74-GT-119

The Society shall not be responsible for statements or opinions

advanced in papers or in discussion at meetings of the Society
or of its Divisions or Sections, or printed in its publications.
Copyright © 1974 by ASME Discussion is printed only if the paper is published in an ASME

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024

journal or Proceedings.
Released for general publication upon presentation.
Full credit should be given to ASME, the Professional Division,
$3.00 PER COPY and the author Isl.

$1.00 TO ASME MEMBERS

A Parametric Method of Turbine Blade

Profile Design

J. DUNHAM

National Gas Turbine Establishment,

Pyestock, Farnborough,
Hants., England

The profile shape of an axial turbine blade is required to satisfy both aerodynamic
and mechanical criteria; the designer wants the most favorable velocity distribu-
tion achievable with the permissible blade thickness. The design involves some
trial-and-error, especially if the profile is initially prescribed by solely aerody-
namic or solely mechanical requirements. A new design technique is described
in which both aerodynamic and mechanical requirements are prescribed. The
shape is defined by an algebraic function of eight parameters: blade inlet and
outlet angle, maximum thickness, trailing edge thickness and wedge angle, lead-
ing edge radius, and the points of maximum thickness and maximum camber.
Some of these are chosen to satisfy mechanical requirements, and curves are given
recommending the best values of the remaining parameters from aerodynamic
considerations, with the exception of the position of maximum camber. By vary-
ing that over a narrow range, a good shape can quickly be selected. A computer
program for designing blades this way and analyzing blades designed in other
ways is described.

Contributed by the Gas Turbine Division of The American Society of Mechanical

Engineers for presentation at the Gas Turbine Conference & Products Show, Zurich,
Switzerland, March 39-April 4, 1974. Manuscript received at ASME Headquarters
November 21, 1973.
Copies will be available until December 1, 1974.

THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS, UNITED ENGINEERING CENTER, 345 EAST 47th STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10017
A Parametric Method of Turbine Blade
Profile Design
J. DUNHAM
INTRODUCTION
The first step in designing a turbine is
to select the velocity triangles at mean radius,
and subsequently the radial variation of the
triangles (as, for example, by a free vortex
rule). This paper concerns the second step in
the design, the selection of the blade profile
shapes best suited to implement the chosen
velocity triangles. A wide range of aerofoil
shapes might, in principle, work, and some way
of selecting a good shape is needed. A para-
metric family of blade shapes is presented here
which enables the designer to start from his
basic requirements and conduct a simple logical
search for a good shape.
Firstly, the blade must be strong enough
and practical to manufacture. It may need to
NOMENCLATURE
A, B, C,
D, E, F,
G, H = constants in thickness equations
A o , a,
b, c = constants in camber line equation,
Appendix 1
c ax = axial chord
e = radius of curvature of suction sur-
face near trailing edge
LER = leading edge radius, percentage of
tmax
M2 = relative outlet Mach number
m = fraction of chord
o = throat
P = point of maximum camber, percentage
distance from leading edge along
chord
Plim = limiting P below which passage be-
comes convergent-divergent
q, r, S = constants in Appendix 2
s = pitch
sl = arc length, Appendix 1
t = parameter in camber line equation
ti/t2 = ratio of stream surface thickness
at inlet to thickness at outlet,
local axial-velocity-density ratio
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024
be cooled. These considerations set limits to
how thin the aerofoil can be at the trailing
edge, approaching the trailing edge, and in
the body of the blade. Secondly, the aerofoil
cascade must deliver the hot gas at the desired
outlet angle, associated with the desired
flow capacity. Thirdly, the surface velocity
distribution must be chosen to minimize aero-
dynamic losses over the desired operating
range.
Twenty years ago, many blades were de-
signed on a drawing board by laying out the
throat and, after some trials, completing the
surface by blending circular arc segments.
Alternatively, standard base aerofoil profiles
were wrapped round a circular or parabolic
= (pVa) outlet/(pVa) inlet
tmax = maximum thickness, percentage of
true chord
TER = trailing edge radius, percentage of
t max
V a = axial component of velocity
WA = trailing edge included wedge angle
(deg)
x = fraction of chord
XT = position of maximum thickness,
percentage distance along base
aerofoil
y = distance normal to chord
xo, yo = constants in camber line equation,
Appendix 1
a = constant in camber line equation,
Appendix 1
a l = gas inlet angle (deg)
a2 = gas outlet angle (deg)
p l = blade inlet angle (deg)
0 2 = blade outlet angle (deg)
7 = angle of normal to camber line
(Appendix 1)
= local blade thickness/chord
= stagger angle (deg)
p = density
 SUCTION SURFACE
CAMBER
LIN
a
+ ye
t
PRESSURE
SURFACE
al
+ ye GAS
INLET
INCIDENCE = CIt -
Fig. 1 Turbine blade nomenclature
camber line (1) 1 (as in compressors). When
ways of calculating surface velocity distribu-
tion became available, they were used to guide
the trials. Both techniques arbitrarily limited
the range of shape available. The parametric
method also poses arbitrary limits, but wider
ones, and lends itself more easily to computer
programming.
Later it became possible to choose the
velocity distribution first and generate the
blade shape from it (2). This technique has
been highly developed by one manufacturer who
has learned what sort of velocity distributions
lead to physically acceptable shapes (3).
Wilkinson (4) programmed a sensible compromise
in which the designer specifies the suction
surface pressure distribution and the thickness
distribution. Le Foll (,5 ) developed a tech-
. noted that instead of a quadratic term a bi-
nique formally minimizing profile loss, but
this probably needs even more practice to
generate physically acceptable blades. The
author believes all these methods starting
from aerodynamic considerations demand more
skill and experience than those starting from
mechanical considerations.
While the parametric scheme presented
could be applied in principle to design blading
for non-cylindrical stream surfaces, it has
only been programmed for cylindrical surfaces,
adequate for many turbine designs; i.e., the
blade pitch is assumed the same at both leading
and trailing edges. It is the method referred
to very briefly in reference (6) which gave test
results for a rotor bladed this way.
THE PARAMETRIC TECHNIQUE
The profile is constructed from a base
1 Underlined numbers in parentheses designate
References at end of paper.
2
DEVIATION (6) = a2 - P2
02
-ye
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024
a2
-ye
GAS
OUTLET
(uncambered) aerofoil together with a parabolic
camber line. The symmetrical base aerofoil
consists of two algebraic curves, one from the
leading edge up to the point of maximum thick-
ness, of the form
y Ax °'5 + Bx + Cx 2 + Dx 3 (1 )
and the other from there rearward of the form
y E + F (1 - + G (1 - x) 3 + °
H (1 - x) (2 )
The first and second derivatives of these curves
are made equal where they join. For convenience,
a circular arc is used to close the trailing
edge. This is an extension of the isolated
aerofoil parametric method (7), but it will be
quadratic term appears in the rear portion
equation. This is because a biquadratic term
was found to generate thickness distributions
more closely resembling the thickness distribu-
tion of some known good blades (ones with
desirable pressure distributions). The familiar
parabolic arc camber line was chosen, after
some study, because it tends to ensure that the
rear half of the suction surface is fairly
flat, a feature considered desirable.
The parameters A to H and the camber line
shape can be expressed by algebra in terms of
the following quantities:
pl = blade inlet angle (deg), angle of
tangent to camber line at leading
edge (Fig. 1)
132 = blade outlet angle (deg), similarly
P = point of maximum camber, percentage
distance measured from leading edge
along chord
tmax = maximum thickness, percentage of
true chord
 XT = position of maximum thickness,
INPUT
percentage distance measured from
leading edge along base aerofoil
LER = leading edge radius, percentage of BLENDING COORDINATE CAMBER
CIRCULAR TABLE LINE
tmax ARCS

TER = trailing edge radius, percentage of

THICKNESS
tmax
DISTRIBUTION
WA = trailing edge wedge angle (deg), the
included angle between upper and
SPLINE
lower surfaces where they meet the FIT

