet Mach number Mout . (case of 6 points)
When flow velocity at an aerofoil outlet is supersonic, the flow
chokes. Then the Mach number is one at the throat, where flow
area is the minimum, and it is more than one downstream from
the throat. A divergent flow path is required for an expansion of
Leading edge
supersonic flow to avoid shock waves, which cause large
energy losses. In contrast, a convergent flow path is adequate CP13 CP12 Suction side
CP14 CP11
for subsonic flow expansion. Therefore, a convergent-divergent CP15 CP10
upstream
flow path is used for aerofoils with subsonic inflow and from throat
supersonic outflow. CP16 CP9
The method of characteristics [11] is applied to the design CP8 throat
ss
of the divergent flow path to get uniform supersonic flow at the CP7
outlet as shown in Fig. 12. The divergent flow path is called the CP6
Laval nozzle and it tilts to fit the outlet flow angle αout_ss, cax
γ +1 CP5
throat 1 ⎡ 2 ⎛ γ − 1 2 ⎞⎤ 2 ( γ −1 )
α out _ ss = ⎢ ⎜1 + M out ⎟ ⎥ . (11)
pitch M out ⎣ γ + 1 ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦ CP4

and adds a straight line for the suction surface as shown in αin CP3
Fig. 13. CP2
To make the definition of curves of the transonic aerofoil s
compatible with the subsonic aerofoil, the curves of the Suction side
divergent flow path of both suction and pressure surfaces are downstream
expressed as a 4th-degree NURBS curve by using a curve from throat
approximation technique as shown in Fig. 11. In the
approximation, first, the parameters corresponding to the
original curves are determined in proportion to the chord Pressure side
length. Next, the knot vector defining the NURBS curve is upstream
obtained with an averaging parameters technique [9]. Then, the centroid t from throat
control points are the only unknowns and they are solved using CP1
CP17
a linear least squares method.
The curves of the trailing edge, leading edge, and upstream
throat are determined using the same method as the subsonic
aerofoil.
throatps CP18
CP19
γstg Pressure side CP20
CP21
downstream CP0
CP22
from throat
Trailing edge

Figure 11. Transonic aerofoil

7 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam
The newly developed 2D aerofoil design method - Industrial Formulation).
inherently satisfies the aerodynamic boundary conditions such The cross-sectional area is another objective function. It
as throat-to-pitch ratio, inlet angle, and outlet Mach number. should be small near the blade tip and large near the blade hub
However, aerofoil design takes time and requires a high to reduce centrifugal stresses. The moments of inertia of the
proficiency level of the designers for the following reasons area and the centroid are constraints in the final design phase to
1) The number of design parameters is large. adjust natural frequencies and a staking line.
2) Understanding the physical meaning of the position of
control points may be difficult.
3) The geometrical constraints are strict, such as cross-
sectional area and moments of inertia of the area which
act as the restrictions of strength and vibration, and the
centroid for the smooth stacking.
Therefore, an evolutionary multi-objective optimization Characteristic Wall
Throat Line
technique is applied to automatically determine the design
parameters. The Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm
(NSGA-II) [12] used in the blade design system has three
operations: selection, crossover, and mutation. The selection, in
which individuals are copied on the basis of their objective
function values, is the main process of the optimization. And an Uniform
elitist strategy, where a mating pool is created by combining the Region
parent and child populations and the best are selected,
accelerates convergence to the best solution. Both crossover Symmetric
and mutation can be used to explore new points for a global Axis
search by creating new individuals at random without
calculating the gradient of the objective functions. A Simulated
Figure 12. Laval nozzle
Binary Crossover (SBX) method [13] is applied with real-
coded representation of the chromosomes to explore a
continuous search space.
The objective function is the energy loss coefficient of
aerofoils calculated by computational fluid dynamics. MISES
(Multiple blade Interacting Streamtube Euler Solver) [14] and
TURBO2D [15] are used. MISES is a viscous flow analysis
solver developed by Drela of MIT. Inviscid flow analysis is
carried out using the compressible Euler equations coupled
with the boundary layer equation in the momentum integral Throat
form. MISES is used to search for the solution candidates in the
initial optimization across a wide range, because it can rapidly Supersonic
evaluate the energy loss coefficient of aerofoils. Nozzle
On the other hand, it is prone to several errors for loss Inlet
estimation, for example, due to the lack of consideration of Velocity
Triangle
base pressure at the trailing edge, and poor convergences for Outlet
transonic and supersonic flow where the Mach number exceeds Velocity
about 1.5. Therefore, TURBO2D is used for making the final Triangle
decision in the optimization and for aerofoils in the transonic
and supersonic flow where MISES fails to converge to a
solution. TURBO2D [15] is a turbulent flow analysis solver
developed by Hitachi Ltd. Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes Straight
equations for compressible fluid are solved using a finite
volume method based on the third-order upwind TVD (Total
Variation Diminishing) scheme. The low-Reynolds number k-ε Figure 13. Divergent flow path
turbulence model was also developed for turbulent stress and of transonic aerofoils
heat transfer. The thermodynamic properties of steam can be
taken into consideration by a generalized approximation
Riemann solver for nonlinear convection terms with the
prevailing international steam table IAPWS-IF97 (the

