Proceedings of

ASME TURBO EXPO 2001

June 4-7, 2001, New Orleans, Louisiana
Proceedings of A S M E Turbo Expo 2001:
IGTI
June 4 th - 7 th , 2001. New Orleans.
2001-GT-0199

2001 -GT-0199
ON THE PERFORMANCE OF GAS TURBINE SECONDARY AIR SYSTEMS

Dr Andrew Foley
Senior Lecturer,
School Of Engineering,
Coventry University,
England.

ABSTRACT The reason why this is so becomes clearer when one

The paper proposes a straightforward technique to considers the following:- The air system generally consists of
quantify the performance of a gas turbine secondary air no discrete components, but instead comprises passages,
system. By recognising the air system as a component in its drillings, rotating ducts, component interfaces etc. By its very
own right and performing the calculations suggested the nature there are therefore a myriad of design configurations
systems engineer should be better able to develop and for any particular system. Also unlike the other major
optimise a given aft- system. The effect of any requested components such as the compressor, turbine and combustor,
compromise can also be better quantified to other component which generally have only one main function the air systems
groups. engineer needs to design a system fulfilling multiple tasks.
These include :-
NOMENCLATURE • Component cooling (e.g. Turbine blades, engine
CP Specific heat capacity of air. (J/Kg/K) casings, combustion cans etc.)
h,H • Sealing of cavities to prevent or reduce hot gas
Specific, Total Enthalpy (J/Kg, J)
ingestion. (e. g. High pressure turbine disc cavities).
Massflow. (Kg/s) • Ventilation in areas such as bearing chambers and
P Total Pressure (N/m2, Pa) compressor rotor cavities both for cooling and fire
o Power, Rate of Heat input (W) prevention purposes.
• Bearing thrust modification. It is surprisingly
7' Total Temperature (K)
difficult to accurately predict bearing loads and
Rate of Work (W) hence the ability to adjust certain cavity pressures
7" Ratio of specific heats. provides a useful technique of 'tuning' bearing loads
q Efficiency and significantly improving bearing life expectancy.
Invariably all of the above are 'must have' requirements
INTRODUCTION for a given engine. It is of course possible to generate a
Traditionally gas turbine design has been undertaken by number of system configurations or proposed modifications to
an existing system that would satisfy the 'must have' criteria.
component specialists. Even within the more recent
The deciding issue would then be the 'would like to have'
concurrent engineering approach their still remains the
requests. One of the most pressing of the~ being the desire to
compressor, turbine or combustor specialist. Each of these
obtain the most energy efficient air system. This is
specialists can often instantly quote their particular
particularly true for modern engines where improved
component nominal efficiency, be it isentropic, polytropic or
efficiency is suffering ever more from the 'law of diminishing
combustion efficiency. More often than not, the exception to
returns', e.g. With a compressor polytropic efficiency of 90%
this rule is the air system specialist.
an improvement of 1% would require a 10% reduction in the