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024

trailing edge circle. 1 a
1 STORE SURFACE CO-ORDINATES,
1 SLOPE, CURVATURE
To define the cascade, the pitch is also needed, b 1
as: s/cax (pitch/axial chord). 1
These nine parameters, which all have a
clear physical meaning, are those handled by 1
VELOCITY
the designer in using the method. They are DISTRIBUTION
1
sufficient to define the cascade precisely in 1 CENTROID, PASSAGE
terms of equations (1) and (2). AREA, itc WIDTH,
THROAT

DESIGN PROCEDURE
The designer starts knowing the gas angle,
al , at inlet (with a range of al over which
efficient operation is desired), the required
gas angle, a2, at outlet, and the associated
Mach numbers. He must choose tmax, TER, and WA
from the mechanical considerations mentioned
earlier. (A suggested WA is given later.) He
chooses s/cax (or pitch/chord) from blade
loading considerations, perhaps by choosing a
Zweifel loading coefficient (1). The blade out-
let angle, 8 2 , must be chosen to ensure the
required a2. The remaining four parameters
(/31, P, XT, LER) are available to tailor the
surface velocity distribution.
It is vital to obtain the correct a2 be-
cause it determines the flow capacity matching
of the turbine. Unfortunately, no simple
formula for a2 in terms of the parameters has
been found. It is calculated from:
a.2 = ui for Li . 0.5
a.2 = 42c + 4 (4'2 c - ) (1
for 0.5 < M,< 1.0
for L. 1.0
0.2 = 'lac
where
a9i = 11.1 + 1.14 7112c- 4 s/e
(12c = cos -1(o/s)
M2 = relative outlet Mach number
which express Ainley and Mathieson's recommenda-
tions [8j algebraically. Apart from the known
Mach number. this involves purely geometrical
L_
BOUNDARY
LAYERS
STACKING
GRAPHICAL / TABULAR OUTPUT
Fig. 2 Block diagram of computer program
(a) Iterative feedback to correct a2
(b) Feedback available to add boundary-
layer displacement to surface
properties of throat (0) and blade back radius
of curvature (e) which can be calculated from
the parameters, though not simply. (Alterna-
tively, a2 could be deduced from the velocity
distribution calculations.) So iteration of
2 2 to obtain the desired a2 is unavoidable.
A "rule of thumb" for designing profiles
for subsonic or low supersonic outlet Mach
numbers states that the passage width, as seen
by the gas stream flowing through the blading,
must converge continuously up to a throat at
the trailing edge circle. A convergent-divergent
- 6M. + 9Lfa, — 414) passage gives high losses. So the first criterion
of aerodynamic quality is this simple check
(3) on passage width.
The second criterion is that the surface
velocity distribution should be smooth, with
the minimum adverse velocity gradients. If
the pressure surface velocity can be made to
increase steadily from the leading edge, the
boundary layer can be kept laminar. One cri-
terion for the suction surface is that the fall
in velocity from its peak value to the trailing
edge should not exceed 20 percent of the peak
velocity (12).

3
 Table 1 Blade Profile Data

Nozzles Rotor blades

Section Inner Mean Outer Inner Mean Outer

a1 o 0 0 48.9 35.2 18.0

a2 -67.5 -65.0 -62.5 -6o.5 -61.3 -62.3
M 1.0 0.90 0.81 1.0 1.0 1.0
tl/t2 0.955 1.045 1.115 0.900 0.830 0.784

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024

P1 15.0 15.0 15.0 48.9 37.7 23.0
P2 -65.4 -62.8 -60.6 -55.9 -58.7 -60.2
P 34 35 36 34 33 32
tmax 22.5 22.5 22.5 25 20 15
XT 25 25 25 30 25 20
LER 15 15 15 5 10 15
TER 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
WA 8 8 8 10 8 6
s/ca x 1.108 1.051 1.010 0.688 0.776 0.864

E 44.8 41.9 39.2 22.6 31.7 41.4

Pli m (to nearest 0.5) 30.5 31.5 32.5 33 31 30

As a result of undertaking numerous surface velocity distribution by Martensen's

trial designs, recommendations as to the best
choice of 8 1 (not necessarily equal to a l ),
XT, and LER can be made. They appear later
in the paper. The remaining parameter, P,
proved very sensitive, however, and a narrow
range of P is suggested over which the de-
signer can make his final trials.
Summarizing, seven of the nine parameters
0 ,
can be chosen by the designer, 2 must be
iterated to obtain the desired a 2, and some
trials of P are recommended to select the best
velocity distribution.
SUPPORTING COMPUTER PROGRAM
It is convenient to use a computer to
undertake the design. Provision to do so has
been incorporated into a general blade profile
design program at the Computer-Aided Design
Centre, Cambridge, England. Fig. 2 shows the
program organization. All the common forms of
profile geometry description are available (sets
of coordinate points, camber line, and thickness
distribution, including parametric method, blend-
ing circular arc segments). A sub-routine fits
a parametric spline around the surface, excluding
the trailing edge circle and, hence, calculates
the slope and curvature at all points. This
information can then be used to compute the
variation of passage width for checking and,
hence, also the throat, o, needed by equation
(3). It can also be used to compute the blade
method (9) followed by the boundary-layer de-
velopment (10). Graphical output of blade
profile and velocity distribution is available.
Further subroutines provide the centroid, prin-
cipal axes, cross-sectional area, and second
moment for stress calculations.
The iterative loop for selecting the
correct 8 2 is incorporated as shown in Fig. 2;
the designer has only to specify a 2 .
The use of the incompressible Martensen
method is a disadvantage incurred on account
of computer limitations at the time the program
was written. Provision was later made to use
Smith's compressible program (11), and all the
calculations reported were done that way.
If the working range of a l is known,
velocity distributions over that range can be
explored.
EXAMPLES
Blade profiles were designed for 18
different duties typical of aero gas turbine
practice. Two blade rows are shown here as
examples. Table 1 lists the design require-
ments and parameter values chosen. The design
study included complete stages, and the local
axial-velocity-density-ratio values (t 1 /t 2 ,
defined in the notation) were not exactly unity.
The program (11) allows for axial velocity
variation.
Fig. 3 illustrates the design of a typical

4
 INNER MEAN OUTER

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024

12 12

08

04 04 04 04 04
SURFACE LON
O SURFACE UNGER

Fig. 3 Blade sections for nozzle row

------ 2-D incompressible
3-D compressible (M 2 = 0.9,
t i /t2 = 1.045)

INNER MEAN OUTER

r
Tx 12

02 0.0 0x 24. 06 04 06 DB
SURFACE LENGTH SURFACE LING.

Fig. 4 Blade sections for rotor row

----- 2 D incompressible
3-D compressible
(inner: M2 = 0.87, tl/t2 = 0.900,
outer: M2 = 0.90, t l /t 2 = 0.784)

high-pressure turbine nozzle row, with blading
fat enough to cool. The ratio of local/outlet
velocity is shown as a function of fractional
surface length. It will be seen that the pas-
sages converge and that the velocity distribu-
tions satisfy the quality criteria mentioned.
The full lines show incompressible two-dimen-
sional results. To check that this simplifica-
tion was not misleading, a three-dimensional
compressible solution was run, which appeared
slightly more favorable.
Fig. 4 illustrates the corresponding rotor
design, which is also satisfactory.
An interesting observation was that the
gas outlet angle, a 2 , sometimes exceeded in
magnitude the blade outlet angle, p 2 , "negative
deviation." The difference was always less
than the semi-wedge angle, so the flow was not
turned more than the suction surface direction
at the trailing edge. Nevertheless, a careful
check on the detailed velocity distribution
and streamline pattern near the trailing edge

5
 -54 05°,
12
NON-ZERO
LOADING
10
04= 59 05°,
-
4 FROM EQN3 AT LOW MACH No)
8 I2
10
ZERO
08
04
0.6 07 08 09
SURFACE LENGTH
Fig. 5 Example of cutlet angles
Rotor inner section, )8 2 = -55.9
Incompressible flow
was made. Fig. 5 shows calculations on the
rotor inner section (p2 = -55.9 deg) for two
different assumed gas angles, a 2 = -54.05 deg
and -59.05 deg [the equation (3) value]. Com-
paring them, the -59.05-deg result appears
physically much more plausible. This lends
support to the use of eguation (3).
CHOICE OF PARAMETERS
Extensive trial-and-error calculations
were undertaken to find suitable values of the
free parameters, p i , LER, XT, and P, and also
the partially free parameter, WA, for the
different duties previously mentioned. Each
parameter was adjusted until the incompressible
two-dimensional pressure distribution satisfied
the criteria quoted earlier. From this experi-
ence, general recommendations for the choice
of parameters emerged.
It was found desirable in most cases to
make p l exceed a1. This apparently "hooks"
the nose of the aerofoil, but this is an illusion.
The sharp curvature of the leading edge of the
camber line, together with the thickness dis-
tribution, combine to give a shape which appears
to the eye (as well as from the velocity dis-
tribution computation) well suited to an inlet
6
gas stream at angle, al. In Fig. 3, for ex-
ample, the nozzles appear well suited to an
axial inflow, although 81 = 15 deg. A suggested
guide is
PI = a l- 7.3 - 0.262(aq + m2 )
A value to within the nearest 5 deg is adequate.
A leading edge radius LER = 15, was found
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024
suitable for values of ll (a 2 ) less than 70
-
deg. It was desirable to reduce that value
for more highly cambered blades, to about 13,
10, and 4 at 8 1 - a 2 = 90, 100, 110 deg, respec-
tively. A value to the nearest 2.5 is adequate.
The best point of maximum thickness, XT,
appeared to depend mainly on t max :
XT - 13.7 + t
7 (5)
A value to the nearest 2.5 is adequate.
A sensible value of WA was
A sensible value of VIA was
WA 2tan'1 (t max/300) (6)
This expression ensures that a thicker blade
has an appropriately higher wedge angle and
characterizes typical existing blades.
No correspondingly simple recommendation
for the position of maximum camber P proved
possible. The useful range appears to lie
between 28 and 44, a narrower range than strictly
mathematical considerations impose, but the
exact choice appears quite critical (to within
0.5) and depends on all the other blade param-
eters. The recommended procedure is to find by
trial Fil m , the value of P at which the passage
is marginally convergent. (Ai; lower P, it be-
comes convergent-divergent). Then the best P
probably lies between P l i m1.5 and P lim -I- 3
and must be found by trial.
DISCUSSION
The recommendations made are believed to
lead to generally acceptable root, mean, and
tip section profiles, though the designer may
wish to adjust some of the parameters. The use
of equation (3) for estimating gas outlet angle
appears from the comparison with potential flow
calculations to be satisfactory, except for very
thin sections. The final step is to stack the
sections into a complete blade, which can also
be done automatically by the computer program.
This may demand some adjustment of chord lengths,
but if the parameters vary smoothly from root
to tip, any number of intermediate stations can
immediately be derived by interpolation of the
parameter values, and the surface should be
smooth. A graphical check on three-dimensional
passage convergence and throat area can finally
be made using the known variation of annulus
height along the turbine axis.
The parametric method is convenient when
the computer program is available, especially
on an interactive basis. The arbitrary nature
of the shape appears not to be a serious
limitation except possibly for extremely highly
cambered blades, which might benefit from an
extra degree of freedom in camber line shape.
Profile shape is not such a highly critical
factor in turbine design as to justify too
much trial-and-error effort.
The parametric method could also prove
valuable to organizations without the computer
program, without the technical resources to
undertake velocity distribution calculations,
and without the economic pressures to optimize
design as thoroughly as in the aircraft industry.
All they require is a simple program to derive
the shape from the parameters. The relevant
equations appear in Appendices 1 and 2. After
two or three trials varying 132 and P to find
a2 and P lim , the chosen shape could be based
on the recommendations quoted, with P = Pli m
+ 2. This would almost certainly have a better
velocity distribution than a blade designed by
blending circular arcs.
CONCLUSIONS
A turbine blade profile is required to
satisfy both mechanical and aerodynamic criteria.
The design method described uses eight shape
parameters plus the pitch. Of these, all but
two can be selected by the designer from mechan-
ical limitations, or using the aerodynamically
based recommendations given in the paper. Of
the remaining two, one is iterated automatically
by the computer program to ensure the correct
outlet gas angle, leaving one to be finally
adjusted by trial over a narrow range. This
technique is believed to require less skill and
experience than other methods starting more
directly from mechanical or aerodynamic con-
siderations alone.
The method can be applied in full by a
computer program. Alternatively, an organization
with small resources could omit the final ad-
justments and the velocity distribution check,
relying on the quoted experience of parameter
choice.
The designs quoted in the paper have not
been built and tested, but another rotor blade
designed by the parametric technique has been
built and tested successfully (6).
ACKXWLEDGMENTS
The parametric idea was suggested by Sr.
T. P. Edwards and explored in detail by Dr. M.
V. Herbert. The Appendix 1 analysis is due
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024
to Mr. B. R. Williams.
T-'EFERENCES
1 Smith, D. J. L., Johnston, I. H., and
Tullbrook, D. J., "Investigations on an Experi-
mental Single Stage Turbine of Conservative
Design," British ARC, R&M 3541, 1967.
2 Stanitz, J. D., "Design of Two-Dimen-
sional Channels with Prescribed Velocity Dis-
tributions along the Channel Walls. Part II —
Solution by Green's Function," NACA Tech Note
2595, 1052.
3 Payne, D., "Axial Turbine Blading," Sym-
posium on Gas Turbine Blading Design Held at
Borough Polytechnic, London, 1970.
4 Wilkinson, D. H., "A Numerical Solution
of the Design Problem for One or More Aerofoils
or Cascades," British ARC, R&M 3545, 1967.
5 Le Foll, J., "A Theory of Representa-
tion of the Properties of Boundary Layers on a
Plane," Proceedings Symposium on Advanced Prob-
lems in Turbomachinery, von Karman Institute,
Brussels, 1965.
6 Dunham, J., and Panton, J., "Experiments
on the Design of a Small Axial Turbine," In-
stitute of Mechanical Engineers, London, Con-
ference Publication 3, 1973, p. 56.
7 Riegels, F. W., "Aerofoil Sections"
(translation) Butterworths, London, 1961.
8 Ainley, D. G., and Mathieson, G. C. R.,
"A Method of Performance Estimation for Axial-
Flow Turbines," British ARC, R&M 2974, 1951.
9 Martensen, E., "Die Berechnung der
Druckverteilung an Dicken Gitterprofilen mit
Hilfe von Fredholmschen Integralgleichungen,"
Arch Rat Mech Anal Part 2, No. 3, 1959, P. 235.
10 Dunham, J., "Predictions of Boundary
Layer Transition on Turbomachinery Blades,"
AGARDograph No. 164, 1972, p. 55.
11 Smith, D. J. L., "Computer Solutions
of Wu's Equations for the Compressible Flow
through Turbomachines," in NASA SP304, 1973.
12 Miser, J. W., and Stewart, W. L.,
"Investigation of Two-Stage Air-Cooled Turbine
Suitable for Flight Mach Number of 2.5 -- II
Blade Design," NACA RM E56K06, 1957.
7
 APPENDIX 1 the fractional distance of any point, t, along
the camber line is
CONSTRUCTION OF PARABOLIC ARC CAMBER LINE
t ) —
L(tie)
The general equation of a parabola can
be written: si(tte) —

(x sins + y cos a. YO) 2

(7) For any desired m, this equation can be solved
(x cos a + y sin a + xo)
iteratively for t and, hence, (x, y).
If a coordinate system is chosen in which the The slope of the normal to the camber

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024

leading edge is at (0, 0) and the trailing edge line is
at (1, 0), the slope at the leading edge is tan
(2 1 + where is the stagger, and the slope tan y -t
at the trailing edge is tan (4 -p2). The
maximum camber (zero slope) occurs at x = P. so the coordinates of points on the blade sur-
These conditions applied to equation (7) enable face are
a, A o , x o , y o to be evaluated, as follows:
Let x x ± 8 cos y
camber line
2
a - 4P (tan P i - tan P2) - 3 tan PI + tan (3 2 8 sin y
Y m Ycamber linet
b . -2 (1 - tan P I tan (32)
c = 4P (tan 13, — tan (32) - tan P I + 3 tan P2 where 8 is the thickness of the aerofoil at the
point, m.
Then All the coordinates obtained in this way
can then be transformed from the Oxy axes to
tan C =-[ - b + (b 2 - 4acr 5] /2a any desired axes.
(
cot a [cot (P 2 +C ) + cot (3 + APPENDIX 2
Ao=* [sin2 a. cot (0 1 + + sin 2 m cosa
CONSTRUCTION OF BASE PROFILE
Yo = (4A,cos a - sin 2 a )/2 sins

x oyo2/4A0 The base profile comprises three parts:

the leading portion up to XT, the trailing
In order to obtain the coordinates of a point portion, and the circular trailing edge. The
a fractional distance, m, along the parabola, total length of these parts is the chord, taken
it is convenient to express equation (7) in as unity, to which all the other dimensions
parametric form: (thicknesses and radii) are referred. The length
of the trailing edge part is (TER x t max x 10 -4 )
x cos a + y sin a + x o = A o t 2 (since TER and t max are defined as percentages).
x sin a + y cos a + y o = 2A 0 b In order to simplify the algebraic deriva-
tion of the coefficients, A to H, x-dimensions
Then the arc length, are scaled up by the factor, S = (1 + TER x
t max x 10 -4 ), temporarily, so this factor appears
ay
, )2]0.5 in the equations. Then it can be shown that,
slit) 11dx)2
dt if a number of points are selected at fractions
(dt)(dt
x along the algebraic parts of the chord, they
will be at fractions (x/S) of the true chord,
and the corresponding blade thicknesses, 8, will
A o sinh -l t + A o t (1 + t 2 )" be given by

As the values of t at the leading and trailing 6 .. { 0.1 t max (Ax°* 5 + Bx + Cx 2 + Dx 3 ), x <0.01 XT.S
edges are 0.1 t + F(1 - x) + G(1 - x) 3 +
max
t1e - 36 /2A,
H(1 - x 5 )] , x > 0.01 XT.S
tte (sin m Yo)/ 2Ao

8
 re: where r = (0.0008 LER.XT/t max ) 05
A (0.08 LER/tmax S)
°
B . (0.3 - 15r/8 + q)/0.01 XT.S 60 tan ( #)
1
- - o.6 + 0.012 TER + t S
(- 0.3 + 5r/4 — 2q)/(0.01 XT.S) 2 max

D (0.1 - 3r/8 + q)/(0.01 XT.S) 3

\.2
E 0.002 TER 0.01 XT.S
(1 - 0.01 XT.S)
F 20 tan 1 ( 6// t max S 1 - 0.01 XT.S/

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1974/79795/V01BT02A037/2391656/v01bt02a037-74-gt-119.pdf by guest on 14 February 2024

G 0.4 - 0.008TER -
60 tan (10 .

This set of points does not include the trailing

t max S
edge circle and should be completed by points at

x 0,1 at which E. . 0.
(1 - 0.01 XT.S) (1 - 0.01 XT.S) -3

9A1
40 tan (ti
H = - 0.3 - 0.006TER - 2
t S
max
[

(1 - 0.01 XT.S) (1 - 0.01 XT.S) -4