See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319169576

Experimental Investigations on the Efficiency of Active Flow Control in a

Compressor Cascade With Periodic Non-Steady Outflow Conditions

Conference Paper · June 2017

DOI: 10.1115/GT2017-63246

CITATIONS READS

15 165

2 authors:

Marcel Staats Wolfgang Nitsche

Navasto GmbH Technische Universität Berlin
23 PUBLICATIONS 184 CITATIONS 317 PUBLICATIONS 2,720 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Marcel Staats on 17 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the ASME 2017 Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS ON THE EFFICIENCY OF ACTIVE FLOW
CONTROL IN A COMPRESSOR CASCADE WITH PERIODIC NON-STEADY
OUTFLOW CONDITIONS
Marcel Staats
Chair of Aerodynamics
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
TU Berlin
Berlin, 10587
Germany
Email: marcel.staats@ilr.tu-berlin.de
ABSTRACT
We present results of experiments on a periodically unsteady
compressor stator flow of the type which would be expected
in consequence of pulsed combustion. A Reynolds number of
Re = 600000 was used for the investigations. The experiments
were conducted on the two-dimensional low-speed compressor
testing facility in Berlin. A choking device downstream the trail-
ing edges induced a periodic non-steady outflow condition to
each stator vane which simulated the impact of a pressure gain-
ing combuster downstream from the last stator. The Strouhal
number of the periodic disturbance was Sr = 0.03 w.r.t. the sta-
tor chord length. Due to the periodic non-steady outflow con-
dition, the flow-field suffers from periodic flow separation phe-
nomena, which were managed by means of active flow control.
In our case, active control of the corner separation was applied
using fluidic actuators based on the principle of fluidic ampli-
fication. The flow separation on the centre region of the stator
blade was suppressed by means of a fluidic blade actuator lead-
ing to an overall time-averaged loss reduction of 11.5%, increas-
ing the static pressure recovery by 6.8% while operating in the
non-steady regime. Pressure measurements on the stator blade
and the wake as well as PIV data proved the beneficial effect of
the active flow control application to the flow field and the im-
provement of the compressor characteristics. The actuation effi-
ciency was evaluated by two figures of merit introduced in this
contribution.
1 Copyright c 2017 by ASME
ASME TURBO EXPO 2017
June 27-29, 2017, Charlotte, NC USA
GT2017-63246
Wolfgang Nitsche
Chair of Aerodynamics
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
TU Berlin
Berlin, 10587
Germany
Email: wolfgang.nitsche@tu-berlin.de
1 INTRODUCTION
Introducing pressure gaining combustion concepts in gas
turbines has the potential to increase the overall efficiency of the
engine by up to 20% compared with state of the art single cy-
cle gas turbines [1]. Using constant volume combustion (CVC)
instead of constant pressure combustion increases the thermal
efficiency of the gas turbine cycle. Air breathing engines usu-
ally operate with continuous combustion. A pulse detonation en-
gine (PDE) is one type of a propulsion concept that uses CVC
and has a highly non-steady characteristic [2]. Implementing the
PDE concept in a gas turbine can be managed by the use of can-
annular combustion chambers, where the tubes close sequentially
when combustion is carried out. The upstream located last com-
pressor stage then suffers from a non-steady outflow condition,
leading to the risk of compressor stall. However, a stable com-
pressor operation is crucial in gas turbine application. In this con-
tribution, a compressor stator flow of the type that is expected in
a PDE was investigated. An active flow control (AFC) approach
was used that helped to stabilize the compressor stator flow-field.
The two-dimensional low speed compressor test rig in Berlin
was used for the investigations. It consists of seven highly
loaded stator blades and was operated at a Reynolds number of
Re = 600000. A periodic non-steady outflow condition was im-
posed by a choking-device mounted downstream from the trail-
ing edges, simulating the impact of a pulse detonation combuster
to the compressor stator.
 In recent decades many research projects have investigated
passive and active flow control methods to increase the flow turn-
ing and reduce the losses of a stator vane [3], [4], [5]. The vortex
structures at the blade-wall junctions generate most of the losses
in a compressor stator vane [6]. Synthetic jet actuators reduce the
losses of the secondary flow structures in a two dimensional sta-
tor cascade by 10% [7]. In Hecklau et al. [8], pulsed blowing on
the end-walls was combined with suction side actuation, where
trailing edge flow separation on a highly loaded stator blade was
suppressed and secondary flow structures were reduced, leading
to 5% efficiency increase of the stator vane.
Fluidic actuators have a high potential to be used for flow
control applications due to their robust design and high output jet
velocities [9], [10]. In the current contribution, fluidic actuators
were used as side-wall- and blade actuators. Recently, similar
devices were investigated in terms of separation flow control in a
number of research projects [11], [12].
Various measurement techniques were used for the experi-
mental investigations. The beneficial effect of AFC was rated by
means of the static pressure recovery and the total pressure loss
reduction. Two suitable figures of merit were introduced that
were inspired by the work of Seifert et al. [13].
2 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Choking-Device
(ref)
0.71 c
1
P signed to generate a sequential blocking of every stator passage.
2
c 3
4
 was generated when φ = 360◦ was reached and the periodical
5
v1
Inflow  6
(BA)
1/3 c
Pressure Taps (SWA)
Boundary Layer Suction
FIGURE 1. LOW-SPEED CASCADE TEST RIG IN BERLIN
The cascade test-rig shown in Fig. 1 was used for the exper-
iments. It consists of seven highly-loaded stator blades forming
six two dimensional passages. Table 1 introduces the key dimen-
sions of the test-rig. The relevance of the Reynolds number of
Re = 6 · 105 is given by the last compressor stage of a high pres-
2 Copyright c 2017 by ASME
TABLE 1. KEY DATA OF THE TEST RIG
Parameter Value
chord length c = 0.375 m
blade pitch P = 0.15 m
blade height H = 0.3 m
inflow angle α1 = 60◦
stagger angle γ = 20◦
Inlet velocity v1 = 25 m/s
Reynolds number Re = 6 · 105
choke-blade height d = 0.05 m
choke-blade pitch b = 0.05 m
Strouhal number Srchoking = 0...0.0525
sure compressor in a gas-turbine, where high subsonic Mach-
numbers are present with temperatures around T = 500 K at the
inlet of the last stator. In the last compressor stage low aspect-
ratios of the blades are typically used. In the described setup an
aspect-ratio of H/c = 0.8 was installed. This leads to strong sec-
ondary flow effects that strongly depend on the Reynolds number
the test-rig is operated with.
The non-steady outflow condition imposed by the con-
stant volume combustion was simulated by the choking-device
mounted at 0.71c behind the trailing edges. This device was de-
In Fig. 1, the reference (ref) choking-blade indicates the phase-
angle φ = 180◦ when it is fully closed. The least disturbance
choking started again. This paper discusses flow structures at
different phase angles. The relevant phase-angles and their corre-
sponding positions of the choking-device are presented in Fig. 2.
As the disturbance generated by means of the pressure gaining
combustion process were mimicked by this device, it is impor-
tant to match the right Strouhal number with respect to the stator
chord length in order to suit full scale interactions between the
last compressor stator and the can-annular combustion chambers.
In the present paper, all experiments were conducted with the
choking-device operating at Srchoking = 0.03, with respect to the
chord length of c = 0.375 m and the inflow speed of v1 = 25 m/s.
A more detailed description of the test-rig is given in [14].
In this contribution, results obtained from wake measure-
ments are presented. Furthermore the 2D/3C-PIV technique was
used to clarify the internal flow structures in the stator vane fo-
cusing on the periodic flow separation phenomena. In Tab. 2 the
 (a) (b) Wake-measurement
Side-wall actuator Plane H/2
insert

2
30°
P

45° Pulsed air jets

(c) (d)
c/3

3 5
seven 2D/3C-PIV planes
s
Blade actuator
(e) insert

Inflow
6
FIGURE 3. AFC setup and five-hole-probe measurement plane

FIGURE 2. POSITION OF THE CHOKING-DEVICE. (a) NO PAS- differential pressure sensors. Furthermore the pressure distribu-
SAGE IS BLOCKED φ = 360◦ . (b) PASSAGE TWO IS BLOCKED tion on the mid-section of the measurement blade was measured
φ = 90◦ . (c) PASSAGE THREE IS BLOCKED φ = 140◦ . (d) simultaneously. Thirty-two First Sensor: HCL 12X5 differ-
PASSAGE FIVE IS BLOCKED φ = 250◦ . (e) PASSAGE SIX IS ential pressure transducers were installed around the centre-line
BLOCKED φ = 280◦ on the measurement blade. Twenty-one of them were mounted
on the suction side of the profile and the rest were distributed
TABLE 2. PIV-PLANES along the pressure side. In the experiments one side-wall ac-
tuator was installed at s/smax = 14.5% on each end-wall of the
plane 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 six passages. The blade actuator outlet orifices were located at
s [mm] 160 200 240 280 320 360 415 s/smax = 52.29% on the blade suction surface in the passages
two, three, four and five. Both actuator-systems were based on
x/c 0.358 0.461 0.564 0.67 0.775 0.876 1 the principle of fluid amplification and follow the design rules
presented in [15]. The flow channels of the actuators are shown
in Fig. 4. The side-wall actuators, shown in Fig. 4 (a) gen-
erate pulsed air jets under a blowing-angle of ωSWA = 45◦ with
two outlet orifices on each device that were arranged in stream-
positions of the PIV planes are given. One Litron: nanoPIV wise direction. The two outlet orifices were BSWA = 20 mm apart
L 200-15 PIV laser and two PCO: pco.edge 5.5 cameras were and measured DSWA = 0.4 mm x LSWA = 20 mm. Further infor-
used for the stereoscopic setup. The standard PIV system was mation regarding the geometry and the working principle of the
triggered by a light barrier mounted to the choking device, allow- actuator is given in [14]. An ωBA = 30◦ blowing-angle was used
ing phase locked PIV snapshots. At every phase-angle, n = 50 in the design of the blade actuator. The device’s flow channels
pictures were evaluated and averaged. Figure 3 depicts the loca- are shown in Fig. 4 (b). It can be operated as a fluidic oscilla-
tion of the measurement planes that were positioned inside and tor by connecting port 1a with 2a and 1b with 2b. In our case,
downstream from passage four. A five-hole-probe was used to the ports 1a and 1b were plugged and a solenoid valve was con-
evaluate the static pressure recovery as well as the total pres- nected to the ports 2a and 2b in order to vary mass-flow-rate
sure loss reduction of one passage with respect to the input of and switching frequency independently. The six outlet orifices
the active flow control (AFC) devices. The wake measurement of the actuator measured DBA = 0.4 mm x LBA = 13 mm and had
plane was located at c/3 downstream the trailing edges. The five- a spacing of BBA = 13 mm. Extended explanations regarding the
hole probe was equipped with five First Sensor: HCLA 12X5 blade actuator are given in [16]. The outlet signals of the actu-

3 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

 (a) (b) actuator outlet orifice to the trailing edge of the stator blade.

Output
Supply 2b 1b The local velocity (ulocal ) was calculated from the static pres-
1a sure coefficient measured at the x/c position of the actuators.
2a time Figure 5 (a) shows the total pressure at the outlet of the side-
wall actuator. The switching frequency of the actuator was set to
+
LSWA Control port factuator,SWA = 40 Hz (FSWA ≈ 0.5) and the mass-flow-rate was
BA-outlets: ṁSWA = 6.344 · 10−4 kg/s. Figure 5 (b) shows a correspond-
ing plot regarding the blade actuator. In this case the switching
ly
BBA Supp frequency was set to factuator,BA = 60 Hz, which corresponds to
+
BSWA DSWA LBA FBA ≈ 0.5. The mass-flow-rate was ṁBA = 1.106 · 10−3 kg/s. In
DBA order to evaluate the efficiency of the actuation it is necessary to
take the power of the jets into account. The jet-power is calcu-
lated using:

FIGURE 4. FLUDIC ACTUATOR SYSTEM. (a) SIDE-WALL-

ACTUATOR. (b) BLADE ACTUATOR AND ZOOMED IN OUTLET v2jet,max
Pjet = ṁactuator · . (2)
NOZZLE 2

ators that were measured using a Pitot-probe are plotted in Fig. The mass-flow-rate of the actuators (ṁactuator ) was measured
5. In earlier work it was shown that the optimized switching fre- through Festo: SFAB-200 flow-meters. The variable v jet,max
refers to the maximum velocity at one actuator orifice and was
calculated using the equation of continuity. Figure 6 shows the
(a) (b)

1.06 1.04
side-wall actuator blade actuator
1.03 side-wall actuator blade actuator
1.04 20 150
pitot [pa]

pitot [pa]

1.02 15

vjet, max [m/s]

Pjet [Watt]

100
1.02
1.01 10
50
ambient 5
ambient
1 1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
t [s] t [s] 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-3
FIGURE 5. TIME-RESOLVED SIGNAL AT ACTUATOR OUT- mactuator 10 [kg/s]
LET ORIFICES. (A) SIDE-WALL ACTUATOR SWITCHING WITH
FIGURE 6. CALCULATED JET ENERGY OF THE ACTUATORS
factuator,SWA = 40 Hz, MASS-FLOW-RATE ṁSWA = 6.344 · 10−4 kg/s.
WITH RESPECT TO THE INPUT MASS-FLOW-RATE
(b) BLADE ACTUATOR SWITCHING WITH factuator,BA = 60 Hz,
MASS-FLOW-RATE ṁBA = 1.106 · 10−3 kg/s

mass-flow-rate of the actuator on the abscissa and the maximum

quency of both actuators corresponds to a Strouhal number of velocity on the right hand side axis. On the ordinate the actu-
+ +
FSWA = FBA = 0.5 [16]. It is defined by ator jet-power is plotted. Taking the side-wall actuator into ac-
count it is found that the jet velocity and the jet-power are al-
ways higher for a given mass-flow-rate compared to the blade-
factu · lre f
F+ = . (1) actuator. This is due to the areas of the outlet orifices. The side-
ulocal wall-actuator has a jet outlet area of Aoutlet,SWA = 0.8 · 10−5 m2 ,
whereas the blade actuator jet outlets cover an effective outlet
The variable factu represents the switching frequency of the ac- area of Aoutlet,BA = 1.56 · 10−5 m2 . The input actuation momen-
tive flow control device and lre f describes the distance from the tum is taken into account using the following definition of the

4 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

 vax = 0
momentum coefficient [14]. vortex
passage vax/vax,1: 0 0.5 1
separation line
vortex 0.5
ṁactuator · v jet,RMS separated flow
cµ = . (3)
q1 · A1

y/H
In this equation, the RMS value of the jet velocity is used. 0
The pulsed jet signal is approximated with a square wave to 0.4 0.8 TE
x/c
allow the √ RMS value of the jet velocity to be calculated as (a) no passage blocked (b)
v jet,RMS = 0.5 · v jet,max [8]. The variable q1 represents the in-
flow dynamic pressure in the cascade experiments and A1 refers
0.5
to the inflow area of one passage. separated flow

y/H
separation
Measurement uncertainties backflow bubble
The manufacturer of the flow meters used in the experi- 0
0.4 0.8 TE
ments states an accuracy of ±0.8 % with respect to the full scale x/c
span, and the inflow dynamic pressure was measured with an (c) passage 2 is blocked (d)
error of ∆q1 = ±1.25 [Pa], as specified for the First Sensor:
HCLA 12X5 differential pressure sensor. Based on these val- 0.5
ues, the deviation from the quoted momentum coefficient was separated flow
always less than ∆cµ,SWA = ∆cµ,BA ≤ ±0.064 %. The static pres-

y/H
sure on the stator blade was measured with a maximum error
trailing edge
of ∆c p ≤ ±0.0052. All five-hole-probe data were evaluated in separation
terms of static pressure rise cP and total pressure loss ζ be- 0
0.4 0.8 TE
x/c
hind the measurement passage, which were calculated with com-
bined errors for the integrated values of ∆cP ≤ ±5.53 · 10−4 and (e) passage 3 is blocked (f)
∆ζ ≤ ±3.03 · 10−4 with respect to repeatability.
0.5
separated flow

y/H
3 REFERENCE FLOW
Figure 7 shows results obtained from 2D/3C-PIV measure- trailing edge
ments in the stator cascade. The periodic motion of the choking separation
0
device forces highly dynamic and recurring flow structure in the 0.4 0.8 TE
x/c
passages, which were resolved using a triggered standard PIV (g) passage 5 is blocked (h)
system. In the contour plots of Fig. 7 (a) the axial velocity ratio
regarding the phase-angle φ = 360◦ is shown, where no passage
was blocked. At this phase-angle the flow-field was least dis- 0.5
separated flow
turbed. The strong structures of the end-wall flow are indicated
y/H

by the streamlines. At the leading edge of the stator blade the

suction side leg of the horse-shoe-vortex forms at the blade-wall trailing edge
separation
junction. This vortex structure breaks down and mixes with the 0
0.4 0.8 TE
passage vortex that represents the strongest secondary flow struc- x/c
ture in the stator vane that forms due to the incoming boundary (j) passage 6 is blocked (k)
layer. A streamline that is located within the end-wall boundary
layer is bent further toward the suction side of the stator blade FIGURE 7. 2D/3C-PIV RECORDINGS FOR DIFFERENT PHASE-
compared to one outside the boundary layer and forms a sec- ANGLES. (a) PASSAGE FLOW-FIELD FOR φ = 360◦ . (b) SURFACE
ondary flow from the pressure side toward the suction side in the STREAMLINES FOR φ = 360◦ . (c) PASSAGE FLOW-FIELD FOR
end-wall region. The added mass is then transported towards the φ = 90◦ . (d) SURFACE STREAMLINES FOR φ = 90◦ . (e) PASSAGE
centre passage and a compensating flow results that forms the FLOW-FIELD FOR φ = 140◦ . (f) SURFACE STREAMLINES FOR
passage vortex structure [17]. Toward the trailing edge, the pas- φ = 140◦ . (g) PASSAGE FLOW-FIELD FOR φ = 250◦ . (h) SURFACE
sage vortex core was shifted closer to the suction surface. The STREAMLINES FOR φ = 250◦ . (j) PASSAGE FLOW-FIELD FOR
φ = 280◦ . (k) SURFACE STREAMLINES FOR φ = 280◦
5 Copyright c 2017 by ASME
resulting corner separation took up much space and generated
major losses at the outlet of the stator vane. In Fig. 7 (b) the cP: 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.7
streamlines on the suction surface are shown. The yellow dashed
(a) (b)
line indicates the vortex separation line. At x/c = 1 the corner
1 PS 1 PS
separation reached into the passage until y/H = 0.2 .
When the choking device blocked passage two as shown in 0.8 0.8
Fig. 7 (c) and (d), the inflow angle was increased and all sec-
0.6 0.6
ondary flow structures were enhanced. The passage vortex core

z/P

hit the suction surface further upstream and took up more space
in the passage. Lower axial velocity occurs close to the blade
surface. The surface streamlines indicate a grown corner separa-
tion that is already reaching the midsection of the measurement
blade. An iso-line for vax = 0 m/s shown in purple indicates the
flow separation line. Along the vortex separation line a separa-
tion bubble started to form from x/c = 0.5 on.
Increasing flow separation was observed as the choking de-
vice blocked passage number three as shown in Fig. 7 (e) and (f).
The surface streamlines strongly bent from the end wall towards
the midsection of the measurement blade and the separation bub-
ble broke down and reached the trailing edge, resulting in a large
pressure induced trailing edge flow separation.
The flow separation extended to its maximum when passage
five was blocked as shown in Fig. 7 (g) and (h). The data show
an extended area with backflow, indicated by the purple iso-line
in Fig. 7 (h) from x/c = 0.75 until the trailing edge for the blades
centre section. From y/H = 0 to y/H = 0.2, a two dimentional
flow separation was observed. Between y/H = 0.2 and y/H =
0.5, a strong impact of the passage vortex became evident. The
contour plot in Fig. 7 (g) shows the three dimensional structures
of the flow-field when passage five was blocked.
The trailing edge flow separation reached far into the pas-
sage flow-field displacing the indicated streamlines away from
the blade’s suction surface.
The stator vane recovers from the strong flow separation
phenomena when passage six was blocked. Figure 7 (k) shows
the pressure induced flow separation from x/c = 0.8 until the
trailing edge. The reduced flow separarion also becomes evident
in the passage flow-field shown in Fig. 7 (j).
4 ACTUATED FLOW
The compressor stator flow-field showed a dynamic corner
stall and periodic pressure induced trailing edge flow separation.
Two actuator systems were installed to prevent both flow sepa-
rations. The influence of the side wall actuation on the dynamic
flow-field was discussed in [14] and [18].
Figure 8 depicts the pressure recovery of the stator vane at
a critical phase-angle of φ = 250◦ with and without active flow
control. At this phase-angle, passage five was fully blocked. The
z/P
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
SS 0 SS
0
0 0.2 0.4 0 0.2 0.4
2y/H 2y/H
FIGURE 8. PRESSURE RECOVERY OF THE MEASUREMENT
PASSAGE FOR PHASE-ANGLE φ = 250◦ (PASSAGE FIVE IS
BLOCKED). (a) REFERENCE FLOW (b) WITH ACTIVE CON-
TROL: MOMENTUM COEFFICIENT OF SIDE-WALL ACTUATION
Cµ,SWA = 1% AND MOMENTUM COEFFICIENT OF BLADE AC-
TUATOR Cµ,BA = 0.5%
static pressure coefficient cP was defined by
p2 (y, z) − p1
cP = , (4)
q1
where p2 represents the measured static pressure at a certain y
and z position in the five-hole-probe measurement plane, where
N = 240 positions were evaluated. The variables p1 and q1 rep-
resent the inflow conditions. Considering Fig. 8 (a), no flow con-
trol was applied. The pressure recovery was limited due to the
corner separation and the pressure induced flow separation on the
stator blade as found in Fig 7 (g) and (h). The lowest values of cP
were found in the direct wake of the centre blade flow separation.
Applying AFC through the side-wall- and the blade actuators an
overall increase in pressure recovery was observed as shown in
Fig. 8 (b). In this case, the overall momentum coefficient was set
to cµ = 1.5%, where the side-wall actuators operated at a mo-
mentum coefficient of cµ,SWA = 1% and the blade actuators with
cµ,BA = 0.5%. The dimensionless actuating frequency of both ac-
tuator systems was kept to the corresponding Strouhal numbers
+ +
of FSWA = FBA = 0.5. Similar to the non actuated case, the data
field shows the highest pressure recoveries in the centre of the
passage for pitch wise values from z/P = 0.5 to z/P = 1. Below
that pitch wise coordinate, the three dimensional flow structures
in the passage still led to lower local pressure recoveries. Adjust-
ing the mass-flow-rate through the actuators results in a variation
of the momentum coefficient cµ . The benefits of the actuating
momentum were evaluated in terms of static pressure recovery
as presented in Eq. 4 and total pressure loss coefficient measured

6 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

downstream from passage four. The total pressure loss coeffi-
cient was corrected by means of the total pressure input of the
actuators and was calculated using the following equation:
pt,1,corrected − pt,2 (y, z)
ζ= [19]
q1
pressure loss coefficient of ζ = 0.1059 was measured, when a
momentum coefficient of cµ,SWA = 0.61% was applied through
the side-wall actuator and the blade actuator was operated with a
momentum coefficient of cµ,BA = 0.3%.
(5)

0.68
The corrected inflow total pressure pt,1,corrected was calculated as
follows. 0.18
0.66
(pt,1 · ṁ1 + pt, jet · ṁ jet ) SWA only

static pressure recovery cP

pt,1,corrected = , (6) BA only
ṁ1 + ṁ jet 0.16 0.64

total pressure loss 

where the inflow total pressure pt,1 and the total pressure at the
actuator outlet orifices pt, jet were mass-flow averaged. In order
to evaluate the global effect of the AFC approach on the flow-
field plane- and time-averaged values were used as presented in
Eq. 7 and 8.
1
cP = ∑ ∑ cP (y, z)
N y z
∑y ∑z ζ · ṁ(y, z)
ζ=
∑ ṁ(y, z)
Figure 9 shows the integral static pressure recoveries and total
pressure losses with respect to the actuation momentum. On
the abscissa the sum of the momentum coefficients is plotted,
where every investigated combination of momentum through the
side-wall actuator and the blade-actuator are shown in two data
points in the plot. The red dashed line indicates the reference
total pressure loss coefficient of the stator vane. Without any
AFC, the total pressure loss coefficient was ζ = 0.12. Taking the
momentum coefficient variation into account, it was found that
the flow losses were reduced for a given range of momentum co-
efficients. When only the side-wall actuator was operative, as
indicated in the plot, it was possible to reduce the total pressure
losses by ∆ζ = 0.012 to a value of ζ = 0.1079 using a momen-
tum coefficient of cµ,SWA = 0.61%. For increasing momentum
coefficients, higher total pressure losses resulted due to the high
actuator output velocities. When the momentum coefficient was
kept below cµ,SWA = 1.5%, reductions in total pressure losses
were measured. For data points where only the blade actuation
was used, no decreasing losses were observed. The combination
of the two actuator systems led to the best results with respect
to loss reduction with values of up to ∆ζ = 0.014 using a com-
bined momentum coefficient of cµ = 0.91%. In this case a total
0.62
0.14
reference total 0.6
pressure loss
0.12
0.58
(7) 0.1
reference static 0.56
pressure recovery
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
c,SW A+ c,BA [%]
(8) FIGURE 9. INTEGRAL TOTAL PRESSURE LOSS COEFFICIENT
AND STATIC PRESSURE RECOVERY COEFFICIENT CALCU-
LATED FROM TIME-AVERAGED DATA WITH RESPECT TO THE
OVERALL MOMENTUM COEFFICIENT OF THE ACTUATION
The static pressure recovery of the stator vane under refer-
ence conditions was cP = 0.565, shown with the blue dashed
line in Fig. 9. It was found that increasing momentum of the
actuation always led to rising pressure recoveries. The major in-
crease was caused by the side-wall actuator. If the actuation only
takes place through the blade actuator, less increase was mea-
sured. Applying cµ,BA = 1.6% at the blade actuator led to a pres-
sure recovery of cP = 0.597. When the same amount of momen-
tum was applied to the side-wall actuator this value increased to
cP = 0.627. For the combined actuation, higher values in terms
of pressure recovery were measured only regarding momentum
coefficients exceeding cP = 1.5%.
In order to evaluate the AFC approach in terms of efficiency,
two figures of merit are introduced. On the one hand total pres-
sure losses were reduced and on the other hand static pressure
rise was increased by the actuation. To take the static pressure
rise at the exit of the stator vane into account, the trailing edge

7 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

 (a) (b) ond figure of merit is introduced.

reference flow
cP,AFC /ζAFC
FM2: 1.1 1.2 best FM2 FM2 = (11)
2 best FM1 cP,noAFC /ζnoAFC
FM1 -0.5
transition
High pressure recoveries combined with low total pressure losses
cµ,SWA [%]

.07 0 are desirable configurations of a compressor stator. Equation 11

1
1 cP
relates the pressure recovery of the stator measured in the five-
separated flow
5 hole-probe plane cP,AFC divided by the total pressure losses ζAFC
1.0
0
03
1.

0.5 to the reference case without AFC. The value for ζAFC was cal-
1.

increasing pressure
0 sult of the second figure of merit is shown. Only values regard-
0 1 2 0 SWA BA
cµ,BA [%] LE x/c
FIGURE 10. (a) EFFICIENCIES OF THE AFC APPROACH FM1
AND FM2. (b) STATIC PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION ON THE MEA-
SUREMENT BLADE AT PHASE-ANGLE φ = 250◦ .
pressure was used and the first figure of merit is calculated by:
∆PT E,AFC
FM1 = [16].
∆PT E,noAFC + (Pjet,BA + Pjet,SWA )
The variable ∆PT E describes the physical energy conversion
through the stator based on the static pressure difference at the
trailing edge of the stator blade to the inflow static pressure and
is expressed by:
v21
∆PT E = c p,T E · · ṁ.
2 gion with flow separation was reduced but not fully suppressed.
The static pressure coefficient c p,T E was measured at the posi-
tion x/c = 0.956 in the mid-section of the measurement blade.
In Eq. 9 the energy conversion of the stator passage with AFC
∆PT E,AFC is related to the energy conversion of the stator vane
without active flow control ∆PT E,noAFC and the jet energies in-
serted by the side-wall and blade actuator Pjet,BA and Pjet,SWA .
Figure 10 (a) shows the evaluation of Eq. 9 in the contour lines
with regard to the momentum coefficients of the side-wall and
the blade actuator. The contour line for FM1 = 1.0 depicts the
break even, where the amount of input actuation energy equals
the increase of the energy conversion that was measured at the
trailing edge. Increasing values indicate more efficient AFC set-
ups. The optimum became apparent for momentum coefficients
of the side-wall actuator of cµ,SWA ≈ 1% and cµ,BA ≈ 0.4% re-
garding the blade actuator.
In order to calculate the efficiency of the AFC by taking
static pressure recovery and loss reduction into account, a sec-
culated using Eq. 8. In the contour plot of Fig. 10 (a) the re-
1
TE ing FM2 >= 1 are shown in the contour plot. The optimum
AFC setup is now found for cµ,SWA ≈ 0.6% and cµ,BA ≈ 0.3%.
The increase in the total pressure loss coefficients after reach-
ing cµ,SWA + cµ,BA ≈ 1% leads to decreasing values regarding
the second figure of merit FM2. Outside the optimum effective
AFC setups still occur regarding a large range of momentum co-
efficients.
Figure 10 (b) shows the pressure distribution around the
midsection of the measurement blade for the reference case com-
pared to two actuating cases for the phase-angle φ = 250◦ (pas-
(9) sage five was blocked). In all cases the transition takes place
through a laminar separation bubble at the position x/c = 0.17.
For the reference case it was found that a large pressure induced
trailing edge flow separation occurred at x/c = 0.6 in the mid-
section of the measurement blade that limited the pressure re-
covery from that point on.
When the actuation was operated corresponding to the op-
timum found in the second figure of merit, the pressure distri-
bution shown by the green line in Fig. 10 (b) resulted. Higher
(10) pressure recovery on the trailing edge was measured and the re-
A steady increase of static pressure until reaching the trailing
edge was measured when the optimum found by the first figure
of merit was used for AFC.
The two different AFC setups led to static pressure recov-
eries that are depicted in Fig. 11 (a). In the polar plot, phase-
averaged static pressure recoveries are shown. Comparing the
reference case to the actuated ones it becomes apparent that an
actuation with the optimum found in the first figure of merit and
the second figure of merit led to increases in static pressure re-
covery at all phase-angles.
The green line depicts the case when the second figure of
merit was maximum. In this case the overall momentum coeffi-
cient of the actuators was set to cµ,BA + cµ,SWA = 0.9%. Increas-
ing the momentum to cµ,BA + cµ,SWA = 1.4% led to a further in-
crease regarding the static pressure recovery and depicts the case
where the first figure of merit had its maximum.
In Fig. 11 (b) the phase-averaged total pressure losses be-
come evident. The equation used to calculate the second figure of

8 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

 reference flow
best FM2
best FM1
(a) (b)
90° 90°
increase
 
red
180° 0° 180°
0.5 0.6
uct
0.05 0.1
cP  (a)
ion
270° 270°
FIGURE 11. IMPACT OF THE AFC TO THE FLOW-FIELD RE-
GARDING THE OPTIMUMS OF THE FIRST- AND THE SECOND
FIGURE OF MERIT. (a) PHASE-AVERAGED STATIC PRESSURE
RECOVERY OF THE STATOR VANE EVALUATED IN THE FIVE-
HOLE-PROBE PLANE. (b) PHASE-AVERAGED TOTAL PRES-
SURE LOSS IN THE FIVE-HOLE-PROBE PLANE.
merit accounts the total pressure losses in the stator vane. When
the optimum momentum coefficients based on the second figure
of merit were applied as seen in the green line plot it was found
that the total pressure losses were reduced at every phase-angle.
The higher momentum used in the optimum based on the
first figure of merit led to loss reductions for a wide range of
phase-angles but between φ = 36◦ to φ = 180◦ increasing total
pressure losses occurred, due to the higher actuation power input.
Figure 12 shows the flow structures in the stator vane
that were conducted in the measurement passage using the
2D/3C-PIV setup for the phase-angle of φ = 250◦ (passage five
was blocked). The Q-criterion was evaluated in every two-
dimensional PIV-plane to depict the passage vortex at every in-
vestigated phase-angle. The result is shown in the green iso-
surface for Q = 3500 1/s with linear interpolation between the
PIV-planes. The planes indicate the axial velocity ratio and a
second iso-surface in grey for vax = 0 indicates the separation
line. In Fig. 12 (a) the reference case is shown. The intense trail-
ing edge flow separation shows in the vax = 0 iso-surface. The
early breakdown of the corner vortex and the mixing of it with
the pressure induced flow separation leads to the Q iso-surface
not showing a connected passage vortex structure. When the
side-wall actuation was turned on with a momentum coefficient
of cµ,SWA = 1.6% the flow-field formed as shown in Fig. 12 (b)
regarding the same phase-angle. A reduction of the corner sepa-
ration was achieved and the clearly formed passage vortex is in-
dicated by the iso-Q-surface of Q = 3500 1/s. The flow losses re-
lated to the corner separation were shifted toward the end-walls.
vax/vax,1: 0 0.5 1
iso-Q-surface
=0 =0
e v ax e va x
sur f a c rfac
0° - s u
iso- iso
(b)
iso-Q-surface
passage vortex
BA-outlets
attatched flow
BA-outlets 0.5
(c) (d)
FIGURE 12. PASSAGE FLOW-FIELD MEASURED WITH 2D/3C-
PIV AT THE PHASE-ANGLE φ = 250◦ . (a) REFERENCE FLOW.
(B) ONLY SIDE-WALL ACTUATION Cµ,SWA = 1.6%. (c) SIDE-
WALL ACTUATION AND BLADE ACTUATION WITH Cµ,SWA =
1.6% AND Cµ,BA = 1.6% (d) SURFACE STREAMLINES FOR THE
ACTUATED CASE WITH Cµ,SWA = 1.6% AND Cµ,BA = 1.6%
The pressure induced flow separation in the centre blade is not
reduced at all by the use of the side-wall actuation. When the
blade actuator was added with the same momentum coefficient
as the side-wall actuator (cµ,SWA = 1.6% and cµ,BA = 1.6%) the
flow-field forms as shown in Fig. 12 (c). Here the passage vortex
structure was still comparable to the case where only the side-
wall actuator was operative. Furthermore no region with sepa-
rated flow was found on the stator blade. The surface stream-
lines on the suction surface of the measurement blade are shown
in Fig. 12 (d). Bent streamlines were found at the blade-wall
junction that were induced by the passage vortex. Further to-
wards the centre section of the blade, the streamlines show fully
attached flow.
5 CONCLUSIONS
Periodically occurring flow separation in a compressor sta-
tor vane induced by a non-steady outflow condition were inves-
tigated. The wake of a two-dimensional low speed stator cas-
cade was periodically choked to simulate the impact of a con-
stant volume combuster to the stator. 2D/3C-PIV measurements
revealed the three dimensional flow structures and the struc-
tures of the flow separation phenomena. Phase-averaged data
showed a separation bubble along the passage vortex separation
line that breaks down, reaches the trailing edge and forms the
9 Copyright c 2017 by ASME
trailing edge flow separation with changing intensity with regard ∆ increment
to the working-phase of the choking device. The flow separa- ζ total pressure loss coefficient
tions were suppressed by means of side-wall and blade actuation. φ phase angle of the choking device
Time averaged loss-reductions by ∆ζ = 11.5% were feasible by ω blowing angle of the side-wall actuators
the combined AFC setup with increased static pressure recov-
eries by ∆cP = 6.8% using an overall momentum coefficient of
cµ = 0.9%. The energy input of the actuators were taken into Indices
account in order to formulate two figures of merit that evaluate 1 inflow plane
the AFC setup in terms of efficiency. It was shown that the opti- 2 outflow plane
mized actuation setup led to major reduction of the flow separa- ax axial
tion phenomena and a strong increase in static pressure recovery j et actuator jet
regarding all phase-angles of the choking-device. RMS root mean square
t total
s static
NOMENCLATURE BA blade actuator
CVC constant volume combustion SWA side-wall actuator
PDE pulse detonation engine
AFC active flow control
PIV particle image velocimetry ACKNOWLEDGMENT
BA blade actuator The authors gratefully acknowledge support by the Deutsche
SWA side-wall actuator Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) as part of collaborative research
Re Reynolds Number based on chord length centre SFB 1029 ”Substantial efficiency increase in gas turbines
Sr Strouhal number based on the non-steady outflow condition through direct use of coupled unsteady combustion and flow dy-
F + Strouhal number based on the actuation parameters namics”.
A area
B distance between output orifices
L length of output orifices REFERENCES
D depth output orifices [1] P. Stathopoulos, J. Vinkeloe and C. O. Paschereit, 2015.
FM figure of merit “Thermodynamic evaluation of constant volume combus-
H blade height tion for gas turbine power cycles”. International Gas Tur-
P blade pitch bine Congress.
P energy [2] G.D. Roy, S.M. Frolov, A.A. Borisov and D.W. Netzer,
b choke-blade pitch 2004. “Pulse detonation propulsion: challenges, current
c chord length status, and future perspective”. Progress in Energy and
cµ momentum coefficient Combustion Science, 30(6), pp. 545–672.
c p blade pressure coefficient [3] E. F. Brocher, 1961. “The jet-flap compressor cascade”.
cP pressure coefficient measured with five-hole-probe Journal of Basic Engineering, 83(3), pp. 401–406.
d choke-blade height [4] D. E. Culley,E. P. Braunscheidel and M. M. Bright, 2005.
ṁ mass-flow-rate “Impulsive injection for compressor stator separation con-
p pressure trol”. AIAA Paper 2005, 3633.
q dynamic pressure [5] A. Hergt, R. Meyer, M. W. Müller and K. Engel, 2008.
s coordinate along the blade’s surface “Loss Reduction in Compressor Cascades by Means of Pas-
t time sive Flow Control”. ASME Turbo Expo: Power for Land,
v velocity Sea, and Air, 6, pp. 269–280.
x length coordinate [6] W. Ma, X. Ottavy, L. Lu, F. Leboeuf and F. Gao, 2011. “Ex-
y span wise coordinate perimental Study of Corner Stall in a Linear Compressor
z pitch wise coordinate Cascade”. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 24, pp. 235–
242.
[7] V. Zander and W. Nitsche, 2013. “Control of secondary
Symbols flow structures on a highly loaded compressor cascade”.
α flow angle Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
γ stagger angle Part A: Journal of Power and Energy, 227, pp. 674–682.

10 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

 [8] M. Hecklau, C. Gmelin, W. Nitsche, F. Thiele, A. Huppertz
and M. Swoboda, 2011. “Experimental and numerical re-
sults of active flow control on a highly loaded stator cas-
cade”. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engi-
neers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy, 225, pp. 907–
918.
[9] L. N. Cattafesta III and M. Sheplak, 2011. “Actuators for
Active and Flow Control”. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 43,
pp. 247–272.
[10] G. Arwatz, I. Fono and A. Seifert, 2008. “Suction and os-
cillatory blowing actuator modeling and validation”. AIAA
journal, 46(5), pp. 1107–1117.
[11] M. Bauer, J. Lohse, F. Haucke and W. Nitsche, 2014.
“High-Lift Performance Investigation of a Two-Element
Configuration with a Two-Stage Actuator System”. AIAA
Journal, 52, pp. 1307–1313.
[12] P. Tewes, L. Taubert and I. Wygnanski, 2014. “On the effect
of sweep on separation control”. In 7th AIAA Flow Control
Conference, p. 2513.
[13] A. Seifert, 2014. “Evaluation criteria and performance
comparison of actuators for bluff-body flow control”. 32nd
AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference.
[14] M. Staats and W. Nitsche, 2016. “Active Control of the Cor-
ner Separation on a Highly Loaded Compressor Cascade
With Periodic Nonsteady Boundary Conditions by Means
of Fluidic Actuators”. Journal of Turbomachinery, 138(3),
p. 031004.
[15] M. Bauer, 2015. “Design and application of a fluidic ac-
tuator system for high lift flow control”. PhD thesis, TU
Berlin, Faculty V - Mechanical Engineering and Transport
Systems.
[16] M. Staats and W. Nitsche, 2016. “Active Flow Control
on a Non-steady Operated Compressor Stator Cascade by
Means of Fluidic Devices”. Notes on Numerical Fluid Me-
chanics and Multidisciplinary Design.
[17] N. A. Cumpsty, 2004. Compressor Aerodynamics. Krieger
Publishing Company.
[18] M. Staats, W. Nitsche, S. J. Steinberg and R. King, 2016.
“Closed-loop active flow control of a non-steady flow field
in a highly-loaded compressor cascade”. CEAS Aeronauti-
cal Journal, pp. 1–12.
[19] D. Nerger, H. Saathoff, R. Radespiel, V. Gümmer and C.
Clemen, 2012. “Experimental Investigation of Endwall and
Suction Side Blowing in a Highly Loaded Compressor Sta-
tor Cascade”. Journal of Turbomachinery, 134.

11 Copyright c 2017 by ASME

View publication stats