1 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/80275/ on 04/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
 remaining losses. This becomes a challenge when one
considers that most of these remaining losses are already
approaching their physical minimum• (e.g. Skin friction, tip
clearance, passage vortices etc.)
Another reason for focusing our attention on the
secondary air system is that demands to increase the turbine
entry temperature, and hence the ideal Carnot cycle
efficiency, mean that the quantities of secondary air being
bled from the engine are consistently increasing. Typically 10
to 30% of the main core flow. These bleeds are essentially
parasitic and generally follow rather tortuous flow paths
through the air system. Not surprisingly therefore such flows
are a source of great loss to an engines overall performance.
Despite the above reasoning and the obvious need to be
able to compare competing air system configurations the
locus on the 'must have' requirements of such systems
invariably means performance is not readily quoted.
PERFORMANCE MODELS
CuITently many air system losses are accounted for by
encompassing air system bleeds and returns into a complete
engine performance model, (See Figure 1.) Values of returns
and bleeds for a particular engine running condition (e.g Max
take-off, cruise etc) will be extracted from a dedicated air
system model and transferred into a whole engine
performance model. These performance models will vary in
complexity but will be considered useful if they can predict an
engine's performance to within +_ 1%. Any improved accuracy
will be misleading as the experimental measurement of an
engine performance, not to mention engine to engine build
and test variances mean that this is the limit of realistic
accuracy.
This method is unfortunately of limited use if one is
interested in subtle changes in an air system configuration.
Although bleeds and returns may change between air systems
and these can be input to a full engine model, the resulting
difference in engine performance will at best, be negligible, at
worst, misleading• An example may illustrate. Consider an
engine producing the equivalent to 25 MW shaft output. Such
an engine may have an air system absorbing 1MW of power.
A major improvement in this systems pertbrmance may see a
reduction of 100KW (i.e. a 10% improvement). The 100KW
returned to the cycle will be subject to approximately the
same efficiency as the engine, say 35%. Therefore 35KW will
in an ideal situation be seen in improved power output, i.e.
An increase of 0.14% in engine output. To capture this
difference would require very precise integration of the air
system boundary conditions into the performance model. As
various changes to the air system will involve changes to the
point of bleed and the point of return these changes will also
have to be incorporated into the performance model.
Consequently general performance models do not cater for
such fine refinements but when this is deemed necessary the
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/80275/ on 04/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
process becomes much more involved, expensive and relies
on close liaison between performance and air systems
departments.
The full engine performance model although arguably
offering the most all encompassing solution to air system
effects is in reality the proverbial "hammer to crack an egg"
solution, What is needed is for air system engineers to be
capable of assessing the performance of their systems with
some autonomy from a whole engine model. This is the
ability compressor and turbine engineers already have with
the aid of dedicated analytical models, e.g. Throughflow
(Denton 1978) CFD (Dawes 1987)etc.
The method proposed in this paper therefore focuses
much more squarely on the air system. Although some overall
accuracy may be sacrificed as far as absolute engine efficiency
is concerned, the deltas, i.e. changes in performance, will be
resolved to a greater accuracy with reduced effort.
AIR SYSTEM MODELLING
Air system models are generally not too computer
intensive in solution time and hence are undertaken on
personal computers or workstations. These packages can be
commercially purchased or, as is frequently found, developed
in house. All are effectively one dimensional flow network
solvers. (e.g. FLOWMASTER, SPAN, MASSFLOW etc)
The network is normally constructed and modified via a
graphical user interface (GUI). Once constructed the network
will consist of a series of connectors and nodes. The nodes
will behave as "instrumentation points" displaying pressure,
temperature and some form of unique identification. The
connectors will normally display mass flow rates between the
various nodes. Nodes will generally be of two types, those
forming boundary conditions for the model and those for
which the model solves and provides data.
Connectors normally contain geometrical data input by
the user. This data is used to find a flow characteristic for that
particular connector. (e.g. Pipe, orifice, labyrinth seal etc).
Once the characteristic is found this is used during the
iterative procedure and then invoked to solve the network• A
typical approach would be to continually adjust pressures and
temperatures at the internal "unknown nodes" until all the
mass flows into and out of nodes balance. The network would
then be converged. The process becomes somewhat more
complicated when high mach number flows are encountered.
Figure 2 illustrates a typical simple flow network display
for a 4 MW industrial gas turbine. Ivey (1993) provides
further background on air system modeling and Miller (1990)
provides detail on component loss modeling.
AIR SYSTEM PERFORMANCE CALCULATIONS
Once a flow network has been solved the
performance calculation can begin. By inspection of only the
boundary nodes, i,e. Nodes on the model where flow
2 Copyright © 2001 by ASME
 effectively enters or leaves the air system, the following data Once again Cp is the mean of the inlet and exit values of
can be extracted. See Figure 3. each returned flow. (i.e. Inlet is the point of return to turbine
and exit is the value at turbine exit.).
Total Air System Bleed. MBL Next the net power extracted from the engine by" the
Gas properties at points of return (Ra, R2, R3, etc.), i.e. air system can be calculated as: -
Pressure, Temperature and mass flow. Q As net = O-,As_gro,s -14/as ...(3)
With the above data the gross power absorbed by the However before comparisons can be completed it is
necessary to calculate the compressor power, turbine power
air system Q,As g,oss can then be calculated by subtracting and and rate of combustion energy addition in our simplified
the enthalpy at compressor inlet from the enthalpy at the main engine (i.e. The simplified engine with no bleeds and an
points of return / exit from the air system, i.e. inlet mass flow of actual air flow less bleed airflow). These
calculations are straightforward and can be completed as
follows: -

Compressor Power
(i= Point of return.) f (r 1__2) "~
Note that the value of Cp to use is the mean value of inlet and
exit values. An altemative method could be to use specific
enthalpy tbund directly from tables. However the benefit is
second order and the above calculation is found to be more
than adequate. Turbine Power
~ ~. comp inlet J
J ... ( 4 )