8 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 By this method, a 4th-degree surface of a blade is created
THREE-DIMENSIONAL BLADE DESIGN from all 2D aerofoils that have been independently designed at
In this section, a method for generating a 3D blade surface each height. Before adapting the method, however, the number
from 2D aerofoil curves is described. The 3D blade shape is of control points and knot vectors should be equalized for all
expressed by a fourth-degree NURBS surface to preserve the aerofoils. Especially, the subsonic and transonic aerofoils have
continuity of slope of the blade surface curvature. A pth-degree different definitions, where both the number of control points
NURBS surface [5] is defined as a weighted-average blending and knot vectors are generally different. The multiple knots at a
function of control points Pi,j i=0,…,nu, j=0,…,nv, throat can be removed without degrading continuity, because

∑∑ N
nu nv
the original curve has C3 continuity by constraints on adjacent
i, p
(u ) N (v )w j ,q i, j
Pi , j control points. A knot refinement technique [9] is used to make
S (u, v ) ≡ i =0 j =0
a ≤ u ≤ b, c ≤ v ≤ d . (12) all curves compatible: the knots are inserted so that the number
∑∑ N
nu nv

i, p
(u ) N (v )w j ,q i, j of control points and knot vectors are equalized.
i =0 j =0

Equation (12) in 3D Euclidean coordinates is represented in

four-dimensional (4D) homogeneous coordinates as RESULTS
Pi w = ( wi xi wi yi wi zi wi ) ← Pi = (xi yi zi ) ,
This blade design method was applied to one of the long
(13)
blades of a steam turbine. Five 2D aerofoils were designed at
and in non-rational form as heights of 0% (hub), 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% (tip). Two
aerofoils at 0% and 25% heights were generated by the design
∑∑ N
nu nv

S w (u , v ) = i,p (u ) N (v ) P j ,q
w
i, j
. (14) method for subsonic aerofoils. Three aerofoils at 50%, 75% and
i =0 j =0 100% heights were generated by the design method for
transonic aerofoils. In spite of a large number of design
Surface equation (14) can be reorganized and an expression
parameters, 24 for subsonic aerofoils and 14 for transonic
similar to curve expression (1) is obtained as
aerofoils, optimizations work well. The shape of aerofoils
⎛ nv ⎞ nu
∑ ∑ ∑
nu

S w (u, v ) = N i , p (u ) ⎜ N j ,q (v) Pi ,wj ⎟ = N i , p (u ) Qi (v) , (15) converges quickly by setting the range of the non-dimensional
⎜ ⎟ parameter of control points shown in Fig.10 as less than 0.4.
i=0 ⎝ j=0 ⎠ i=0
Figure 14 shows 21 aerofoils at equal 5%-spaced heights
where the control points are replaced with control curves [16] including five designed sections and 16 interpolated sections.
The blade skew from the hub to tip is as large as about 50
∑N
nv

Qi (v ) = j ,q (v ) P w
i, j
. (16) degrees. Nevertheless, only five aerofoils of the designed
j =0
sections can represent the long blade. The continuity of the
In this paper, the parameter u is used to define a 2D aerofoil slope of the curvature is mathematically preserved by the
and the parameter v is used for the direction along the blade fourth-degree NURBS surface. On the other hand, a
height. If the parameter v in the height h of the design of a 2D conventional method where 2D aerofoils were simply stacked
aerofoil is symbolized as vd, the curve of the aerofoil can be along the centroid requires many more design sections and
expressed using Eq. (15) in 4D homogeneous coordinates as skillful adjustment to generate a smooth surface. In addition to
that another smoothing procedure for the surface, for example a
∑N
nu

C w (u ) h = S w (u , v d ) = i, p
(u ) Q (v ) . i d
(17) least squares surface approximation, might be necessary, It has
i =0 possibilities of changing shapes of two-dimensional aerofoils.
The developed design method reduces the design time
Compared to Eq. (1), Qi(vd) is equivalent to control points CPwi
more than one order of magnitude compared with the
defining the aerofoil in 4D homogeneous coordinates, it can be
expressed with Eq. (16) as conventional method by both reducing the number of design
sections and automatically deciding their design parameters by
∑N
nv

Qi (vd ) = CPi w h = j ,q (v ) P d
w
i, j
. (18) a numerical optimization technique. Moreover no additional
j =0 procedures are necessary to generate a smooth surface from
plural aerofoils, because the 4th-degree NURBS surface
Therefore, the control points Pwi,j defining the blade preserves the continuity of the slope of the curvature.
surface are determined by solving Eq. (18) as follows.
1) Make a sequence of control points CPwi,j j=0,…,nv that
have the same index i in each aerofoil curve.
2) Find a sequence of control points Pwi,j j=0,…,nv by
solving the linear simultaneous Eq. (18).
3) Determine all control points Pwi,j i=0,…,nu, j=0,…,nv by
repeating procedures 1) and 2) for all indices i.
4) Map inverse control points Pwi,j in 4D homogeneous
coordinates to Pi,j in 3D Euclidean coordinates.

9 Copyright © 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


Figure 14. Two-dimensional aerofoils
at 5%-spaced heights
CONCLUDING REMARKS
A new steam turbine blade design method using the fourth-
degree NURBS surface was developed. This method can easily
and inherently generate the smooth surface blade from plural
2D aerofoils. The blade surface preserves the continuity of the
slope of the curvature in all directions.
This design method has three steps. First, 2D aerofoils are
independently generated at each design height. Second, the
number of control points and knot vectors are equalized for all
aerofoils by inserting or removing knots and fitting the
divergent part by the fourth-degree NURBS curve. Finally, all
aerofoils are stacked radially along the centroid axis and the
fourth-degree NURBS surface is generated by interpolating the
control points of the NURBS curves of all aerofoils.
The developed design method was applied to the long
blades of the last stage for steam turbines which have a large
skew from hub to tip. Aerofoils in inner diameter have a
convergent flow path for subsonic outlet flow, on the outer
diameter, aerofoils have a convergent and divergent flow path
for supersonic outlet flow. The design parameters of each
aerofoil are automatically determined to minimize the energy
loss coefficient under constraints. The smooth surface is
generated from only five aerofoils, even if blade skew is large
and types of aerofoils are different. The new method can reduce
the design time by more than one order of magnitude compared
with the conventional method.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/gt2010/70457/ on 03/01/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
REFERENCES
[1] G. Gyarmathy and W. Schlachter, 1988, On the Design
Limits of Steam Turbine Last Stages, Technology of
turbine plant operating with wet steam, BNES, pp.55-63
[2] G. Briasco., D. Bruna and C. Cravero, 2008, A NURBS-
Based Optimization Tool for Axial Compressor Cascades
at Design and Off-Design Conditions, GT2008-50622,
ASME TurboExpo, pp.1-10
[3] T. Sonoda, M. Olhofer, T. Arima and B. Sendhoff, 2009, A
New Concept of a Two-Dimensional Supersonic Relative
Inlet Mach Number Compressor Cascade, GT2009-59926,
ASME TurboExpo, pp.1-11
[4] A. K. Dutta, P. M. Flassig and D. Bestle, 2008, A Non-
Dimensional Quasi-3D Blade Design Approach with
Respect to Aerodynamic Criteria, GT2008-50687, ASME
TurboExpo, pp.1-11
[5] M. Arabnia and W. Ghaly, 2009, A Strategy for Multi-
Point Shape Optimization of Turbine Stages in Three-
Dimensional Flow, GT2009-59708, ASME TurboExpo,
pp.1-11
[6] T. Korakianitis and P. Papagiannidis, 1993, Surface-
Curvature-Distribution Effects on Turbine Cascade
Performance, Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol.115,
pp.334-341
[7] T. Korakianitis, 1993, Prescribed-Curvature-Distribution
Airfoil for the Preliminary Geometric Design of Axial
Turbomachinery Cascades, Journal of Turbomachinery,
Vol.115, pp.334-341
[8] R. Corral and G. Pastor, 2004, Parametric Design of
Turbomachinery Airfoils Using Highly Differentiable
Splines, Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol.20, No.2,
pp.335-343
[9] L. Piegl and W. Tiller, 1997, The NURBS Book, 2nd
edition, Springer
[10] Les Piegl and Wayne Tiller, 1987, Curve and Surface
constructions using rational B-splines, computer-aided
design, Vol. 19, No. 9, pp.485-498
[11] A. H. Shapiro, 1953, The Dynamics and Thermodynamics
of Compressible Fluid Flow, Ronald
[12] K. Deb, S. Agrawal, A. Pratap, and T. Meyarivan, 2000, A
Fast Elitist Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm for
Multi-Objective Optimization: NSGA-II, KanGAL Report
No.200001, pp.1-11
[13] K. Deb and R.B. Agrawal, 1994, Simulated Binary
Crossover for Continuous Search Space, Convenor,
Technical Report IITK/ME/SMD-94027, pp.1-33
[14] H. Youngren, 1991, Viscous/Inviscid Method for
Preliminary Design of Transonic Cascades, AIAA-91-
2364
[15] S. Senoo and A.J. White, 2006, Numerical Simulations of
Unsteady Wet Steam Flows with Non-Equilibrium
Condensation in the Nozzles and the Steam Turbine,
ASME FEDSM-2006-98202, pp.1-11
[16] C.D. Woodward, 1988, Skinning Techniques for
Interactive B-Spline Surface Interpolation, Computer-
aided Design, Vol.20, No.8, pp.441-451
10 Copyright © 2010 by ASME