It is important to stress that this value is only as good as

the air ,system model. Therefore such details as heat extracted
... ( s )
from the main gas flow by turbine blade cooling flows, or
heat generated by rotating discs and passed to cavity cooling
air should all be modeled as accurately as possible. Where
Rate of Combustion Energy addition :-
any doubt exists then it is important to model consistently for
different configurations. Ore, _ in = £Le, _ in`°, c , ( r,.,b _ ,.l,, -- Lo., _ ) ... (6)
The next stage is to calculate an estimate of the net work
retrieved by returning the air to the turbine. Here there is a The final engine efficiency can then be calculated:-
difficulty in that the method with which the flow is re-
introduced into the turbine will impact on how effectively it is ~/turb -- vprcomp -- O AS_net
expanded through the turbine. This is also a difficulty for the q = _O~.el ,. .. (7)
full performance model and is often overlooked resulting in
This value of efficiency can now be used as a basis for
significant errors in an engine performance estimate. The
comparison between various air system configurations. The
ctuTent method is only concerned with differences in air
benefits in terms of improved specific fuel consumption,
system performances and so long as there is consistency in
thrust or net power output are all easily quantifiable.
the handling of the returned air, performance estimates
One surprising result from this analysis is that the point
should remain insensitive to this issue. Typically, therefore a
of compressor bleed is of no relevance to this method. This
starting point would be to apply a modifying factor to the
seems at first to be at odds with intuition as the more
original turbine polytropic efficiency. The value of this factor
compressed the air is at the bleed point the more energy
depending on how the flow is re-introduced, be it
expense is involved. However if that air is used carefully with
perpendicular or parallel to the main gas stream. Values will
minimal pressure loss in the air system then it can be usefully
reflect individual company experience but should be
returned to the turbine early in the expansion process with
consistently applied to allow thh comparisons between
minimal loss. The point of return is therefore the critical issue
differing systems.
and this is what is used in this method.
The power recovered by the turbine can now be
As can be seen from the forgoing method a simple
calculated: -
pertbrmance model of the engine will still be required but this

I I. o,l
will be absent of any of the complications of air bleeds and
returns. It will only perform calculations based on the net
CpZi_l nl~lir i 1 - P'_ • ... (2)
amount of air passing completely through the compressor,
combustor and entering into the turbine and the author has
found it possible to undertake the entire performance

3 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/80275/ on 04/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 calculations using a simple spreadsheet which reads in sealing, ventilating and bearing load control has meant that
appropriate values from air system models air systems performance has generally had limited and
retrospective attention. Unlike other engine components the
EXAMPLE CALCULATION air systems performance is intimately entangled in the
Figure 2 can be treated as representative of a performance of the entire engine and as .such not clearly
simplified air system appropriate to a small (4 MW), simple amenable to analysis on its own. This paper has proposed and
cycle, industrial gas turbine. The arrows between internal demonstrated a very simple method, which used in
nodes constitute numerous loss elements such as conjunction with existing air system models and requiring
constrictions, passages and cavities. If further detail was only a minimum of data from said models allows calculation
required, particularly if system development is intended these of meaningful performance figures. These in turn can allow
loss elements could be separated by further internal nodes and the air systems engineer to justify or discard alternate or
hence more pressure and temperature values calculated. For modified systems for an)' given engine quantifiably.
the purposes of calculating air system losses however, such
detail is unnecessary.'. The minimum requirement is the return ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Boundary Node pressure, the mass flow returned and the The author would like to acknowledge the School Of
upstream internal Node temperature. Engineering at Coventry University for allowing the author to
Table 1 lists the five return boundary nodes and the proceed with this paper.
contributing upstream internal Nodes. Values of pressure,
temperature and mass flow are also tabulated. The mean REFERENCES
specific heat capacity of the returned air is then used to Dawes W.N. (1994)
calculate the power cost attached to the returned air. Finally A numerical study, of a transonic complessor rotor
the last five columns of the table calculate the power overtip leakage vortex with the following stator blade
recovered from the gas after it is returned to the turbine. lOW.
By summing the net power cost of all the returned ASME 94-GT-156
air the power cost of this particular air system is calculated at Denton J.D. (1978)
642 KW. By incorporating this value into a simple cycle Throughflow calculations for transonic axial flow
pertbrmance calculation the overall efficiency for this engine turbines.
is calculated at 32.0 %. It is important that the overall cycle ASivlE JnL of engineering for power
calculation is performed as the massflow taken into the air Vol. lO0,Apr 1978, p.212
system has an impact on the engine power output. If only the Ivey P.C (1993)
air system power cost is considered then the benefit of Internal Air Systems : A Review.
reduced air bleed as seen in increased massflow through the Dept of Turbomachinery, Cranfield Universi~.
main engine will be omitted. Part-Time MSc Module Course Handbook.
Miller D ( 1990 )
CONCLUSION blternal Flow Systems.
It has been the author's experience that focus on BHRA (Information Services)
achieving an air systems primary objectives of cooling, ISBN 0-947711- 77-5

B O U N D A R Y C O N D I T I O N S K E P T FIXED

I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
.......................................
COMBUSTION ~COMPRESSOR TURBINE ~OTHER
MODEL / TESTS MODEL /TESTS MODEL /TESTS iSUBSYSTEMS
.............................................................
~.°°.. , ...............
. % ........... .. ........................... ..$~e.g. Lubrication
.......................................
".-,..°...~ **,°. ;/ ......°.-*'

°'°°°'°° ° **°°*-,.°° ""°°'"'~1~ ~ ,~"°"°"°°'°

ISECONDARY AIR ~1~ M A I N E N G I N E ENGINE EFFICIENCY
[~VqT~ IPERFORMANCE MODEL

AIR SYSTEM B O U N D A R Y C O N D I T I O N S C H A N G E WITH D I F F E R E N T

MODELS. D I F F E R E N C E IN R E S U L T I N G E N G I N E E F F I C I E N C Y N O T E D
AND USED TO C O M P A R E AIR SYSTEMS.

Fiaure 1. Air system performance using the whole engine performance model.

4 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/80275/ on 04/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Boundary Nodes

0.35 0.05 0.70 0.30 0.20

0.60 1.30 f

0.70 0.30 20

0.10
0.10 .30
0.2

~-~0"10 / ~'~ Internal NOdes

0.20

0.20 0.15 0.10

Connecting Loss Elements

Key :

B Bleed Points : Boundary Nodes

R Return Points : Boundary Nodes
N Internal Nodes

. / Identification
N10
Pressure : Bar 2.00 t 0.1 ~, M assflow kgls
[ 69%
~'~-~Temperature : Kelvin

Figure 2. Simplified secondary air system network for a 4 MW Industrial Gas Turbine-

5 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/80275/ on 04/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 SIMPLE' ENGINE MODEL
QFUEL_IN= 10.5 MW

17 kg/s 14.9 kg/s

ENGINE INLET MASS

FLOW LESS TOTAL
AIR S Y S T E M BLEEDS
M net.inlet

Wcomp = 5 . 5 0 0 MW Wturb = 9 . 5 0 0 MW

2.1 kg/s

AIR S Y S T E M
Points of r e t u r n . G a s p r o p e r t i e s d e t e r m i n e d
MODEL DATA
from air s y s t e m model. (I.e. T e m p e r a t u r e ,
P r e s s u r e and m a s e f l o w at e a c h p o i n t
R1,R2,R 3 etc..)

AIR S Y S T E M
..................................................... M O D E L : (See figure

T LOTEALSAIR S Y S T E M L ~'I Q...... ss:0901MW

MBL

Engine Overall Efficiency = 9.500-5.500- (0.901 - 0 . 2 5 9 ) I

10.5 WAs = 0 . 2 5 9 MW

= 32.0 %

FIGURE 3. Simple engine performance model and air system boundary conditions.

R etu rn Upstream Return Mass Power Turbine Power Net Power

Node Node Press * Tern p ** Cp Flow Cost E x i t T e m p * Cp Recovered Cost
Bar K J/Kg/K Kg/s W K J/Kg/K W W
R1
N9 5.40 685 1028 0.35 142842 478 1047 75957 66885

R2 N9 3.00 685 1028 0.05 20406 541 1054 I 7610 12796

Nll 3.00 800 1039 0.70 372439 634 1079 124972 247467

R3 N13 2.90 695 1008 0.30 125631 553 1056. 45100 80531

R4 N14 1.20 690 1028 0.20 82688 664 1069 5474 77215

R5 N4 1.01 595 1020 0.15 46992 595 1050 0 46992

N5 1.01 480 1013 0.15 29165 4801 1027 0 29165
N7 1.01 675 1027 0.10 39749 675 1069 i 0 39749
N10 1.01 690 1028 0.10 41344 690 1072 0 41344

Totals 2.10 901257 259113 642144

Note : Ambient/Inlet : Temperature = 286 K /

: Pressure = 1.01 b a r P o w e r c o s t of this a i r s y s t e m !

R e t u r n p r e s s u r e b a s e d on P r e s s u r e at R e t u r n N o d e . ( B o u n d a r y C o n d i t i o n )
** R e t u r n T e m p e r a t u r e b a s e d on U p s t r e a m N o d e . ( I n t e r n a l N o d e )
*** Turbine Isentropic Efficiency = 0.820

T A B L E 1. Calculation of net power cost f o r a i r system shown in figure 2.

6 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/80275/ on 04/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo