Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CARLETON UNIVERSITY
MECH 5401
TURBOMACHINERY
S.A. Sjolander
January 2010
CARLETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering
MECH 5401 - Turbomachinery
COURSE CONTENTS
Week
1
Introduction. Review of similarity and non-dimensional parameters. Ideal versus non-ideal gases.
Velocity triangles.
Energy considerations and Steady Flow Energy Equation. Angular momentum equation. Euler
pump and turbine equation. Definitions of efficiency.
Preliminary design: meanline analysis at design point. Stage loading considerations. Blade
loading and choice of solidity. Degree of reaction.
Correlations for performance estimation at the design point for: axial compressors, axial turbines
and centrifugal compressors. Approximate off-design performance: compressor maps and turbine
characteristics.
Two-dimensional flow in turbomachinery. Spanwise flow effects. Simple radial equilibrium. Freevortex and forced-vortex analysis.
Blade-to-blade flow. Blade profile design considerations: boundary layer behaviour and diffusion
limits; significance of laminar- to turbulent-flow transition.
Compressible flow effects: choking in turbomachinery blade rows; shock waves in transonic
compressors and turbine; shock-induced boundary layer separation; limit load in axial turbines.
Effects of compressibility on losses and other flow aspects.
10
Unsteady flows in turbomachinery. Fundamental role of unsteadiness. Significance of wakeblade interaction. Approximate analysis of unsteady behaviour of compression systems: dynamic
system instability (surge); factors affecting compressor surge.
11
Current issues in turbomachinery aerodynamics. Very high loading for weight and blade-count
reduction. Effects of gaps, steps, relative wall motion and purge flow on blade passage flows.
12
Passive and active flow control to extend range of performance. Aero-thermal interactions. Multidisciplinary optimization.
S.A. Sjolander
January 2010
INTRODUCTION
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.0
Course Objectives
Positive-Displacement Machines vs Turbomachines
Types of Turbomachines
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
3.0
3.6
Efficiency of Turbomachines
3.6.1
3.6.2
4.0
Incompressible-Flow Machines
Compressible-Flow Machines
Introduction
Control Volume Analysis for Axial-Compressor Blade Section
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.8
4.9
Introduction
Blade Design and Analysis Using Howells Correlations
Blade Design and Analysis Using NASA SP-36 Correlations
4.7
Meanline Analysis
Blade Geometries Based on Euler Approximation
Off-Design Performance of the Stage
Spanwise Blade Geometry
4.6
Force Components
Circulation
5.0
AXIAL-FLOW TURBINES
5.1
5.2
5.3
Introduction
Idealized Stage Geometry and Aerodynamic Performance
Empirical Performance Predictions
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.3.3
6.0
Introduction
Idealized Stage Characteristics
Empirical Performance Predictions
6.3.1
6.3.2
6.3.3
6.3.4
6.3.5
6.3.6
7.0
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Appendix F:
Introduction
Static Stability
Dynamic Stability - Surge
Curve and Surface Fits for Howells Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades
C4 Compressor Blade Profiles
Curve and Surface Fits for NASA SP-36 Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades
NACA 65-Series Compressor Blade Profiles
Curve and Surface Fits for Kacker & Okapuu Loss System for Axial Turbines
Centrifugal Stresses in Axial Turbomachinery Blades
The following two, relatively short books were written by the man who subsequently helped to
found the Whittle Turbomachinery Laboratory at Cambridge University. He spent a number of
years as its Director. Good discussion of the design techniques which were current at the time
(and which still play a part in the early stages of design). Lots of practical engineering
information. They remain in-print thanks to an American publisher who specializes in reprinting
classic technical books which remain of value.
J.H. Horlock, Axial Flow Compressors, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics, Butterworth, London,
1958, (reprinted by Krieger).
J.H. Horlock, Axial Flow Turbines, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics, Butterworth, 1966, (reprinted
by Krieger).
The next book is by a more recent Director of the Whittle Laboratory. In the Preface he explicitly
disclaims any intention to present design information. However, it presents a detailed, relatively
up-to-date discussion of the physics of the flow in axial compressors, which is still very useful.
N.A. Cumpsty, Compressor Aerodynamics, Longman, Harlow, 1989.
The following book on radial machines (both compressors and turbines) is also published
published by Longman, like Cumpsty and Cohen, Rodgers & Saravanamuttoo. It is the least
satisfactory of the three, and is apparently going out of print. Nevertheless, worth being aware of
since most other available books on radial turbomachinery are quite old and rather out-of-date.
A. Whitfield and N.C. Baines, Design of Radial Turbomachines, Longman, Harlow, 1990.
To the extent that they present design information, the books by Horlock and Cumpsty reflect
largely British practice. The North American approach to axial compressor design was developed
by NASA (then called NACA) through the 1940's and 50's. The results are summarized in the
famous SP-36, and many axial compressors continue to be designed according to it.
NASA SP-36, Aerodynamic Design of Axial Compressors, 1956.
AGARD, the scientific arm of NATO, organizes conferences, lecture series and specialist courses
on many aerospace engineering topics, including turbomachinery aerodynamics. The following
are two particularly useful publications which have come out of this activity.
A.S. Ucer, P. Stow and Ch. Hirsch eds., Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics of Turbomachinery,
Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, Vol. I and II, 1985.
AGARD-LS-167, Blading Design for Axial Turbomachines, 1989.
Gases
Incompressible flow
Pumps
Liquids
Compressors
Gases
Compressible flow
Propellers
Both
Both
lift force
L
=
List all the independent physical variables that control the flow of interest (based on experience,
judgment, physical insight etc.). For example, consider again the airfoil flow. Assume that the flow
is compressible and the working fluid is a perfect gas.
For a particular airfoil shape, the flow is completely determined by:
c - chord
- angle of attack
U - freestream velocity
- fluid density
- fluid viscosity
R - gas constant
a - speed of sound
P = RT
a = RT
D
M
c
Thus, by specifying a, and R, we have implicitly specified T. Similarly, with and R specified, and
T implicitly specified, then P is implicitly specified through the perfect gas law. Therefore, for our
particular choice of independent variables, P and T are just dependent variables. All other quantities,
such as the lift, L, and drag, D, likewise depend uniquely on the values of the independent variables.
(2)
Then
n=8
r = 4 (M, L, T, )
(n - r) = 4
ie. there are 4 criteria of similarity
LT
M
L
L
3
M
T
L
U c
U
a
Mach number , M
Thus, for the airfoil 4 suitable criteria of similarity are: Re, M, , and . If these are matched between
two geometrically similar airfoils, the two flows will be dynamically similar.
(3)
All other non-dimensional ratios are then functions of the criteria of similarity.
Take each dependent variable in turn and non-dimensionalize it using the independent variables.
eg. for the drag of airfoil (per unit span), D
1
U2
1
=
c 1
L
L3
T2 M
T2
L2
1
LL
then C D = f ( Re, M , , )
D
U 2 c
or
D
1
U 2 c
2
( CD )
Similarly for all other dependent non-dimensional ratios (CL, Cm, etc.).
Any non-dimensional ratios we develop could also be combined, by multiplication, division etc., to
form other valid non-dimensional ratios. This does not provide any new information, simply a rearrangement
of known information. However, the resulting ratios may be useful alternative ways of looking at the
information. For example, for the airfoil, having derived CD and CL then
CL
CD
L
D
2.2
APPLICATION TO TURBOMACHINERY
2.2.1
For now, consider just pumps, fans, and blowers. Hydraulic turbines will be discussed briefly in
Section 2.4.
D
Q
W&
Q
For a given geometry, the independent variables that determine performance are usually taken as
.
D N (or ) Q-
Note that the choice of independent variables is somewhat arbitrary. One way to visualize what are
possible independent variables and what are dependent variables is to imagine a test being conducted on the
machine in the laboratory. The variables which, when set, fully determine the operating point of the machine
is then one possible set of independent variables. In the laboratory test, one might set the rotational speed (by
controlling the drive motor) and the flow rate (by throttling at the inlet or outlet ducts). With N and Q set, the
head or pressure rise produced or power absorbed are then dependent functions of the characteristics of the
machine. Alternatively, if the throttling valve is adjusted to produce a particular pressure rise, then we lose
control over the flow rate and it becomes a dependent variable. The independent variables listed above are the
most common choices for incompressible flow machines that raise the pressure of the fluid. All other
variables are then dependent. For example
H W& T -
total head rise across machine (or sometimes, total pressure rise)
shaft power absorbed by the machine
torque absorbed by the machine
efficiency of the machine
H = f 1 ( D, N , Q, , )
W& = f 2 ( D, N , Q, , ) etc.
Applying Buckingham Theorem:
n=5
Flow rate:
1
N
L3
T
1
1
D
N D3
1
L3
N DD
=
N D2
All other non-dimensional ratios or coefficients then depend on these two criteria of similarity.
For power coefficient (non-dimensional work per unit time)
W&
1
N3
M L2
2
T
T
then
W&
N 3 D5
T3
1
=
L3
M
1
D5
W&
N 3 D5
1
L5
Q N D2
,
f
3
ND
Next consider the total head rise, H, across the machine. By definition, the total head H is given by
P V2
+
+z
g 2g
= static head + dynamic head + elevation head
H=
and H can be interpreted physically as the mechanical energy content per unit weight. However, the energy
content is more commonly expressed on a per unit mass basis:
g H = mechanical energy per unit mass
g H
L
T
T2
1
1
D
g H
N 2 D2
1
L2
Sometimes the head rise H is simply written H. As with the power coefficient, the head coefficient is a
dependent function of the two criteria of similarity:
gH
or 2 2
N D
g H
N 2 D2
Q N D2
,
f
3
ND
The g is also sometimes dropped to give H/N2D2, but the head coefficient is then dimensional and will take
different values in different systems of units.
A corresponding total pressure coefficient can be obtained from
g H
2
N D
g H
N 2 D2
P0
N 2 D2
Using the conventional definitions, efficiency is already non-dimensional. For pumps, fan and
blowers, the efficiency is usually defined as:
pump
fluid power
shaft power
and
fluid power = mass flow rate mechanical energy change per unit mass
Thus
m&
Qg H
pump
gH
Qg H
W&
Q g H
N D3 N 2 D2
=
W&
N 3 D5
=
turb
=
=
shaft power
W&
=
fluid power
Qg H
Power Coefficient
Flow Coefficient Head Coefficient
2.2.2
g H
W&
,
, , etc. =
N 2 D2 N 3 D5
Q
N D2
fns
,
N D3
Q
fns
, Re
3
ND
The flow in most turbomachines is highly turbulent. Therefore, most frictional effects are due to
turbulent mixing. Viscosity has a minor direct effect and losses tend to vary slowly with Re: recall from the
Moody chart that in pipe flow the friction factor varies much more slowly with Re for turbulent flow than for
laminar flow. Thus, if the Reynolds numbers are high and the differences in Re are not too large between the
machines being compared, Re is often neglected as a criterion of similarity. We can then use, as an
approximation
g H
W&
,
, , etc. =
N 2 D 2 N 3 D5
Q
fns
only
3
ND
Where Re variations can not be neglected, a number of empirical relations have been proposed for
correcting for the effect of Re on efficiency. These corrections typically take the form
1 P Re M
=
1 M Re P
(1)
where ReM is the smaller of the two values of the Reynolds number and n varies with the type of machine and
Reynolds number level. For example, the ASME Power Test Code (PTC-10, 1965) suggests the following
values:
n = 0.1 for centrifugal compressors
n = 0.2 for axial compressors
if ReM$ 105, where Re = ND2/< (ie. the tip Reynolds number). Note that (1) indicates that efficiency improves
with increasing Re.
2.2.3
Q
f
(neglecting Re)
3
ND
imply that if we test a family of geometrically-similar, incompressible-flow machines (different sizes, different
speeds etc.), the resulting data will fall on a single line if expressed in non-dimensional form. For example, the
non-dimensional coefficients for a pump of fan might appear as follows (we will discuss later why the curves
will have the particular trends shown):
Coefficients
W&
N 3 D 5
gH
N 2 D2
Q
N D3
The thick curves are used to suggest variations which could be due to the neglected Re effects, and perhaps
some secondary effects which were not included in the original list of independent parameters (e.g. mild
compressibility effects for a fan or blower). The dashed line indicates the likely "design point": the preferred
operating point, since the efficiency is best there.
Because of the universality of the performance curves, the tests could be conducted for a single
machine and the results used to predict the performance of geometrically similar machines of different sizes,
different operating speeds, and even with different working fluids.
Note again that there is flexibility in the choice of dependent and independent parameters. See P.S. #1
Q 1 for the form of non-dimensional parameters which are often used for hydraulic turbines.
2.2.4
We now develop the criteria of similarity for compressible-flow turbomachines. Assuming the
working fluid is a perfect gas, a suitable list of independent variables which control performance is as follows:
a 01 P01
N , D, m& , or , or , , R,
T01 01
where
m& = mass flow rate (rather than Q as measure of flow rate)
a 01 = RT01
(perfect gas)
r=4
(M, L, T, )
n - r = 4 (4 criteria of similarity)
ND
a 01
(2)
m&
01 D 2 a 01
(3)
D 1
N D2
=
or we could use 01
again
m&
Re
(4) =
Cp
Cv
All other performance coefficients are then functions of these four coefficients (as always, geometrical
similarity is assumed).
P02
P01
Then
ND
m&
,
, Re, (1)
fns
2
a 01 01 a 01 D
P02
W&
,
, , etc. =
P01 01 N 3 D 5
The form of the independent coefficients used here is very general. The main assumption that has
been made is that the working fluid is a perfect gas. We can make use of some of the perfect gas expressions
to rewrite the independent parameters in a somewhat more convenient form:
(1) Speed coefficient:
ND
a 01
ND
RT01
D
T01 R
m&
01 a 01 D 2
m&
P01
RT01 D 2
RT01
m& T01
P01
R 1
D2
P02
W&
, , etc. =
,
P01 01 N 3 D 5
N
fns
T01
m& T01
P01
R 1
, Re,
2
D
(2)
This is the form of the parameters that is appropriate for the most general case, where we are relating the
performance of geometrically-similar, compressible-flow turbomachines of different sizes and operating with
different working fluids (both of which are perfect gases).
In practice, the parameters are often simplified somewhat according to specific circumstances.
In many cases, the same working fluid (eg. air) will be used for both the model and prototype. Thus,
R and are often known constants and it is somewhat tedious continually to have to include them in the
calculation of the coefficients. If we then omit the known, constant fluid properties we can write:
P02
W&
,
, , etc. =
P01 01 N 3 D 5
N D m& T01
fns
,
, Re
2
T01 P01 D
(3)
This form of the coefficients is suitable for relating geometrically-similar machines with different sizes but
with the same working fluid. Note that by assuming the same working fluid, we have reduced the number of
criteria of similarity by one. The main disadvantage to this form of the coefficients is that the speed and flow
coefficients are now dimensional and we must specify what system of units we are working in.
If the performance curves are intended to represent the performance of a particular machine operating
at different inlet conditions, then D is a known constant and is often omitted:
P02
W&
,
, , etc. =
P01 01 N 3 D 5
N m& T01
fns
,
, Re
P01
T01
(4)
This is the form of the independent coefficients typically used to present the performance characteristics of the
compressors and turbines for gas turbine engines.
As with incompressible-flow machines, it is sometimes possible to neglect Re as a criterion of
similarity (by the same arguments used in Section 2.2.2). Note that the speed and flow coefficients are again
dimensional.
2.2.5
If we can neglect the Reynolds number effects, Eqns. (3) and (4) indicate that our performance curves
will take the form:
P02
P01
ND m
& T01
,
f 1
2
T01 P01 D
etc.
Thus, whereas our performance tests for the incompressible-flow machines led to a single curve for each
dependent performance coefficient, for compressible-flow machines we will obtain a family of curves.
The resulting performance diagrams for compressible-flow compressors and turbines would then look
as follows (again, we will discuss the reasons for the detailed shape of the characteristics later in the course):
(a) Compressor ("Compressor Map")
P02
P01
LINE OF CONSTANT
ND
SURGE LINE
(UPPER LIMIT OF
STABLE OPERATION)
T01
CHOKING
ND
INCREASING
T01
& T01
m
P01D 2
Implicitly, this map applies for one value of some reference Reynolds number. If the effects of Re can not be
neglected, then we would have to generate a series of such graphs, each one containing the performance data
for a different value of the reference Re.
STATORS CHOKED
LINES OF CONSTANT
ND
T01
& T01
m
P01D 2
In a gas turbine engine, the pressure ratio developed by the compressor is applied across the turbine at
the hot end of the engine. The mass flow rate swallowed by the turbine and its power output are then
dependent functions of the turbine characteristics. That is, as far as the turbine is concerned the pressure ratio
is imposed and is effectively an independent parameter. When presenting performance data, we generally plot
independent parameters on the x axis and dependent parameters on the y axis, as was done on the
compressor map. By this argument, the turbine characteristic should be presented as:
& T01
m
P01D 2
CONSTANT
ND
T01
P02
P01
and this is in fact the way turbine characteristics are generally presented in the gas turbine business.
2.3
The performance diagrams discussed in the earlier sections present a wide range of conditions at
which the machine can operate. For example, the compressor in the last section can operate stably at any point
to the right of the surge line. The precise point at which a turbomachine actually operates depends on the load
to which it is connected.
(a)
The simplest case is a compressor or pump connected to a passive load (e.g. pipe line with valves,
elbows etc.). At the steady-state operating point we must have:
(1)
Qmachine = Qload (or, for compressible flow, m& machine = m& load )
(2)
& , characteristics
Thus, the operating point is where the machine and load H vs Q , or P0 vs m
intersect.
e.g. Suppose a pump is supplying flow to a pipe line. The head drop along the pipe varies with V2
(or Q2), as determined from the friction factor (e.g. Moody chart) and the loss coefficients of any other
components in the pipe system. The resulting H vs Q variation is known as the load line for the
system. The head rise produce by the pump is a function of the flow rate and the rotational speed.
Then if the pump is run at N1, the operating point will be A, etc.
H
LOAD LINE
PUMP CHARACTERISTICS
AT CONSTANT SPEED
B
N3
A
N2
N1
(b)
For a gas turbine engine, the operating points of the compressor and turbine are determined by
compressor/turbine matching conditions (a propulsion nozzle will also influence operating points - see
Saravanamuttoo et al., Ch. 8 & 9).
& fuel
m
COMBUSTOR
W& C
COMPRESSOR
&C
m
W& out
TURBINE
&T
m
For the simple shaft-power engine shown, the matching conditions would be:
m& T
NC
W&
NT
= W& C + W& out
(c)
In hydro-power installations, total head across the turbine is imposed by the difference in elevation
between reservoir and tailwater pond (minus any losses in the penstock). Since
W& T = T gQ H
to produce varying power (according to electrical demand), it is necessary to vary the equilibrium Q, at fixed
H. Furthermore, since the electricity must be generated at fixed frequency, we do not have the option of
varying N to achieve different operating points. The solution to this is to vary the geometry of the machine.
This can be done with variable inlet guide vanes or with variable rotor blade pitch.
H
1
LOAD LINE
NEGLECTING FRICTION
LOAD LINE
INCLUDING FRICTION
VALVE K = 1, K=10
K = 0.9
K = 0.9
K = 0.9
K = 1 (EXIT LO SS)
K = 0.9
6 m.
WATER
K = 0.9
PUMP
Pipe diameter:
dpipe := 50
Pipe length:
L := 125
Viscosity (water):
:= 10
mm
(smooth)
m
m2/s
The pump has the characteristics shown in the plot, and the following information applies to the
pump:
Pump speed:
Flow coefficient:
N := 1750 RPM
Q
3
3
N D
Head coefficient:
Pump Characteristics
D := 30 cm
g H
2 2
N D
Head Coefficient
Pump diameter:
0.002
0.004
0.006
Flow Coefficient
0.008
0.01
2.4
FAMILY B
FAMILY A
only
f
3
ND
Q
ND3
Thus, the maximum 0 will occur for this family (say family A) at some particular value of Q/ND3. For
another family of machines, the maximum 0 might occur at a different value of Q/ND3. We could therefore
classify turbomachines according to the value of Q/ND3 at which they produce the best efficiency. Then if we
knew the value of Q/ND3 that we required in a given application, we would choose the machine that gives the
best value of efficiency at that value of Q/ND3. Unfortunately, this idea presupposes that we know the
diameter of the machine. In general, this will not be the case. We therefore look for an alternative parameter
to Q/ND3 that does not involve the size of the machine to use as a basis for classifying families of
turbomachines.
We can always form valid new non-dimensional parameters by combining existing ones. Combine
the flow and head coefficients to eliminate D:
1
Q 2
3
ND
g H
2 2
N D
3
4
NQ 2
3
( g H ) 4
Q2
( g H )
3
4
where T is in radians/s so that S is truly non-dimensional. Conceptually, we could then plot the efficiencies
of various families of turbomachines against S (rather than Q/ND3) and note the value of S at which each
family achieves its best 0. This value of S is known as the specific speed for that family of machines. The
next figure (taken from Csanady) shows the values of specific speed that are observed for various types of
turbomachines:
A number of more detailed summaries of specific speed have been presented over the years.
Unfortunately, the non-dimensional form of the specific speed has not been used consistently. The following
table can be used to convert between the various definitions used:
AREA OF APPLICATION
FANS, BLOWERS AND
COMPRESSORS
(BRITISH UNITS)
SPECIFIC SPEED
N S1 =
RPM cfs
EQUIVALENT S
N S1
129
N S2
2730
N S3
42
ft 4
PUMPS
(AMERICAN
MANUFACTURERS)
HYDRAULIC TURBINES
(BRITISH UNITS)
N S2 =
RPM USgpm
ft
N S3 =
RPM HP
ft
HYDRAULIC TURBINES
(METRIC UNITS)
N S4 =
3
4
5
4
RPM metric HP
N S5 =
m4
FANS, BLOWERS AND
COMPRESSORS
(METRIC UNITS)
RPM m 3 s
3
N S4
187
N S5
53
m4
Several plots showing the specific speeds for various classes of machines are given on the next pages.
In addition to giving the values of specific speed, the plots can also be used for initial estimates of the
efficiencies that can be expected. These efficiencies apply for machines that are well-designed, correctly sized
for their applications, and operating at their design points.
Hydraulic turbines are usually characterized according to their output power rather than the flow rate.
Since shaft power output is related to the flow rate by
W& t = t Qg H
( g H )
3
4
W&
5
( g H ) 4
In practice, 0, D and g are usually dropped, and T is replaced by N (usually in RPM). Thus, the "power
specific speed" normally used with hydraulic turbines is
NS =
N W&
5
H 4
The following figure (from Shepherd, 1956) shows the variation of the power specific speed for hydraulic
turbines of different geometries.
The plots shown above were based on data that is as much as 50 years old. One might expect that
over time the efficiency of all types of machines would improve as a result of the application improved design
tools such as computational fluid dynamics. This is illustrated in the following figure which shows the
variation of efficiency with specific speed for compressors. The baseline data, taken from Shepherd (1956),
dates from 1948 or earlier. Japikse & Baines (1994) compared more recent compressor data with the plot from
Shepherd and concluded that efficiencies had improved noticeably since Shepherds time. They also projected
that there would be further improvements by 2000, as shown in the figure.
0.9
Axial-Flow
Machines
Efficiency,
0.8
0.7
0.6
Centrifugal
Machines
Positive-Displacement
Machines
0.5
0.4 1
10
10
20
40
60
2
80 10
100
200
Specific Speed, N S
400
600
1000
103
2.5
The selection starts from the required duty: the conditions at which it is intended to operate:
For pumps, compressors
For turbines
In practice, a precise value of N may not be known, but it is often constrained to specific values by the fact
that, for example, electrical motors come with certain maximum speeds according to the number of poles.
There may also be mechanical constraints (e.g. maximum tip speed, because of centrifugal stress
considerations). Often the selection process will involve varying the speed to get a specific speed which
results in good efficiency.
From the duty, one can work out the specific speed and then use the figures in Sec. 2.4 to select an
appropriate type of machine. However, the efficiencies shown on the figures will be achieved only if the
machine is well-designed and correctly sized. Size is important because:
(a) if machine is too small: high flow velocities, and since frictional losses vary as 0.5DV2 (and with
gases, shocks can occur), the efficiency will be poor;
(b) if machine is too big: low velocities, low Reynolds numbers, boundary layers will be thick and
may separate, again reducing the efficiency; also, machine will be expensive.
In Sect 2.4, we noted that for a given family of machines the peak 0 occurs for a particular Q/ND3. In effect,
having chosen a suitable machine, knowing Q and N, we want to pick D to get the appropriate Q/ND3.
However, efficiency data for turbomachines has not in fact been correlated in this form. Instead of using
Q/ND3, we define a new parameter, the "specific size" ):
1
D( g H ) 4
Q
The specific size for a given machine is then the value of ) at which it achieves its best efficiency. The value
of ) depends on the machine type (i.e. S) and to some degree on its detailed design. However, in the early
1950s Cordier examined the data for a wide range of well-designed, actual machines, and found that )
correlated quite well with S alone: the correlation is summarized in the Cordier diagram (see over).
Summarizing:
To get best efficiency for a specified duty:
(1) Select the machine type such that its S is
Q
=
3
( g H ) 4
duty
(2) From S, read ) from the Cordier diagram and size the machine such that
1
4
D
g
H
(
)
duty
2.5
The selection starts from the required duty: the conditions at which it is intended to operate:
For pumps, compressors
For turbines
In practice, a precise value of N may not be known, but it is often constrained to specific values by the fact
that, for example, electrical motors come with certain maximum speeds according to the number of poles.
There may also be mechanical constraints (e.g. maximum tip speed, because of centrifugal stress
considerations). Often the selection process will involve varying the speed to get a specific speed which
results in good efficiency.
From the duty, one can work out the specific speed and then use the figures in Section 2.4 to select an
appropriate type of machine. However, the efficiencies shown on the figures will be achieved only if the
machine is well-designed and correctly sized. Size is important because:
(a) if machine is too small: there will be high flow velocities, and since frictional losses vary as
0.5DV2 (and with gases, shocks can occur), the efficiency will be poor;
(b) if machine is too big: there will be low flow velocities, low Reynolds numbers, boundary layers
will be thick and may separate, again reducing the efficiency; also, the machine will be expensive.
In Section 2.4, we noted that for a given family of machines the peak 0 occurs for a particular Q/ND3. In
effect, having chosen a suitable machine, knowing Q and N, we want to pick D to get the appropriate Q/ND3.
However, efficiency data for turbomachines has not in fact been correlated in this form. Instead of using
Q/ND3, we define a new parameter, the "specific size" ):
1
D( g H ) 4
Q
The specific size for a given machine is then the value of ) at which it achieves its best efficiency. The value
of ) depends on the machine type (i.e. S) and to some degree on its detailed design. However, in the early
1950s Cordier examined the data for a wide range of well-designed, actual machines, and found that )
correlated quite well with S alone: the correlation is summarized in the Cordier diagram (see over).
Summarizing:
To get best efficiency for a specified duty:
(1) Select the machine type such that its S is
Q
=
3
( g H ) 4
duty
(2) From S, read ) from the Cordier diagram and size the machine such that
1
D( g H ) 4
duty
2.6
CAVITATION
If the local absolute static pressure falls below the vapour pressure of a liquid, it will boil, forming
vapour cavities or bubbles. This is known as cavitation. When the bubbles collapse, brief, very high forces
are created which can cause rapid erosion of metal surfaces. Cavitation will also cause significant
performance deterioration. Thus, cavitation should be avoided.
Cavitation is a danger on the low-pressure ("suction") side of the machine: the inlet for pumps, the
outlet for turbines.
Define the Net Positive Suction Head (NPSH):
H sv = H abs hv
where Habs is the absolute total head at the suction side of the machine, defined as
P
V2
H abs = abs +
2g suction side
g
where Pabs is the absolute value of the static pressure and V is the fluid velocity, both on the lower pressure or
suction side of the machine. hv is the head corresponding to the vapour pressure of the liquid,
hv =
Pvap
Note: Habs is not the usual total head H since it does not include the elevation term. In fact Habs = P0/g.
At the minimum pressure point on the suction side of the machine, the local static head will be less than the
total head, Habs, but directly related to it. Thus, the onset of cavitation will occur for some critical, positive
value of Hsv.
1
2
P01
1
V 12
2
P1
P01
1
V 22
2
gH SV
P2
P1
Pv
Pv
f (T )
1
V 22
2
P2
gH SV
critical
S=
Q
3
( gH sv ) 4
For a given machine there will then be some critical value of S ( = Si, i for cavitation inception),
corresponding to the critical value of Hsv, at which cavitation will start. If
S < Si
then there is no cavitation. The higher the value of Si, the more resistant the machine is to cavitation.
The value of Si can be found experimentally by holding Q and N constant (i.e. Q/ND3 constant) while
reducing the pressure on the suction side of the machine and observing the H or behaviour. For example,
for a pump a valve in the intake pipe can be used to reduce gradually the inlet total head while an outlet valve
can be used to maintain the constant the flow rate. Plot the results versus the resulting values of S:
Q
ND 3
INCEPTION
Si
At cavitation inception, the blade passages fill with vapour and H and drop drastically.
The value of Si depends in the detailed design of the machine (e.g. surface curvatures in the lowpressure section of the blade passage). However, for machines which have been properly designed to avoid
cavitation it has been found that the values of Si are fairly similar:
For pumps:
For turbines:
Si . 2.5 - 3.5
Si . 3.5 - 5.0
H sv
crit
where H sv crit is the critical value of H sv : that is, the value at cavitation inception. However, the value of
will vary with the details of the design of the machine. This can be illustrated by considering two pump
impellers that have identical inlet geometries:
2
1
D2
D1
If the pumps are run at the same rotational speeds and flow rates, the flow in the inlet region will be identical.
Thus, they should cavitate at the same values of Hsv. Then since
S=
Q
3
( gH sv ) 4
it follows that the two machines have the same critical value of S: Si1 = Si2. However, the two rotors do not
have the same value of H. In fact, the larger rotor will produce a significantly larger H because of its
higher tip speed (H varies as (ND)2, as implied by the form of the head coefficient; see also later sections).
Thus, at cavitation
1 =
H sv
crit ,1
H1
> 2 =
H sv
crit ,2
H 2
since H1 < H2. Consequently, the Thoma parameter should be used only within a geometrically-similar
family of machines. For example, a critical value of determined from model tests can be used to predict the
conditions for the onset of cavitation in another member of the same family.
Since cavitation is a significant danger to the machine, checking for cavitation should be a normal
part of selecting a hydraulic machine for a particular duty.
EXAMPLE (Section 2.6): In Section 2.5 we selected a hydraulic turbine for the following service: W =
1000kW, H = 6 m. An axial-flow (propeller or Kaplan) turbine was chosen, with a diameter of 2.7 m, a flow
rate of 18.9 m3/sec and running at 180 RPM. What is the maximum height above the tailwater level that this
turbine can be installed if cavitation is to be avoided? The draft tube is a length of diffusing duct at the exit
of the turbine. Assume that the draft tube has an outlet area of 6 m2 and the outlet is 3 m below the turbine.
The water is at 20 oC for which Pv = 2.3 kPa. Patm = 101.3 kPa. Assume that the tailpond is large
compared with the draft tube outlet so that the flow is effectively being dumped into a very large reservoir at
the draft tube outlet.
6m
3m
TAIL POND
&
m
&
m
W& shaft
Q&
For steady flow, conservation of energy can be written
Rate of energy flow into CV + Rate of energy addition inside = Rate of energy flow out of CV
dm&
If the energy content is the same for all fluid entering or leaving the CV (or using mean values) SFEE can be
written
(1)
m&
E
Q&
W& shaft
The energy content of the fluid includes thermal and mechanical components:
P C2
= u + +
+ gz
2
thermal + mechanical
=h+
where
u
P/
C
C2/2
gz
h
=
=
=
=
=
=
C2
+ gz
2
(2)
For a turbomachine at steady state, the flow is essentially adiabatic, Q& = 0 . For gases, we usually
neglect potential energy changes. Then SFEE can be written
C2
C2
= m& h2 + 2 h1 + 1
2
2
W& shaft
where
(3a)
C2
= stagnation enthalpy
2
= C P T0 for perfect gases
= h+
h0
(3b)
For incompressible flow , temperature (i.e. internal energy, u) changes only due to frictional heating,
since is constant and we have already assumed the process is adiabatic. In order to separate the frictional
effects from other effects, we retain the internal energy separate from the flow work:
W& shaft
m&
P
C2
P C2
= or u2 + 2 + 2 + gz 2 u1 + 1 + 1 + gz1
2
2
(4)
u2 u1
= H L = " total head loss" due to friction inside the machine
g
The total head is a measure of the total mechanical energy content of the fluid
= total head
P
C2
+
+z
g 2g
Then for an incompressible-flow compression machine (eg. a pump or blower) (4) can be written
W& shaft
Q g ( H 2 H1 + H L )
Q g H + Q g H L
(5)
H = H2 - H1 is the total head rise that appears in the fluid between the inlet and outlet of the machine. It is
the H which was used in the head coefficient, (gH/N2D2), and QgH is what was referred to earlier as the
fluid power.
pump =
then
fluid power
shaft power
QgH
QgH + QgH L
1
=
H
1+ L
H
pump =
(6)
As shown later, we have ways to estimate the various contributions to HL (eg. frictional losses at the walls vary
as V2). We can then use (6) to estimate the resulting efficiency of the machine.
For incompressible-flow expansion machines (i.e. turbines),
W& shaft
= Q g H Q g H L
since the friction inside the machine now reduces the shaft power output compared with the fluid power
released by the fluid, as given by QgH. We then define turbine efficiency
turbine
3.2
ANGULAR-MOMENTUM EQUATION
The energy transfer between the fluid and the machine occurs by tangential forces exerted on the fluid
as it interacts with the rotor blades. Although forces are also exerted between the fluid and the stators
(stationary blades), no energy transfer occurs since there is no displacement associated with the forces - thus,
stators can only redistribute energy among its components.
The angular form of Newtons second law (the angular-momentum equation) governs the interaction
(see earlier courses for derivation):
out
&
r C dm
in
&
r C dm
rC
out
where
r =
Cw =
& rC w dm
&
dm
in
(7)
3.3
ROTOR
U
(+)
()
(+)
C
U
W
STATORS
()
C
W
U
= absolute velocity
= relative velocity (as seen in the rotating frame of reference)
= blade circumferential speed ( = r)
Subscripts:
a
r
w
Angles:
= absolute velocity
= stator blade metal angles
= relative velocity
= rotor blade metal angles
The datum for all angles is the main flow direction: axial in axial-flow machines, radial in radial-flow
machines.
Sign conventions: The question of signs only arises with reference to velocity components and
angles in the tangential direction. Unfortunately, there is not much consistency in the use of signs in the
turbomachinery literature. When needed, we will use the following conventions:
(i) Tangential components of velocity are positive if they are in the same direction as the blade speed, U.
(ii) The signs of angles are consistent with the sign convention for the tangential velocity components.
The torque applied to the fluid as it passes through the rotor is given by (7):
rC
dm& rC w dm&
(7)
The torque is supplied at the shaft, transmitted through the disk and blades, and applied by the blades to the
fluid in the form of a tangential force. The corresponding shaft power is
W& shaft = T
and multiplying through by in (7)
= UC
rC
&
w dm
&
w dm
(8)
UC w dm&
h dm& h dm& = UC
0
&
w dm
UC
&
w dm
(9)
If we approximate the flow quantities by their mean values, then we can write
h02 h01
= U 2 C w2 U 1C w1
(10)
g ( H 2 H1 + H L ) = U 2 C w 2 U 2 C w 2
and letting H = H2 - H1 (the total head rise seen across the machine) and HE = H2 - H1 + HL = H + HL
(the "Euler head") then
g H E = U 2 C w2 U 1 Cw1
(11)
Eqns. 9-11 are versions of the famous Euler Pump and Turbine Equation (or Euler Equation). The
Euler equation is the fundamental equation of turbomachinery design. It relates the specification (for example,
the head rise required) to the blade speed of the machine and the changes in flow velocity that it must produce
to achieve the required performance. As described later, these changes in flow velocity are directly related to
the rotational speed and geometry (eg. blade shapes, etc.) of the machine.
Note that the Euler equation involves the full energy transfer between the machine and the fluid,
including the energy that will be dissipated in overcoming friction. For a pump
H E =
pump
H will be specified to the designer. But from eqn. (11), HE is needed to determine the flow turning
(change in UCw) which will achieve the required H. Thus, to design the machine we need to know its
efficiency. As a result, the design process becomes iterative.
3.4
We now examine in more detail the process of energy transfer within the rotor. Recall that
absolute velocity = relative velocity + velocity of moving reference frame
C =W +U
The drawing shows a hypothetical velocity diagram at outlet (station 2) for the generalized rotor (a
similar diagram could be drawn for station 1)
W& shaft
m&
= g H E = h0 = U 2 C w2 U 1C w1
(12)
We then rewrite the velocity terms on the RHS in terms of the velocity vectors in the drawing
(a)
and similarly for the relative velocity (the components are not labelled on the figure to avoid clutter)
C22 C w2 2 = W22 U 22 + 2U 2 C w2 C w2 2
(b)
Then
U 2 C w2 =
1 2
C2 + U 22 W22
2
U 1 C w1 =
1 2
C1 + U 12 W12
2
W& shaft
m&
= g H E = h0 =
((
) (
) (
1
C22 C12 + U 22 U 12 + W12 W22
2
(1)
( 2)
(3)
))
(13)
Note that (13) is another (and useful) version of the Euler Equation.
Now consider the physical interpretation of the three terms on the RHS of (13).
1 2
C2 C12 is clearly the kinetic energy change of the fluid across the rotor. In a pump,
2
blower or compressor, the kinetic energy of the fluid normally increases across the rotor. Some of this kinetic
energy can be converted to static pressure rise in a subsequent diffuser or set of stators.
Term (1),
To see the physical meaning of the other two terms, apply the SFEE between the inlet and outlet of
the rotor again, assuming adiabatic flow and neglecting potential energy changes:
P C2
C2
= m& 2 + 2 + u2
2
Substitute for W& shaft from the Euler Eqn., (13), and solve for the static pressure rise through the rotor passage
P2 P1
1
1
U 22 U 12 + W12 W22 (u2 u1 )
2
2
(14)
Equation (14) shows that there is some direct compression (or expansion) work done inside the rotor blade
passage and it is associated with the changes in U and W that the fluid experiences as it passes through the
rotor. Note that if there is friction present, u2 > u1, and this reduces the pressure rise that would be achieved by
a compression machine, as one would expect.
1 2
U 2 U 12 is then energy transfer to the fluid due to the centrifugal compression (or
2
expansion) of the fluid as it passes through the rotor ("centrifugal energy" change). The rotation of the fluid
imposed by the rotor results in a radial pressure gradient to balance the centrifugal forces on the fluid particles.
Term (2),
For example, consider a centrifugal pump or compressor rotor for the limiting case where there is no
flow (say that a valve has been closed in the discharge duct). The fluid particles trapped inside the rotor travel
in circular paths. The force required to give the corresponding acceleration towards the axis of rotation is
supplied by the radial pressure gradient that is set up in the rotor.
(+)
F
2
(-)
P2 P1
1
U 22 U 12
2
Thus, a radial machine will produce a pressure rise even for no flow. The delivery pressure for this case is
sometimes known as the shut-off head.
When there is flow, the fluid particles that move through the radial pressure field will likewise be
compressed (or expanded) and the corresponding work per unit mass is accounted for by term (2) in Eqn. (13).
1 2
W1 W22 represents the change in pressure energy due to the change in fluid velocity
2
relative the rotor. Consider the flow in a the rotor-blade passage of an axial compressor. Neglecting friction
(u2 = u1) and if the stream tube is at constant radius (so that U1 = U2) then from Eqn. (14)
Term (3),
1
P2 P1 = W12 W22
2
(15)
W2
W1
U
Note that the pressure rise along the rotor blade passage can cause separation of the blade boundary
layers and therefore stalling of the airfoils. We therefore find it necessary to limit the change in W that we
permit in a given blade passage.
Summarizing:
(a) Term (1) in Eqn. (13) represents the change in kinetic energy (dynamic pressure) of the fluid due
to the work done on it in the rotor.
(b) Terms (2) and (3) represent the direct static pressure changes (compression or expansion work)
which occur inside the rotor.
In general, all three components of energy transfer will tend to be present in all rotors. However, for
axial rotors the centrifugal compression tends to be small (since U1 U2 for every streamtube that passes
through the rotor), whereas it is large in radial rotors.
3.5
A turbomachinery stage generally consists of two blade rows, a rotor and a set of stators:
A compressor stage normally has a rotor followed by a row of stators. As noted in 3.4, some
static pressure rise can occur inside the rotor. The stators can produce a further static
pressure rise by reducing the fluid velocity.
A turbine stage normally has a row of stators ("inlet guide vanes" or "nozzles") followed by a
rotor. The nozzles impart swirl to the flow, accelerating it and thus causing a static pressure
drop. The rotor then extracts energy from the fluid by removing the swirl. This may be
accompanied by a further static pressure drop inside the rotor.
Consider a thin streamtube passing through an axial compressor stage (say near the mean radius):
We then draw a hypothetical set of velocity vectors as they might appear in the axial plane:
Note that the inlet flow has been assumed to have some swirl (1 0.0). Therefore, there must be
another stage or a set of inlet guide vanes ahead of the present stage. The stators have also been shaped to
give a stage outlet flow vector equal to the inlet vector (C3 = C1). This is sometimes referred to as a normal
stage.
Even for an axial stage, as the flow passes through the stage, the streamtube may vary slightly in
radius. Thus, in general U1 U2. Also, due to the density changes and changes in the cross-sectional area of
the annulus, the axial velocity at different locations may vary (Ca1 Ca2). However, across a given axial rotor
blade, the radial shift in any given streamline tends to be quite small. For reasons discussed later, it is also
undesirable to have the axial velocity change significantly along the machine. The latter is the reason for the
tapering of the annulus which is seen in most multistage compressors and turbines.
For discussion purposes only, we may therefore make the following simplifying assumptions for axial
stages:
(i) Assume the streamline radius is constant through a rotor: U1 = U2.
(ii) Assume constant axial velocity through a given stage: Ca1 = Ca2 = Ca3.
The resulting velocity diagrams are sometimes known as the simple velocity diagrams (or velocity
triangles). For actual design calculations, we would not make these simplifications: we would use the true,
general velocity diagrams. But in practice most axial stages come close to satisfying the simplifying
assumptions and therefore the conclusions which we will draw about the stage behaviour, based on the simple
velocity triangles, will be quite realistic.
One convenient feature of the simple velocity triangles is that we can combine the inlet and outlet
triangles because of the common blade speed vector U. We can therefore draw the velocity triangles for the
axial compressor stage as follows:
3.5.2
Degree of Reaction
If the pressure is rising in the direction of the flow (ie. if there is diffusion), then there is a danger of
the boundary layers on the walls separating. When this happens on a turbomachinery blade, there is generally
a large reduction in the efficiency of the machine and an impairment of its ability to transfer energy to or from
the fluid. In the case of compressors, boundary layer separation can lead to the very serious phenomena of
stall and surge which will be discussed later.
Diffusion is present most obviously in compressors since they are specifically intended to raise the
pressure of the fluid. While overall the pressure drops through a turbine stage, diffusion may still be present
locally on the blade surfaces. Thus, the possibility of boundary layer separation is a concern in the design of
both compressors and turbines.
As evident from the velocity triangles, pressure rise can occur in both blade rows of a compressor
stage. Intuitively, it would seem beneficial to divide the diffusion fairly evenly between the blade rows.
Similarly, in a turbine stage both blade rows can benefit from the expansion. The choice of the split in
pressure rise or drop between the two blade rows is one of the considerations for the designer of a
turbomachinery stage.
We define the degree of reaction,
[(
)]
) (
h2 h1
h02 h01
(17)
where h = static enthalpy, h0 = total enthalpy. Using the Steady Flow Energy Equation or Euler Equation,
there are several alternative ways of expressing the denominator in (16) and (17).
If the flow is assumed incompressible and isentropic, and the stage inlet and outlet velocities are the
same (ie. if is a normal stage), (17) reduces to
Protor
Pstage
(18)
Thus, (16) and (17) are also approximate measures of the fraction of the static pressure change which occurs
across the rotor.
A well-designed pump, fan or compressor will then have > 0 in order to spread the diffusion
between the blade rows. A value of . 0.5 has often been used. In an open machine, such as a Pelton wheel
turbine, P1 = P2 = Patm and = 0. A machine with = 0 is known as an impulse machine. Impulse wheels are
sometimes used for axial turbines, particularly steam turbines.
The effect of the choice of on the machine geometry can be seen by examining the velocity
diagrams for a few examples.
Axial-Flow Impulse Turbine ( = 0):
Consider the mean radius. Assume incompressible flow, constant annulus area and no radial shift in
the streamlines. Thus U1 = U2 = U and from continuity, Ca0 = Ca1 = Ca2 since m& = Ca Aannulus . We therefore
have the conditions for simple velocity triangles. The turbine stage will look as follows:
We must accelerate the flow through the nozzles, since all expansion is to occur in
here ( = 0): ie. we want C1 > C0. This can be done by turning the flow since this
will reduce the area of the flow passage from A0 to A1noz (for the constant height,
A1noz = A0cos1N). Bear in mind that Ca0 = Ca1 from continuity.
Rotor Blades:
What determines the value of 1N which is chosen? From the Euler Equation:
& C w
W& = m& (U 2 C w2 U 1C w1 ) = mU
Redraw the velocity triangles with the common blade speeds U superimposed. Note that Cw = Cw2 - Cw1 will
be negative, consistent with our sign convention that power in is
positive. The magnitude of Cw (for a given U) is clearly related to
Ca1 = Ca2
1. Thus, the required W& plays a direct role in determining the
velocity triangles, and ultimately the metal angles.
C2
1 = 1 , 2 = 2
This is not strictly true, as will be discussed later, but is often a
reasonable first approximation. It is sometimes known as the "Euler
Approximation".
Cw2 (+)
1 (+)
U
W2
C1
Cw1 (+)
Cw
W1
3.5.3
de Haller Number
The importance of diffusion in compressor blade rows was discussed in Section 3.5.2. By selecting a
degree of reaction close to 50%, the diffusion is shared roughly equally between the rotor and the stators.
However, this does not address the question of whether the blade rows will be able to sustain the level of
diffusion which is being asked of them. We will later examine diffusion limits which are used in the detailed
design of the blade rows. However, it is useful to have a simple approximate criterion for diffusion which can
be applied at the point in the design where we are taking basic decisions about the velocity triangles.
An axial compressor blade row in effect forms a rectangular diffusing duct. Based on various
compressor designs of the time, de Haller in the mid 1950s suggested that the maximum static pressure rise
which could be achieved in axial compressor blade passages is given by
C p,max =
where P
V
P
= 0.44
1 2
V
2
(a)
= static pressure rise between inlet and outlet of the blade row
= velocity at the inlet to the passage (relative velocity for rotors, absolute for stators).
Taking a rotor blade passage and assuming no change in radius of the streamlines (so that there is no
centrifugal compression) and neglecting friction, from Section 3.4 the static pressure rise is
1
1
P2 P1 = W12 W22 .
2
2
Substituting into (a) and simplifying,
W2
= 0.75 .
W1 min
The ratio W2/W1 (or Cout/Cin for a row of stators) is known as the de Haller number.
The de Haller limit should be used as a rough guide only. It does not take into account details of the
blade passage design which can improve the diffusion capability of the passage. Successful modern
compressor designs have used values of the de Haller number as low as 0.65. The de Haller number should be
used mainly to alert the designer to the fact that the level of diffusion in a particular compressor blade row
may present a design challenge.
3.5.4
Work Coefficient
and for an axial machine with simple velocity triangles (so that U1. U2 = U)
h0 = UC w .
From the velocity triangles, if we vary U, adjusting Ca to maintain geometrically similar triangles, then
and
C w
h0
U2 .
Thus, the power transfer varies as U2. The head or enthalpy change "per unit U2" is a useful measure of the
stage loading and is known as the work coefficient, R, where
h0
U
(UCw )
U
gH E
U2
For high R, we are taking full advantage of the blade speed and we have high stage loading: we will
specify what constitutes high R for different types of machines in Section 3.5.6.
For a centrifugal machine, tip speed, U2, would be used in R.
For an axial machine with simple velocity triangles (so that U1. U2 = U)
UC w
U
Cw
U
Normally, R is taken as positive. For our sign convention, )h0 and )Cw are negative for turbines.
Therefore, we use absolute values in R
3.5.5
Flow Coefficient
Consider two compressor rotors designed for the same service (same Q, P0 and N):
The same mean radii have been used so that the rotors have the same blade speeds U. From the Euler
equation, h0 = UCw , and to achieve the same h0 , and thus the same pressure rise, they must therefore
have the same change in swirl velocity, Cw. As a result, the rotors have the same work coefficient
( = Cw/U) and thus the same loading. However, rotor B has twice the axial velocity of rotor A: this is
achieved by reducing the cross-sectional area of the machine. This change obviously has a significant effect
on the rotor blade geometry. It also has aerodynamic consequences:
(i) For rotor B, both the absolute and relative velocities have been increased. Since losses generally
vary as 0.5V2 (where V = W for the rotor), rotor B will, all other things being equal, have poorer
efficiency than rotor A.
(ii) All other things are not equal. Note that the increase in Ca in rotor B has had the effect of
increasing the de Haller number (W2/W1). Thus, the diffusion has been reduced in rotor B, which is
aerodynamically favourable.
We can thus identify an additional important parameter which must be chosen by the designer, the flow
coefficient, :
Ca
U
For a centrifugal compressor, we would use Cr2/U2, where Cr2 is the radial component of velocity at the rotor
outlet.
Note that for the compressors shown, the change in flow coefficient did not in fact change the degree
of reaction. As you will show in Problem Set 3, the symmetry of the velocity triangles for both machines
implies that they both have 50% reaction.
3.5.6
We have identified four useful performance parameters: the degree of reaction, the de Haller number,
the work coefficient and the flow coefficient. Experience shows that to design a stage with good efficiency, ,
and , and for fans and compressors, the de Haller number, should be kept within certain ranges.
Design
Parameter
Axial Turbines
Axial
Centrifugal
0.2 6 0.7
. 1 (at outlet)
0.4 6 1.2
0.3 6 0.6
0.3 6 3.0
<0.5 - Lightly Loaded
>1.5 - Highly Loaded
0.3 6 0.7
061
de Haller
N/A
For compressible-flow axial turbines, Smith ( S.F. Smith, "A Simple Correlation of Turbine
Efficiency," J. Royal Aero. Soc., Vol. 49, July 1965, pp. 467-470.) developed a very useful figure (the Smith
chart) which summarizes the influence of and on the efficiency of the stage:
The "Smith Chart" or "Smith Diagram" presents the results for a large number of turbine tests (for
both model and full-scale machines) conducted at Rolls-Royce from 1945 to 1965. Over that period, the flow
over the tip of the rotor blades ("tip leakage") was considerably reduced. The tip-leakage flow is an important
source of losses and as a result there was significant improvement in efficiency. To isolate the influence of the
stage loading and shape of the velocity triangles, the efficiencies were corrected back to their zero-clearance
equivalents. Thus, efficiencies for actual machines can be expected to be lower than those shown by a couple
of percentage points. Note that the degree of reaction is not mentioned on the Smith chart. The turbines used
to generate the chart had a range of degrees of reaction. However, the performance of turbines is not strongly
dependent on the degree of reaction, provided reasonable values are used.
The Smith chart is well known and is widely used by axial turbine designers during the preliminary
stages of design. The usefulness of the Smith chart makes it surprising that comparable charts are not more
widely used by axial and centrifugal compressor designers. Part of the reason lies in the important role played
by diffusion (expressed through both the degree of reaction and the de Haller number) in compressor
performance. Thus a single Smith chart for compressors is not feasible. However, it is possible to generate
a small number of charts, each for a different value of degree of reaction say, and then use these in design. In
the late 1980's Casey (M.V. Casey, A Mean Line Prediction Method for Estimating the Performance
Characteristics of an Axial Compressor Stage, Proceedings, I.Mech.Eng., C264/87, 1987, pp. 273-285.)
calculated compressor stage performance for a wide range of conditions. In a recent textbook, Lewis (R.I.
Lewis, Turbomachinery Performance Analysis, Arnold, London, 1996) took this data to generate Smith
charts for axial compressors for three values of degree of reaction: 50, 70 and 90%. Note the rapid
deterioration in efficiency when the de Haller number is less than about 0.7.
Smith Charts for Axial Compressors: (a) = 0.5, (b) = 0.7, (c) = 0.9.
The use of the guidelines presented in this section will be illustrated in the next chapter.
3.6
EFFICIENCY OF TURBOMACHINES
3.6.1 Incompressible-Flow Machines
The definitions of efficiency used for incompressible-flow machines have been discussed briefly in
earlier sections. The definitions are repeated here for completeness.
Fundamentally, the efficiency of a turbomachine is defined in terms of a comparison with a related
ideal machine in which there are no losses. However, there are small conceptual differences between the
definitions of efficiency used for incompressible- and compressible-flow machines. These will therefore be
clarified now.
(a) Pumps, Fans and Blowers
& H E = m& h0
W& shaft = mg
where
HE
=
=
Euler head = head equivalent of the shaft power input to the machine
head rise that would be achieved in the ideal (no losses) machine with the
same shaft power input as the actual machine.
The fluid power is defined as the useful, mechanical power that actually appears in the fluid across the
machine
& H
W& fluid = mg
where
The Euler head and the actual total head are related by
H = H E H L
where HL is the head loss due to friction inside the machine. Neglecting elevation changes, we can also write
P0,actual = gH
P0,ideal = gH E
We then define the efficiency for a pump, fan or blower as
pump =
P0,actual
Fluid power QgH
H
=
=
=
Shaft power
H E
P0,ideal
W& shaft
To help visualize the significance of this definition, and for comparison with the definition of efficiency used
for compressors, we represent the processes on the h0 versus s diagram.
P02
h0
P02
h0
P01
ACTUAL
IDEAL
(b) Turbines
For turbines, the head drop, H, or pressure drop P0,actual that is available is normally specified.
However, some of the fluid power released by the fluid is used in overcoming friction inside the machine and
& H E . That is,
is therefore not available to be extracted as shaft power output, W& shaft = mg
H = H E + H L
turbine =
P0,ideal
Shaft power QgH E H E
=
=
=
QgH
H
P0,actual
Fluid power
h0
P01
ACTUAL
h0
IDEAL
P02
P02
h0
P02
h0,actual
P01
ACTUAL
h0,ideal
IDEAL
c =
If we assume that the working fluid is a perfect gas, then h0 = CpT0, and it is common to present the
processes on a T0-s diagram, rather than the h0-s diagram. The efficiency can then be written
c =
C p T0, ideal
C p T0, actual
T02 T01
T02 T01
T0
P02
T02
T02
= const .
P01
ACTUAL
IDEAL
where = Cp/Cv, the specific heat ratio. Then using the perfect gas
law, P = RT, we can write
T02 P02
=
T01 P01
T01
Then
h0, actual =
C p (T02 T01 )
C p T01 P02
1
=
c P01
t =
T0
and
P01
T01
ACTUAL
h0, actual
P02
= C p T01 t
1
P01
IDEAL
P02
T02
T02
Note the expression for h0, actual will be negative, consistent with
our sign convention that power into a machine is positive.
It can then be shown that the actual temperature at the outlet of the Nth stage is
T0 N +1
1
PR
(
)
s
= T01 1 +
PRc = ( PRs )
and the isentropic temperature rise for the whole compressor is then
1
= T01 PRsN
c =
T0N +1 T01
T0 N +1 T01
N ( 1)
PRs
PRs 1
1 +
s
For example, if PRs = 1.2 and s = 0.9, the resulting variation of the overall pressure ratio and overall
isentropic efficiency with the number
of stages is shown in the figure. As
EFFECT OF PRESSURE RATIO ON OVERALL ISENTROPIC EFFICIENCY
seen, the overall efficiency decreases as
the pressure ratio increases.
When cycles for gas turbine
engines are being investigated, it is
normal to examine the effect of varying
pressure ratio. It is evident that
assuming a constant value of the
overall compressor isentropic
efficiency is not valid for such
investigations. To account for the
effect of the pressure ratio on the
isentropic efficiency, the concept of the
small-stage or polytropic efficiency has
been introduced.
0.9 1
0.88
Number of Stages
10
11
0.84
Stage PR = 1.2
Stage isen = 0.9
0.82
0.8
dh0 =
Then for an isentropic process (ds = 0)
12
0.86
dP0
+ T0 ds
10
dh0 =
dP0
Define the polytropic efficiency, p, as the isentropic efficiency for the infinitesimal process
dh0 = p dh0
dP0
= p dh0
R
, and the fluid
1
d C p T0
dP0
= p
C p T0
0 C p T0
dP0
0 RT0
1
or
= p
dT0
T0
dT0 1 dP0
=
T0
p P0
T 1 P02
ln 02 =
ln
T01 p P01
1
or
T02 P02 p
=
T01 P01
c =
h0
h0
1
1
pc
h
=
C
T
PR
1
where
and h0 = C p T01 PR
1 where pc is the polytropic efficiency for
0
p 01
c =
PR
1
pc
PR
1
1
For a turbine,
t =
h0
h0
t =
P
1 04
P03
pt ( 1)
P
1 04
P03
The following figure shows the resulting variation of isentropic efficiency with pressure ratio for an assumed
polytropic efficiency of 0.9 and = 1.4, for both a compressor and a turbine. Also shown are the earlier
results for the multistage compressor with stage pressure ratio of 1.2.
VARIATION OF ISENTROPIC EFFICIENCY WITH PRESSURE RATIO
Polytropic Efficiency, p = 0.9, = 1.4
0.94
Isentropic Efficiency
Turbine
0.92
0.9 1
0.88
10
11
12
Compressor
0.86
1
10
Pressure Ratio
The concept of polytropic efficiency should be used with caution. It is only valid if the machine can
be considered to employ comparable technology and produce comparable performance as the pressure ratio is
varied. For this reason, it should be applied only to explore the influence of pressure ratio on performance for
multistage machines. It is assumed that the pressure ratio is varied by adding or removing comparable stages.
Polytropic efficiency should not be used to predict how the efficiency of a single stage will vary as its design
pressure ratio is changed. As will be shown later, stage performance is closely related to its tip speed. For
example, to increase the design pressure ratio of a compressor stage, the tip speed must normally be increased.
This in turn results in higher flow velocities generally. As these velocities reach and exceed the speed of
sound, shock waves will appear, providing a source of additional losses that is not present at lower speeds.
Thus, as the stage pressure ratio is changed, the technology cannot be considered to remain unchanged.
y
A
B
C1
Ca1
Cw1
Cm
Y
m
Ca
Cwm
s
2
D
C2
Ca2
P2
Cw2
Take unit depth in the z direction. Also, make the following simplifying assumptions
(i) Incompressible flow
(ii) Constant axial velocity through the passage: Ca1 = Ca2 = Ca.
The blade exerts a force F on the flow thought the passage. This is divided into axial and tangential
components X and Y. By definition, the lift generated by a turbomachinery blade L is the component of the blade
force normal to the vector mean flow direction through the blade row. The drag D is the component of the blade
force parallel to the vector mean flow direction.
Then apply the linear momentum equation to the control volume. In the x direction:
Fx = m& (V x 2 V x1 )
X = ( P2 P1 ) s
For the y direction:
Fy = m& V y 2 V y1
(1)
and since the pressure forces on the control volume cancel each other in the y-direction, the only force in the y-
Y = Ca ( s 1)(( C w1 ) ( C w2 ))
= Ca s(C w1 C w2 )
(2a)
Since
C w1
,
Ca
tan 1 =
tan 2 =
C w2
Ca
(2b)
From the definition total pressure for incompressible flow, the total pressure loss through the passage is
given by
P0 = P01 P02 = ( P1 P2 ) +
1
C12 C22
2
) (
P0 = ( P1 P2 ) +
1
(Cw1 + Cw 2 )(Cw1 Cw 2 )
2
P0 =
X 1
Y
+ ( C w1 + C w 2 )
s 2
Ca s
and using the vector mean flow direction through the passage, tan m =
P0 =
1
( X + Y tan m )
s
1
( tan 1 + tan 2 ) , we can write
2
(3)
From the force vector triangles, the drag D can be expressed in terms of X and Y as follows
D = Y sin m X cos m
= cos m ( X + Y tan m )
(4)
D = P0 s cos m
(5)
CD =
1
Cm2 c 1
2
P s cos m
= 0
1
Cm2 c
2
1
1
P0 = C D Cm2
2
cos m
(6a)
1
P0 = CD Ca2
cos3 m
2
(6b)
As will be seen later, some axial fan and compressor prediction procedures use the airfoil drag coefficient to express
the loss performance for the blade row. Equation (6a) or (6b) can then be used to express this as a total pressure
loss.
Returning to the lift force, from the force triangles the lift L can be expressed as
L = X sin m + Y cos m
(7)
X = Y tan m
D
cos m
D
L = Y tan m
sin m + Y cos m
cos m
Y
D tan m
cos m
L=
Ca2 s
( tan 1 tan 2 ) D tan m
cos m
By definition
CL =
L
L
=
1
1
Cm2 c 1 C 2 c
a
2
2
2
cos m
(8)
then
Ca2 s
( tan 1 tan 2 )
cos m
D
tan m
CL =
2
1
1
Cm c
Ca2 c 2
2
2
cos m
or
s
C L = 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 ) C D tan m
c
(9a)
Since the drag force is normally much smaller than the lift, the drag term is often omitted from (9a),
s
C L = 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 )
c
(9b)
4.2.2 Circulation
Any lifting surface has circulation. By definition, the circulation is
= VS dS
(10)
where the integral is evaluated along any closed contour enclosing the lifting surface. VS is the tangential
component of the flow velocity along the enclosing curve and S is arc length. For the axial-compressor airfoil, the
curve A-B-C-D-A shown on the control volume in the last section is a convenient curve for use in (10):
B
A
VS dS +
C
B
VS dS +
VS dS +
A
D
VS dS
Since B-C and D-A are periodic surfaces with identical lengths and velocity distributions,
C
B
VS dS =
A
D
VS dS
and their contributions to cancel. Along A-B and C-D, VS is simply Cy (= Cw) along the respective segments. The
direction of the integration changes so that the integrals will have opposite signs (since Cw1 and Cw2 have the same
sign for the control volume shown). Thus, we can write
= C y1 s C y 2 s
We are assuming constant axial velocity, and since tan = C y C x (and Cx = Ca), we can write
= Ca ( tan 1 tan 2 ) s
(11)
From Eqn. (8), neglecting the drag term and substituting from (11) we can also write
L = Cm
which is the expression given by the Kutta-Joukowski Theorem for an isolated airfoil. Note that in the case of the
blade row, the undisturbed velocity seen by the airfoil is in fact the vector mean velocity through the passage.
4.3
rt
rm
1
rh
For preliminary design, we typically consider just the flow at the mean radius and treat the flow
through stage as one-dimensional. The mean radius is normally defined as the radius that divides the flow
area in half:
gH E
Work coefficient:
Degree of reaction:
= 0.5
U2
= 0.4
Note that if we were using the Lewis charts from Section 3.5.6, we would probably choose a slightly higher
value of for this value of :
To proceed, we need the value of the Euler head rise, HE = H/. Therefore, we need to guess a
value for the stage efficiency . This can be done from experience, or from the specific speed plots in Chapter
2, or from the approximate correlations shown in Section 3.5.6. Later, we will see how to calculate the
efficiency of the stage we have designed. If this efficiency is different from the one we have guessed here, we
will have designed the stage with an incorrect value of the HE and it will not match the required performance
H. If this turns out to be the case, we will have to return to the beginning and revise the design. Thus, the
design of a turbomachine inherently tends to be iterative: to design the machine we need its efficiency, but we
do not know its efficiency until we have designed it.
Having estimated HE we can then calculate the absolute blade speed (at the mean radius) from our
chosen value of the work coefficient :
U=
gH E
With U determined, the axial velocity at mean radius follows from the chosen value of the flow coefficient :
Ca = U
The chosen value of also determines the relative magnitudes of Ca and U as they will appear in the velocity
diagram: in this case, Ca = 0.5U. Finally, having established Ca, the required annulus area for the stage
follows from one-dimensional continuity:
A=
Q
m&
=
Ca Ca
We will assume simple velocity diagrams, as defined in Section 3.5.1. That is, we assume that the
annulus is shaped such that Ca and U remain constant through the stage: U1 = U2 = U, Ca1 = Ca2 = Ca3 = Ca.
Then from the Euler equation
gH E = U 2 C w2 U 1C w1 = UC w
Knowing U, we now know Cw. Note also that for the simple velocity diagrams, can be written
C w
U
and we therefore also know the relative magnitudes of U and Cw in the velocity triangles: Cw = 0.4U.
Finally, we make use of the degree of reaction to completely define the velocity triangles. Since we
have chosen 50% reaction, equal amounts diffusion are
occurring in the rotor and the stators. Thus the de Haller
Ca1 = C a 2
numbers for the rotor and stators must be the same:
W2 C3
=
W1 C2
2 (+ )
1 (+ )
W2 C3
=
= 0.678
W1 C2
This is approaching the limit of about 0.65 that was
Cw 1 (+ )
C1
Cw 2 (+ )
C2
W1
W2
1 ( )
2 ( )
Cw
recommended in Section 3.5.6 and we will therefore have to monitor our design for the possibility of stall. As
noted in Section 3.5.5, we could reduce the diffusion levels by increasing the flow coefficient .
Note that to achieve 50% reaction in this stage, the
inlet flow must have a swirl angle 1. Thus, there must either
be a stage ahead of the present one, or a set of inlet guide
vanes, that leave the required amount of swirl in the flow. The
flow from this stage will also leave with swirl 3 = 1, so that
C3 = C1 .
Suppose instead that the inlet swirl was specified. For
example, if this is the first stage in the machine then we will
normally have no swirl in the flow, 1 = 0. Using the same
values of and , the velocity triangles will then look as
shown. We can then show that the resulting degree of reaction
is = 0.8. This means that the diffusion is much higher in the
rotor than in the stators and this might at first be a matter for
concern. However, consider the values of the de Haller
numbers (we will assume that the flow leaves the stage with
no swirl, C3 = C1):
Rotor:
W2
= 0.699
W1
Stators:
C3
= 0.781
C2
C a1 = Ca 2
C1
2 (+ )
Cw 2 (+ )
Cw
C2
U
W1
1 = 0
W2
Cw 1 = 0
2 ( )
1 ( )
As expected, the value is lower for the rotor than for the stators. However, the diffusion is actually less than
for the 50% reaction machine. As a result, this stage may be just as feasible as the earlier stage, despite the
high value of degree of reaction.
Having determined the velocity triangles, the next step is to define the blade geometries that will
produce the required velocities.
For the idealized analysis, we define the blade geometry using the assumption that the fluid leaves the
blade row parallel to the metal angle at the trailing edge of the blades: this is known as the Euler
Approximation. In a later section, we will develop the procedures for estimating the actual outlet flow angle,
which will turn out to be slightly different. To bring the flow smoothly into the blade passage, we will also
make the leading edge metal angle parallel to the inlet flow angle. We can then define the shapes of the blades
for the 50% reaction stage as follows:
and the head rise produced by the machine H = H E will be increased. Equivalently, for a compressible
flow machine, h0 , and the corresponding pressure ratio, P02 P01 , will be increased. Note that this is
consistent with the increase in incidence (angle of attack) at the leading edge of the rotor blade. As a result
of this, the blade should develop greater lift, do more work on the fluid, and thus increase the head rise. On
the other hand, increasing the incidence will eventually lead to stalling of the blade. Thus, reducing the flow
rate through a compressor stage will move it towards stall. Note that the incidence was also increased for the
stators, bringing them closer to stall as well.
Clearly, we can use the velocity triangles and the Euler equation to predict the quantitative stage
characteristic for the idealized stage. It is convenient to express the characteristic in terms of the work and
flow coefficients. The flow turning is
C w = C w2 C w1
and from the velocity triangles (noting that Ww2 is negative for the conventional compressor velocity triangles)
C w1 = Ca tan 1
Then
C w2 = U + Ww2 = U + Ca tan 2
C w = U + Ca ( tan 2 tan 1 )
and dividing by U
C w
C
= 1 + a ( tan 2 tan 1 )
U
U
or
= 1 + m
Thus, the versus curve (effectively, the head rise versus flow rate characteristic) is a straight line with
slope
m = tan 2 tan 1
For the present case, the symmetry of the velocity triangles implies that 2 = 1 and the slope is then
m = 2 tan 1 . For 1 > 0, as is the case here, this gives a negative slope and an inverse relationship between
head rise and flow rate, as inferred above.
Alternatively, since the characteristic
passes through the design point (say, D and D),
we can write
m=
1.0
D 1
D
D3
0.5
D2
D1
INCREASING
DESIGN-POINT
LOADING
D
0.0
0.5
1.0
From the triangles, = Ca U > D since U has decreased. For the work coefficient, = C w U ,
Cw has clearly decreased, but so has U. However, Cw has decreased more rapidly than U; as can be seen, a
small further decrease in U would reduce Cw to zero. We therefore conclude that = C w U < D and
and are again seen to vary inversely. In summary, any deviation from the design point will cause the a given
compressor to move along the same versus characteristic.
It is also worth noting that the reduction in rotational speed has had a very strong effect on the
absolute work transfer:
gH E = UC w
Since Cw decreases directly with U (and in fact faster than U) the head rise varies approximately as
gH E kU 2
and the head rise delivered by the stage, at a fixed value of flow rate, will change strongly with the rotational
speed: for example, reducing the speed by a factor of 2 will reduce the head rise by about a factor of 4. Thus,
high rotational speed is essential to obtain high pressure rise from a compressor stage. This will be illustrated
further in later sections.
As seen, the Euler Approximation results in an idealized versus characteristic for the stage that is
a straight line with a negative slope.
We have already noted that some changes in operating point will result in positive values of the
incidence at the leading edge of the airfoils. If this incidence becomes too large, we would expect the airfoils
to stall. Also, we would expect the efficiency of the stage to be best when the rotor and stator blades are
operating at the design point. We can therefore project what the actual stage characteristic is likely to be
based on the idealized characteristic:
MAXIMUM
STALL
USING EULER
APPROXIMATION
LIKELY
ACTUAL
The characteristic shown applies for all rotational speeds. As noted, there is a strong effect of
rotational speed on the absolute performance (say H for a given Q). To emphasize this, the characteristics
& ) for constant values of
are often plotted in absolute terms as variations of H (or P0) versus Q (or m
rotational speed N. The corresponding curves are easily calculated from the non-dimensional characteristic.
The resulting map will look as follows.
max
CONSTANT
CONSTANT
On each of the constant speed lines, there will be a point that corresponds to the design point values
of and on the non-dimensional characteristic. At each of those points, the velocity triangles will be
similar, as indicated in the drawing. In each case, the relative velocity vector at the rotor inlet is lined up with
the metal angle and the flow comes smoothly onto the leading edge. As shown, we would therefore expect
that the machine will operate at its maximum efficiency at each of those points, apart perhaps for some small
effect of differing Reynolds numbers. Also, as we will see later, frictional losses vary as V2 and thus the
higher flow velocities with increasing rotational speed will result in higher frictional losses. This effect will
be partly offset by the fact that the Reynolds number is also increasing.
Later in the chapter, we will examine to what degree actual machines match the performance
characteristics we have inferred from the velocity triangles in this section.
C1
rt
W1
C2
W1
W2
C1
rm
C2
W1
U
W2
C1
rh
W1
U
C2
W2
Parameter
TIP
MEAN
ROOT
Flow Coefficient,
0.395
0.5
0.791
Work Coefficient,
0.25
0.4
1.0
Degree of Reaction,
0.875
0.8
0.5
0.788
0.699
0.62
0.845
0.781
0.62
Note:
(i) This blade design is clearly not acceptable. The work coefficient is far too high at the root and the de
Haller numbers there also indicate too much diffusion. The blade will need to be redesigned. If the stage is
still to produce uniform pressure rise across the span, the mean line work coefficient will have to be reduced.
(ii) The blade exhibits considerable twist across the span. Both this and the large variation in the design
parameters is a function of the hub-to-tip ratio, HTR = rh/rt. Increasing the HTR will make the blade more
uniformly loaded across the span, but since the cross-sectional area is fixed (by the choice of ), this has
consequences for the tip diameter of the machine and the rotational speed. This is demonstrated in the
following sketch, which shows three different blades with the same annulus cross-sectional area but different
values of HTR. In multi-stage compressors, the HTR will normally increase along the machine since the
cross-sectional area is decreased to keep the axial velocity high. This is illustrated by the cross-section of the
compressor from the GE LM2500+ gas turbine engine (17 stages, PR = 23.3).
0.3
RPM
Higher
0.5
0.8
Lower
4.4
The design parameters introduced in the last chapter apply to a stage or a blade row. Experience has
shown that it is possible to design a stage of good efficiency if the guidelines for those design parameters are
followed. The parameters also fully define the velocity triangles and the corresponding airfoil geometries.
However, the guidelines give no information about the number and the spacing of those airfoils: in other
words, about the solidity = c/s of the blade rows.
For a blade row, the larger the spacing between the airfoils the larger the mass flow that each airfoil is
required to turn. From the control volume analysis in Section 4.2, the resulting lift coefficient was given by
s
C L = 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 )
c
1
= 2 cos m ( tan 1 tan 2 )
and it is seen to vary directly with spacing, or inversely with the solidity. Just as for an isolated airfoil, there is
an upper limit to the lift that a turbomachinery blade can develop before it stalls. For a given set of inlet and
outlet flow angles, it is possible to stay below the loading limit by making the solidity of the blade row large
enough. Thus, the solidity of the blade row is selected on the basis of a blade loading limit. This is in contrast
to the work coefficient, , which was a stage loading limit.
In the past, loading limits for compressor blades have sometimes been expressed in terms of the lift
coefficient (Horlock, 1958). In the early 1950s, Howell suggested that a well-designed compressor airfoil will
stall at
3
C
C L 1 3.3
C2
and designers of low-solidity fans have sometimes used the criterion
c
C L 11
.
s
However, expressing the loading limit simply in terms of CL has been found to be unreliable. Recent practice
has therefore taken a somewhat different approach.
Howell (British Practice)
In the 1950s, Howell conducted an extensive series of cascade measurements on the compressor
airfoils that were commonly used in British compressor design. The performance was measured for a wide
range of the design parameters, including the flow turning angle and solidity. Howell varied the amount of
flow turning up to the onset of stall. The corresponding total-pressure losses were also measured. Howell
suggested that a suitable design turning angle for a blade row was that which corresponded to about 80% of
the turning that would result in stall. He also found that the losses were close to a minimum at this condition.
He therefore presented a correlation that could be used to estimate the solidity that would result in the blade
row operating at 80% of the stalling turning angle. This correlation is shown in the next figure (taken from
Saravanamuttoo et al., 2001).
Knowing the design deflection and outlet flow angle from the velocity triangles, Fig. 5.14 can be used
to select a suitable value of solidity (note that the plot is expressed in terms of s/c = 1/).
Lieblein (NASA Design Practice)
Like Howell in Britain, in the 1950s NACA (now NASA) conducted an extensive set of cascade
measurements to determine the performance of compressor airfoils for a wide range of geometric and
aerodynamic parameters. As described later, these results became the basis for a compressor design system
which is now widely used, both in North America and in Europe (including Britain).
The drawing shows the hypothetical velocity distribution around a compressor blade.
C2
SUCTION SURFACE
Cmax
C1
C1
C2
0
0
x/c
1.0
The performance of the blade is limited by the deceleration (that is, the diffusion or adverse pressure
gradient) on the suction surface of the airfoil. If the diffusion is too great, the boundary layer separates, the
blade stalls, and the losses increase significantly. Lieblein proposed a parameter to measure the severity of the
diffusion:
C2
C
D = max
(1)
C1
As usual, relative velocities W would be used for rotor blades.
Unfortunately, Cmax is a function of the detailed flow around the particular airfoil, which would not be
known early in design. However, the larger the lift (or circulation) being generated by the airfoil the larger
Cmax must be. From Section 4.2.2, the circulation is given by
= s(C w1 Cw2 ) = sC w
and thus we can write
C max = C1 + f ( )
= C1 + f ( sC w )
D =1
C2
1
+
f ( sC w )
C1 C1
Experiments showed that the following form for D correlates the loss and stalling behaviour of a wide range
of blade geometries:
D =1
C w
C2
+
C1 2 C1
(2)
4.5
4.5.1 Introduction
The idealized stage analysis used in Section 4.3 made a number of assumptions that are not fully
satisfied in practice. For example, the flow angle at the trailing edge does not precisely match the metal angle,
as assumed in the Euler Approximation. Nor does matching the inlet flow angle to the inlet metal angle
necessarily result in the lowest losses. Finally, we need methods for estimating the losses generally, in order
predict the efficiency of the stage and thus complete its design. To accomplish a more realistic stage analysis,
we need to draw on correlations for the behaviour of actual blade geometries, as determined experimentally.
Such empirical correlations were alluded to in the discussion of blade-loading limits in the last section.
Two systems for empirical performance predictions of axial compressors have been used fairly
widely. The British system, connected mainly with the name of Howell, will be discussed since it is relatively
easy to apply in hand calculations. However, it omits the influence of a number of blade geometric
parameters, does not directly apply to all the families of blade geometries that are in common use, and has
somewhat limited ability to predict the influence of factors such as compressibility.
A more comprehensive, but less easily applied, prediction system was developed by NASA during the
1950s and 60s. This system is summarized in a famous document, NASA SP-36, Aerodynamic Design of
Axial-Flow Compressors published in 1965. SP-36 continues to form the basis for much practical axialcompressor design, both in North America and outside. The correlations presented in SP-36 have also been
re-evaluated and updated from time to time so that the system continues to be applicable.
It should be mentioned the largest gas turbine engine companies (eg. Pratt & Whitney, General
Electric and Rolls-Royce) have to some extent developed their own compressor design systems that reflect
their in-house design philosophies and proprietary blade profile designs. However, these systems are often
structured in similar ways and strongly influenced by the design systems that are available in the open
literature.
Nomenclature:
s
c
a
t
=
=
=
=
=
=
i =
=
=
blade spacing
blade chord
(solidity = c/s)
stagger angle
1' - 2' = camber angle
distance of maximum camber aft of blade leading edge
maximum thickness of blade
incidence = 1 - 1'
deviation = 2 - 2' = difference between outlet flow angle and metal angle
flow turning = 1 - 2
The nomenclature applies for a stationary blade row. For a rotor, replace by and use the relative
components of velocity.
Typical results obtained by Howell for a particular cascade geometry are shown in the following
figure. The figure (taken from Horlock, 1958) shows the variation of flow turning, and the total pressure
loss as a function of the incidence, i.
The cascade performance should depend on the blade and cascade geometry as well as the flow
conditions. Howell suggested that:
a c, ,
s c,
flow conditions)
i, 2
He also found that the results collapse well onto universal curves if they are normalized in terms of the results
at the "nominal" (or "design"or "reference") flow condition for each cascade. The nominal condition is
defined, somewhat arbitrarily, as the condition at which the flow turning, , is 0.8 of the value at stall. Stall is
the appearance of boundary layer separation, towards the trailing edge, on the low pressure side of the blade.
The appearance of stall manifests itself in a rise in the losses and an impairment of the ability of the blade to
turn the flow. For convenience, Howell defined the stalling incidence as the positive incidence at which the
losses have increased to twice their minimum value. This definition is fairly easy to apply to experimental
data. As the figure above indicates, it also seems to correspond fairly well to the point of maximum flow
turning. The latter point could perhaps have been use as an alternative for identifying the stalling incidence.
The superscript * is used designate nominal values of the flow quantities. Thus
* = nominal deflection = 0.8 stall
The corresponding values of i, and 2 are designated i*, * and 2*.
Howells correlations can be presented in a small number of formulae and graphs.
(a) Deviation at the trailing edge:
1
* = m
(1)
where
2
2*
a
m = 0.23 2 +
c
500
(2)
* = f 2* ,
c
The correlation is usually presented graphically ( Fig. 5.14 from Saravanamuttoo et al.) and was used in
Section 4.4 to select the solidity.
The blade will often be used at other than the nominal (design) flow conditions. Howell was able to
correlate fairly successfully the off-design behaviour of the cascades by plotting the results against the nondimensional relative incidence, irel = (i - i*)/*. Figure 3.17 (taken from Dixon) shows the normalized flow
turning, /* as a function of irel. The figure also shows the variation of the losses (expressed as a drag
coefficient) with relative incidence. As seen, the losses are close to a minimum at the nominal condition.
Loss estimates will be discussed separately later.
The correlations presented to this point can be used to predict the flow turning capability of a
compressor blade row. As mentioned, loss estimates will be considered later.
The correlations can be used in two ways: for analysis or for design.
Analysis:
Predicting the performance of a blade row of specified geometry.
Design: Determining the geometry of a blade row which produces a specified performance.
The approach is a little different for each case. Each will be described and the analysis mode will then be
illustrated with an example.
Analysis Mode Calculations:
In this case, the inlet flow direction (1 or 1) is specified and the blade row geometry is known (1',
2', a/c, and = c/s). The goal is to predict the outlet flow angle, 2.
(i) The performance depends strongly on 2*. Since it is not known initially, it must be determined
(by iteration). Guess a value of 2*. Use equations (1) and (2) to calculate *. Then
2* = 2 + *
Compare this value with the assumed 2*, revise as necessary and repeat until 2* and * are
consistent.
(ii) Read the value of * from Fig. 5.14. Then
1* = 2* + *
i * = 1* 1
The nominal conditions are now known.
(iii) If the actual i = 1* - 1' is different from i* then the blade row is operating "off-design". Fig.
3.17 would then be used to determine the actual flow turning. The Reynolds number correction
would be applied to the turning if appropriate.
Design Mode Calculations:
Again, the inlet flow direction (1 or 1) would be specified. Typically, the shape of the camber line
(ie. a/c) would also be selected. The goal is then to choose a blade row geometry (1', 2', and = c/s) which
will give the desired outlet flow angle, 2. This application of the correlations is a little more complicated
since there is in fact a range of geometries which will satisfy the requirements.
One possible approach is to use the nominal values for the design point. This is reasonable since
nominal conditions give near-minimum losses and provide some stall margin. Then
2* = 2 1* = 1
and * = 1 2
With 2* and * known, Fig. 5.14 is now used to choose the solidity, (this was the way that Fig 5.14 was
used in Section 4.4). Since the blade row is operating at the nominal conditions, the deviation will also be that
given by Eqns. (1) and (2). However, * is also a function of the camber, . From the drawing of the cascade,
the flow turning is related to the camber by
=i +
Thus, the value of the camber will depend on the choice made for i*. Howells correlations indicate that there
is no unique choice for the design incidence, although he recommends that a value be chosen of a few degrees
at most. Reductions in camber can be compensated for by increases in incidence, and vice versa. Note that
these changes will also result in a change in the stagger of the blade row. In summary, according to the
Howells correlations a variety of blade geometries can produce identical aerodynamic performance. This
gives the designer some freedom to tailor the blade geometry to meet other possible requirements: eg. to
simplify the spanwise variation in the blade geometry, to alter a natural frequency, or to alter the stress level in
some region.
The Howell cascade measurements were made for the British C family of compressor blade profiles.
Therefore, a compressor designed according to the correlations is most likely to match the predicted
performance if the same blade profiles are used in the machine. The C4 profile, one of the most widely used
of the C-family profiles, is described in an appendix to these notes.
For use in computer programs or with analysis software (such as Mathcad or Matlab), the graphs for
the Howells correlations have been fitted by polynomials. These curve and surface fits are also given in an
appendix.
= + i
If we use the reference values of incidence and deviation then
= + i ref ref
(1)
It was found that the deviation angle and the minimum-loss incidence vary linearly with the blade camber:
i ref = i 0 + n
ref = 0 + m
where i0 and 0 are the values for the same blade when it has zero camber. Substituting into (1), the required
camber is given by
+ 0 i 0
1+ n m
(2)
The correlations are then used to find the values of the four unknowns on the right-hand side of (2).
The minimum-loss incidence at zero camber is written
i 0 = ( K i ) sh ( Ki ) t (i 0 ) 10
(3)
where
(i0)10
minimum-loss incidence for a blade with zero camber and 10% thickness
(Ki)sh
shape correction to be applied when blades of other than the 65-series profile are
being used
(Ki)t
For 65-A10 series blades, the correlations for the incidence related quantities are given on the
following graphs from NASA SP-36 (the graphs are reproduced at the end of the section):
(i0)10
(Ki)t
f3(t/c)
Fig. 142
For 65-series blades the shape correction, (Ki)sh, is simply 1.0. However, it has been suggested that the same
correlations can be used to design C-series (C4 etc.) blades with circular-arc camber lines by setting
(Ki)sh = 1.1, and to design DCA blading by setting (Ki)sh = 0.7.
The zero-camber deviation, 0, is obtained in a similar way:
0 = ( K ) sh ( K ) t ( 0 ) 10
(4)
where
(0)10
reference deviation for a blade with zero camber and 10% thickness
(K)sh
shape correction to be applied when blades of other than the 65-series profile are
being used
(K)t
For 65-A10 series blades, the correlations are given on the following graphs:
(0)10
f4(1,)
Fig. 161
(K)t
f5(t/c)
Fig. 172
As with the incidence, for 65-series blades the shape correction for deviation, (K)sh, is simply 1.0. For C4 and
DCA the same values of the shape correction as for incidence have been suggested: 1.1 and 0.7 respectively.
The deviation gradient, m, is also a function of 1 and . It is usually obtained using a deviation rule
similar to that used in the Howells correlations:
m=
m =1.0
(5)
where
m=1.0
f6(1)
Fig. 163
f7(1)
Fig. 164.
Eqn. (2) defines the camber required for the blade if the reference conditions are chosen as the design
point. However, there may be a variety of reasons to choose a different incidence at the design point, in the
same way that nominal conditions might not be used when designing a compressor using Howells
correlations. If i is different from iref then will also be different from ref. The resulting value of can be
predicted from
d
= ref + (i i ref )
di ref
(6)
4.6
For axial machines (both compressors and turbines), the losses are therefore subdivided into:
(i) Profile losses:
These are the losses generated by friction in blade-surface boundary layers, by the
sudden expansion in area at the trailing edge, and by the mixing out of the wake
downstream of the blade.
(ii) Secondary losses: The slower-moving flow in endwall boundary layers is "over turned" by the blade-toblade pressure field, as shown in the drawing. The fluid swept towards the low
pressure (suction) side of the passage is blocked by the blade surface and rolls up
into a "passage vortex" that generates additional losses through high shear stresses at
the endwalls and as it mixes with the downstream flow. The boundary-layer
separation around the blade leading edge also results in a "horseshoe vortex".
(iii) Annulus losses:
These are generated by friction on the endwalls, mainly upstream and downstream of
the blade passage. The endwall losses inside the passage are normally assigned to
the secondary losses.
(iv) Tip-leakage losses: There must be some clearance between the rotor blade tips and the compressor
casing. The flow that is driven through the tip gap rolls up into a "tip-leakage
vortex" as it interact with the main passage flow. There are viscous (frictional)
losses inside the gap, but most of the tip-leakage losses are generated through
downstream mixing with the surrounding fluid.
In transonic and supersonic compressors, there will be additional losses due to the presence of shock
waves.
Howell gave simple correlations, expressed mostly in terms of drag coefficients, to estimate the losses:
(i) Profile Losses:
The profile losses were expressed as a function of both the incidence and the spacing-to-chord ratio,
s/l (Howell used the symbol l for chord length), as shown earlier in Dixon Fig. 3.17 (repeated here).
s
C L = 2 ( tan 1 tan 2 ) cos m
c
and
tan 1 + tan 2
m = arctan
2
For the rotor flow, we would use the relative flow angles, $1 and $2, as usual.
(iii) Annulus Losses:
C DA = 0.02
s
sc
0.02
= 0.02
=
h
c h AR
With the drag coefficients corresponding to the losses determined, the corresponding total-pressure
losses can be calculated from Eqn. (6a) or (6b) from Section 4.2.1. Equation (6b) is usually the most
convenient:
1
P0, loss = C D Ca2
cos 3 m
2
(6b)
Section 4.6.5 explains how to use the estimated total-pressure losses to obtain the stage efficiency.
The NASA system for axial compressor loss prediction, described next, uses direct correlations for
total pressure loss coefficient, rather than for drag coefficient.
C2
SUCTION SURFACE
Cmax
C1
C1
C2
0
0
(1)
x/c
1.0
However, Lieblein subsequently argued that the profile losses should depend primarily on the amount
of diffusion on the suction side of the blade. He therefore introduced an alternative parameter, known as the
equivalent diffusion ratio:
Deq =
C max
C2
(2)
Note that Deq resembles the deHaller number. Whereas the deHaller number defines the net diffusion between
the inlet and outlet of the blade row, Deq defines the local diffusion on the suction side of the airfoil. Lieblein
then correlated the profile losses with Deq and this approach has since been widely adopted.
As with the diffusion factor D, the exact value of the Deq is only known if the detailed flow around the
airfoil is known. For use in the early stages of design, an approximate value of Deq, estimated from the
circulation, is therefore used. The following correlation appears to be widely accepted:
Deq =
(3)
y
C2,ref
s
C 2 (y )
s
0
C2
C2 ,ref
C
1 2
C2 ,ref
dy
cos 1
= 2
(4)
c cos 2 cos 2
where
P01 P02
1
C12
2
(5)
The loss correlation is then expressed in terms of the variation of the momentum thickness ratio, 2/c,
with equivalent diffusion ratio, Deq:
= f ( Deq )
c
(6)
The figure shows the original data set, obtained for NACA 65-series compressor airfoils, that was
used by Lieblein. Also shown are various curve fits for the function in (6) that have been proposed over the
years. Note that losses begin to rise sharply at Deq 2.0 and this would be interpreted as the onset of stall. For
the original diffusion factor, Eqn (1), the corresponding value was D 0.6 (see Section 4.4)
0.12
Aungier
Wilson & Korakianitis
Koch & Smith
Casey/Starke
Konig et al
0.1
0.08
0.06
Lieblein Data
0.04
0.02
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.2
2.4
2.6
Recently, Konig et al. (W.M. Konig, D.K. Hennecke & L. Fottner, Improved Blade Profile Loss and
Deviation Models for Advanced Transonic Compressor Bladings: Part I - A Model for Subsonic Flow,
ASME Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 118, January 1996, pp. 73-80.) investigated whether the Lieblein
correlation approach worked equally well for more recent compressor airfoil shapes. Their data are shown in
the next figure, along with the same curve fits.
0.12
Aungier
Wilson & Korakianitis
Koch & Smith
Casey/Starke
Konig et al
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
Konig et al. Data
0.02
+
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.2
2.4
2.6
Although there is some evidence that more recent blade designs can tolerate somewhat higher values
of Deq before stalling, the curve fit suggested by Aungier (R.H. Aungier, Axial-Flow Compressors, ASME
Press, 2003) seems as reasonable as any, for both data sets:
2
8
= 0.004 10
. + 31
. ( Deq 1) + 0.4( Deq 1)
(7)
The method outlined here assumes that the blade is operating at its minimum-loss incidence, i* (see
Section 4.5.3). If i > i* then Lieblein suggested that (3) should be replaced by
Deq =
1.43
where a = 0.0117 for NACA 65-series blades and 0.007 for C4-series circular-arc blades.
2 *
1
h
=
P 1 2
h
where
P
*
=
=
=
(1)
The tangential force-deficit thickness is a measure of the reduction in blade force near the endwalls due to the
lower fluid velocity present in the endwall boundary layers.
Koch & Smith provide correlations, derived from very wide-ranging tests conducted on a large, lowspeed compressor test rig, for estimating the values of * and . The drawing defines some of the geometric
parameters that appear in the correlations.
s
=
=
=
=
spacing
stagger angle
staggered spacing
s cos
=
=
=
tip clearance
blade span
axial gap between rotor and stators
s
g
from the casing wall and have a clearance at the hub wall. If the stators are variable pitch, they will also need
clearance.
The Koch & Smith correlation is embodied in three graphs.
(a) Displacement thickness. The first graph is used to estimate the displacement thickness as a function of
the clearance and the pressure rise ratio:
C P
2 *
= f
,
g
C P ,max g
where
C P =
P
q
with P the static pressure rise across the stage and q the average of the inlet dynamic pressures for the rotor
and stator rows. C P,max is the maximum value of the static pressure rise coefficient for the same stage,
corresponding to the stalling of the stage.
The pressure rise ratio is probably the most difficult input to obtain. However, for preliminary design
it may be sufficient to choose a value that seems generally consistent with the stage and blade loading that has
been chosen. For example, if the deHaller numbers are low and the solidities have been selected to give
relatively high values of the diffusion factors, the pressure rise ratio would be expected to be towards the
higher end of the scale.
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
2*/g
0.35
0.3
/g = 0.10
0.075
0.25
0.050
0.2
0.025
0.15
/g = 0.0
0.1
0.05
0
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
C P/CP,max
0.9
0.95
(b) Effect of Axial Spacing. Koch & Smith concluded that the average displacement thickness of the endwall
boundary layer would vary with the axial spacing between the rotor blade and the stators. If that spacing is
different from 0.35s, then the following correction is applied to the displacement thickness given by the
previous figure.
1.1
1.05
2*/(2*)ref
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
(c) Force Deficit Thickness. Finally the force-deficit thickness is correlated against the displacement
thickness as given in the following figure.
0.9
0.8
0.7
2/2*
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.75
0.8
0.85
CP/CP,max
0.9
0.95
hc s
=
g hcsg
AR
=
h cos
(2)
Values of the tip clearance are often specified as a fraction of the blade span h. Therefore, reasonable values
of /h would be known early in design. Eqn. (2) also implies that the Koch & Smith correlation can be used to
conduct parametric studies to investigate the influence on the endwall losses of common design parameters
such as the solidity and the blade aspect ratio AR = h/c.
For use in Eqn. (1), note that
2 * 2 * g s c
=
h
g s ch
=
2 * cos
g AR
The Howell correlation for the profile losses for C-series airfoils presented in Section 4.6.2 included
the influence of incidence. As seen, the losses rose more rapidly with positive incidence than with negative.
However, the precise behaviour of the losses with incidence is strongly influenced by the geometry of the
blade section.
In addition, the Howell results apply only for low subsonic values of the inlet Mach number. The loss
behaviour of the airfoil is also strongly influenced by the inlet Mach number.
We do not have time in this course to go into these issues in detail. Therefore, only some
representative results are presented to illustrate the complexities.
The figure (taken from SP-36) shows the variation of profile losses with both incidence and inlet
Mach number for four different airfoil and cascade geometries.
Note that the two examples of the British C4-series airfoils differ mainly in the shape of the camber
lines and yet their sensitivity to both the inlet Mach number and the incidence are significantly different.
The double circular arc (DCA) profiles were specifically developed by NACA for use in transonic
compressors. It is seen that their sensitivity to Mach number is delayed to a higher inlet Mach number than
some of the other shapes.
The strong influence of the detailed airfoil geometry on the behaviour at both off-design incidence
and with increasing inlet Mach number obviously makes it more difficult to devise simple correlations for the
losses, liked those presented in Sections 4.6.2 and 4.6.3. For a recent attempt, see W.M. Konig, D.K.
Hennecke & L. Fottner, Improved Blade Profile Loss and Deviation Models for Advanced Transonic
Compressor Bladings: Part II - A Model for Supersonicc Flow, ASME Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 118,
January 1996, pp. 81-87.
where )P0,ideal is the pressure rise that would have been obtained in an ideal machine having the same work
input.
(i) For compressible flow of a perfect gas, the ideal pressure rise is
where
P03 T03 1
=
P01 T01
and T03 is the (actual) final T0 corresponding to the work input: )h0 = Cp(T03 - T01)
T0
P03
P03
T03
T03
P01
T01
T01 P01
Then
T03 T01
T03 T01
For hand calculations, the following approximation results in only a small error
P0
P0, ideal
If any of the loss components is expressed in terms of an efficiency decrement, as is sometimes the case with
tip-leakage loss, its contribution to the total pressure losses can be estimated from
P0, TL clearance P0, ideal
and
=
where, as before
P0
P0, ideal
P0 = P0,ideal P0,loss
4.7
MIGRATION OF
STALL CELL
NORMAL ATTACHED
FLOW
SEPARATION OF
BLADE BOUNDARY
LAYER - BLADE STALL
ROTATING STALL
The rotating stall can take a number of patterns. It may involve only one blade passage, or a large
number of adjacent blade passages around the annulus. If the rotor is at the front of a multi-stage compressor,
it will have a relatively low hub-to-tip ratio. As seen in Section 4.3.4, the loading will then vary considerably
across the span and it will be the hub region that will have the highest loading and therefore be the most likely
to stall. In that case, the may stall cells may only involve part of the span of the blade. If the blades have high
hub-to-tip ratio, the stall is more likely to extend across the full span.
Particularly if the rotating stall occurs at low speed and only involves part of the span, it may not be a
danger to the machine. It is nevertheless undesirable since:
(i) The stalled passages, and therefore the stage, produce less pressure rise.
(ii) The stage losses will be higher, leading to lower efficiency.
(iii) The fluctuating forces on the blades as they successively stall and unstall will be a source of
noise.
For reasons discussed in Section 4.8, it is fairly common for the early stages of multi-stage axial
compressors to experience some rotating stall at low rotational speeds. If it is present only during start-up and
shut-down of the machine, this may be acceptable.
4.7.2 Surge
If the stall is very extensive, the pressure rise may be affected to the point that the slope of the P0
& characteristic becomes positive. As will be shown in Chapter 7, if this occurs the system of which
versus m
the compressor is a part can become dynamically unstable. If this instability is triggered, the result is known
as surge. The peak point of the compressor characteristic is therefore often identified as the surge point.
P0
SURGE
ROTATING
STALL
N const .
&
m
At steady state, the combustor is being filled with gas by the compressor at the same rate as it is
being drained through the turbine. At any instant in time, there is a fairly large mass of gas present in the
volume of the combustor. Now suppose that the last stage of the compressor suddenly stalls. This might be
due to some disturbance that causes a drop in the mass flow rate through the machine. Since the last stage
normally has a high hub-to-tip ratio, the stall may involve the full span of the blades and all of the passages, as
described in the last section.
If the stall is very extensive, there will be an abrupt drop in the pressure of the gas delivered by the
compressor. The flow area through the turbine is relatively small and this limits the outflow through the
turbine. Consequently, the pressure in the combustor will drop somewhat gradually. It the rate of pressure
drop is too slow, the situation can occur that the pressure in the combustor is higher than the pressure at the
compressor outlet. Since fluid tends to flow from a region of high pressure to one of low pressure, it is
therefore possible for the high pressure gases from the combustor to flow back upstream into the compressor.
The pressure in the combustor will eventually drop to below the compressor discharge pressure, at which point
the flow in the compressor may re-establish itself. However, if the conditions that led to the initial stall are still
present, the whole process can repeat. The cyclic flow reversal in the compressor can result in very large
fluctuating forces on the blades which can destroy the machine. In the gas turbine engine, the abrupt drop in
compressed air supplied to the combustor can also lead to over-temperatures and resultant serious damage to
the turbines.
4.8
MULTI-STAGE COMPRESSORS
We now examine the aerodynamic behaviour of multi-stage compressors.
For arguments sake, we will consider a hypothetical four-stage compressor made up of stages with
identical aerodynamic characteristics and thus identical stage design points. Therefore, at design point for the
machine as a whole, each of the stages will be running at their individual design points, which occur for the
same value of the flow coefficient = Ca/U for all of the stages. Assume also that the mean radius, and thus
the blade speed U, is the same for all four stages. Since the density of the gas increases across each successive
stage, to maintain the constant axial velocity Ca needed to keep constant it is necessary to reduce the annulus
area along the machine. This variation in the cross-sectional area would be determined at the design-point
flow conditions.
Ca
U
U
Ca
DESIGN N
1
m& = Ca A
3
OR
Ca =
m&
VARIATION
DUE TO
COMPRESSION
Ca
TARGET Ca
VARIATION
A
AREA VARIATION
TO ACHIEVE
TARGET Ca
DESIGN POINT
Now consider what happens if the compressor is run at a rotational speed that is lower than the design
value. To see the effect, we will just consider the first two stages:
STAGE I
STAGE II
Since the annulus area has been adjusted such that at the design point the two stages have the same
flow coefficient:
I D = II D = D
For stage I
I =
D
CaI D
UD
P1 + PI D
RT3D
Ca 3 D =
m& D
3D A3
II =
D
Ca 3 D
UD
1
C a 1D
2
I =
= ID
1
UD
2
Thus, Stage I will also be operating at its design . However, the absolute h0 (and thus P0} varies as U2 and
the pressure rise is therefore reduced to
1
P1 + PD
1
4
P PD and 3 =
RT3
4
Neglecting the changes in T3, which will be relatively much smaller than the changes in P3, then
1
P + PD
3
4
.
< 10
3
P + PD
D
Ca 3
Ca 3 D
m&
3 m&
A
1
= 3 3 = D
= ( > 10
. ) = k
m& D
2
3 m& D
3D A3
II =
Ca 3 kCa 3D
k
=
= II D
1
1
U
UD
2
2
and since k > 1/2, II > II D . Thus, the non-dimensional operating point for Stage II shifts to a lower value of
than the design value. Stage I undercompresses the fluid due to the reduction in U2. But stage II
undercompresses the fluid even more than Stage I due to the reduction in both U2 and . This effect only
increases in the subsequent stages. For the 4-stage compressor with four identical stages we would therefore
expect to see the following pattern of operating points:
Ca
U
U
Ca
LOW N, STAGE 1 AT DESIGN
1
2
Ca =
m&
A
VARIATION
(UNDERCOMPRESSION)
Ca
DESIGN Ca
VARIATION
NEW Ca
VARIATION
A
AREA VARIATION
(FIXED)
If we now reduce the mass flow rate at the low speed operating
point, keeping N constant, the flow coefficient for Stage I will be
lowered. Stage I will then be producing slightly higher pressure rise.
However, the effect of the low U2 is much greater than the small
increase in and Stage I will still be producing much lower pressure
rise than at the design N. Consequently, Stage I is still undercompressing the fluid and the downstream stages will again be at
successively higher values of . We therefore conclude that if we
throttle the flow further, Stage I will be the first to reach its stalling
value of .
m&
LOW N, THROTTLED
1
2
3
Combining these arguments, we can plot the expected map for the compressor as a whole.
1
P02
P01
3
4
HIGH-SPEED
OPERATING POINT
max
HYPOTHETICAL
STEADY-STATE
OPERATING LINE
DESIGN
POINT
COMPRESSOR
SURGE LINE
CONSTANT
SPEED LINE
T01
3
m& T01
P01
Note that:
(i) Over most of the map, we assume that the stalling of any stage results in compressor surge. As a
result, when the onset of the stall switches from the front to the back of the machine (near the design
N), there is a discontinuity in the slope (or knee) in the surge line.
At low values of N, stall is expected to occur first in the first stage of the compressor.
However, since the early stages of the compressor have lower hub-to-tip ratios, the stall there is more
likely to be part-span, rotating stall (as discussed in Section 4.7). This, combined with the fact that
the absolute forces on the blades will be low at low N, means that some degree of rotating stall is
acceptable at low N. As a result, at the low end of the map the surge line has a kink, indicating that
some early-stage stall is allowed.
(ii) At the design point of the compressor, all of the individual stages are operating at their design
points and therefore have their maximum efficiencies. From the earlier discussion, it is evident that at
any other operating point at most one of the stages will be operating at best efficiency. Therefore, the
efficiency of the overall compressor will be less than its value at design. For this reason, the lines of
constant efficiency are shown as closed contours surrounding the design point.
The compressor map shown is a hypothetical one. In practice, the individual stages in a multi-stage
machine will not all have identical characteristics. Nor are the stall lines for the individual stages likely to
cross at exactly the same point on the map, and as a result the knee in the surge line will probably not be as
well defined. Nevertheless, many of the features are reproduced by actual compressor maps, as shown on the
following:
4.9
For solidities, F, less than about 0.4 each blade can be treated as an isolated airfoil. Note that F = 0.4
was the lowest value of solidity that appeared on the NASA SP-36 correlations (Section 4.5.3). Usually, the
blade is divided into a series of spanwise segments or blade elements. Three-dimensional flow effects in the
form of spanwise flows are usually neglected, although the downwash induced by the trailing vortex system is
sometimes taken into account. This approach, known as the "blade-element method", is commonly used to
design propellers and low-performance axial fans.
Consider the flow relative to a blade element. The element behaves like an isolated airfoil in a stream
in the direction of the vector mean of the inlet and outlet flows:
ZLL
Wm
=
=
Wm =
P
)L
=
=
=
)D
)X
)Y
CL, CD =
Ca
Q
tan 1 + tan 2
; m = arctan
; Ca =
A
cos m
2
The axial force is obtained from the momentum equation (with Ca = const.):
(2)
Fx = N B X = AP = (2 rr ) P
where NB
)P
=
=
(3a)
no. of blades
static pressure difference across the blade row
1
N B Wm2 crC L sin m 2rrP
1
N B Wm2 cC L sin m 2rP
(3b)
QP0
W&in = T =
Qh0 Q(UC w )
R
(4a)
)T
)Q
0R
)P0
=
=
=
=
Substituting for the torque in terms of the components of the lift and drag forces ()T = NBr)Y)
QP0
1
Rotor and stator blade rows can then be designed using Eqns. (1) - (4). Iteration will generally be
necessary since W2 is a function of )L, which is a function Wm, which in turn is a function of W2. The
analysis would be performed at enough spamwise sections to define the full blade geometry.
Propeller analysis usually takes into account the "downwash" induced along the blade span by the
trailing tip vortices from the blades. The downwash would slightly alter the effective flow incidence seen by
the blade and thus the lift it develops.
To make the velocity triangle diagram clearer, the blade was sketched with somewhat lower stagger
angle than would normally be found in practice. The diagram shows the force triangles for a more realistic
value of the stagger angle:
L
X F
Wm
Note that )D makes a noticeable contribution to the magnitude of )Y but has a much smaller influence on the
magnitude of )X. This is the reason that )D can be neglected when determining )X, but needs to included
when determining )Y.
5.2
The geometry of an axial-flow turbine blade is similar that of an axial-flow compressor blade, except
that camber is usually much larger. The stage consists of a set of stators ("nozzles") followed by a rotor. The
nozzles control the swirl in the flow entering the rotor and the rotor then extracts work from the fluid by
removing swirl. This arrangement of components results in stage aerodynamic characteristics that are very
different from those obtained for an axial compressor.
We begin again by estimating the stage performance based on an idealized stage:
(i) Simple velocity triangles are assumed: constant axial velocity through the stage and constant mean
radius, resulting in constant blade speed where the mean streamline enters and leaves the rotor.
(ii) Approximate blade geometries are obtained using the Euler Approximation.
Consider again the reaction turbine sketched in Section 3.5. The drawing shows the velocity
triangles:
Now reduce the mass flow at constant N, using the Euler Approximation to determine the outlet flow
angles. From the drawing shown over, the flow coefficient is reduced
Ca
< D
U
Clearly, Cw is smaller than at design. This is also consistent with the reduction in rotor blade incidence.
Thus
h0 C w
=
U
U2
< D
Therefore, varies directly with . Compare this with the case of compressors where they varied inversely.
Ca
U
> D
Cw
U
> D
and the same trend is found as when the mass flow rate was changed.
Now consider the absolute output. From the Euler equation
h0 = UC w
and from the velocity triangles, Cw increased as U decreased. It is not entirely clear whether the product
UCw has increased or decreased. However, it is clear that it, and therefore h0, has not changed very much.
Compare this with the compressor case, where a reduction in U resulted in a large reduction in UCw:
Summarizing, based on the velocity triangles, the aerodynamic performance characteristics of axial
compressors and turbines differ in two main ways:
(i) versus , and therefore P0 versus m& , is negative for compressors, positive for turbines.
(ii) The energy transfer h0 is a strong function of U for compressors, but only a weak function for
turbines.
The following figures show the actual characteristics of the gas-generator turbine of the Orenda OT-2
gas turbine engine. Note that it is conventional to use the pressure ratio as the independent variable for
plotting turbine aerodynamic characteristics.
The characteristics confirm that the mass flow-pressure ratio characteristic is only a weak function of
the rotational speed. However, this does not mean that the rotational speed is not important in order to have a
high output of useful work. As seen from the velocity triangles, if the rotational speed is reduced below the
design value, the energy released by the fluid, h0 = UCw, may not be changed very much, but this is also
accompanied by high incidence on the rotor. This will lead to higher losses and therefore poor efficiency.
This is confirmed by the OT-2 efficiency curves. Thus, to have high energy release by the fluid and to recover
most of that energy as useful shaft power output, it is necessary to have high rotational speed.
5.3
Cascade results are used for meanline analysis of turbines in much the same way as for axial
compressors. Again, primarily British results will be presented, but these are also widely used in North
America.
5.3.1
Turbine blade rows, for gas turbine engines in particular, often operate at choked conditions or with
mildly supersonic outlet flow conditions. The correlations for outlet flow angles for such blade rows are
generally divided into two sections: one for low speeds (usually taken as M2 # 0.5-0.7) and one for the sonic
condition (M2 = 1.0). For intermediate values of M2 the outlet angle is usually assumed to vary linearly
between the low-speed and the sonic values.
(i) Low Speed (M2 # 0.5)
As mentioned earlier, the Carter & Hughes correlation for deviation (used by Howell for compressors)
has also been used for turbines:
s
= m
c
where 2 = camber angle and the value of m is obtained from Fig. 3.6 (from Horlock).
For turbines, n is generally taken as 1.0, as used for compressor inlet guide vanes (as opposed to the value of
1/2 used for compressor rotor and stator blades). However, the Carter & Hughes correlation tends to overestimate the deviation for most modern turbine blades.
A more satisfactory (but less convenient) correlation is that due to Ainley & Mathieson (A-M). Their
correlation uses the so-called gauge angle 2g as a reference angle to which the actual outlet angle is related:
o
g = cos 1
s
g
s
o
2 = 11625
.
cos 1 12
s
o
s
2 = 11625
.
cos 1 12 + 4
s
e
where e is the suction side radius of curvature.
Unfortunately, modern turbine blades usually do not use
circular arcs to define their surface shapes. As a result, e
is not constant and generally not known. To use the AM correlation it is therefore necessary to obtain an
equivalent value of e. An approximate value can be
calculated from the unguided turning angle as follows:
s
=
e
u
o
180 1
s
For a curved-back blade, this was again corrected for the suction side radius of curvature. The results were
presented graphically but can be approximated by the following curve fit:
s
1.787 + 4 .128
e
o s
sin 1 o
2 = cos
s
e
s
As mentioned, for 0.5 # M2 # 1.0 the value of "2 is obtained by linear interpolation:
5.3.2
In 1945, Zweifel introduced a tangential force coefficient to measure the loading of turbine blades.
Consider the control volume enclosing a single airfoil in a row of turbine blades. The CV extends unit depth
in the z direction.
Y
y
x
X
P1
C1
1 Cw1
Ca1
P2
Ca2
1
cx
Cw2
C2
Fy = m& V y 2 V y1
(1)
Because the top and bottom faces of the CV are periodic boundaries, the pressure forces on them exactly
balance each other in both the x and y directions. Thus, the only contribution to Fy is the blade force Y.
Then
Y = m& (C w 2 + C w1 )
(2)
C w 2 = Ca 2 tan 2
and for unit span, m& = 2 Ca 2 s1 . Note that we are using here a common convention in turbine design
practice that 1, 2, Cw1, and Cw2 are all taken to be positive: that is, we are not rigidly following the sign
conventions introduced earlier. Then (2) can be written
C
Y = 2 sCa22 tan 2 + a1 tan 2
Ca 2
C
1
Y = 2 C22 (2 s)cos 2 2 tan 2 + a1 tan 2
Ca 2
2
(3)
The tangential force in (3) is just the integrated effect of the pressure distribution around the airfoil:
"IDEAL" DISTRIBUTION
P0
P1
1
P0 P2 = C22
2
PS
ACTUAL
DISTRIBUTION
P2
SS
Y=
cx
cx
Zweifel then defined a reference, ideal loading distribution. This corresponds to the maximum loading that
could be achieved with the same inlet and outlet conditions while avoiding adverse pressure gradients on the
suction surface. This distribution, which is not physically realizable, corresponds to a pressure on the pressure
side of P0 and a pressure on the suction side equal to the discharge pressure P2. The resulting ideal
tangential force is then
1
Yideal = ( P0 P2 )c x 1 = 2 C22 c x
2
(4)
The Zweifel coefficient is then obtained by taking the ratio of the actual to the ideal tangential forces
Z=
Substituting from (3) and (4) then
Y
Yideal
C
Z = 2 cos 2 2 tan 2 + a1 tan 1
Ca 2
cx
(5)
Note that this definition neglects the sign convention for angles. For a typical turbine blade, 1 and 2 have
opposite signs. If the signs of 1 and 2 are taken into account then the coefficient becomes:
C
Z = 2 cos 2 2 tan 2 a1 tan 1
Ca 2
cx
As usual, for rotor blades replaces . The normal definition of the solidity is = c/s. The way the Zweifel
coefficient is defined results in the solidity being expressed in terms in term of the axial chord length, cx,
rather than the true chord, c. The relationship between the true chord and axial chord can be seen from the
drawing, where is the stagger angle:
C
X
Zweifel (1945) concluded, based on European cascade data from the 1930s and 1940s, that Z .
0.8 gave minimum profile losses. Thus, for given velocity triangles, the optimum s/cx is that which gives the
value of Z which results in minimum profile losses:
If s/cx is too high (which corresponds to low solidity), losses will be high due to separation,
If s/cx is too low, profile losses are high because of excessive wetted area.
Using the Zweifel coefficient to choose s/cx is analogous to the use of the diffusion factor to select the solidity
for axial compressors. Since Zweifels time, profile design has improved and today turbines are often
designed with considerably higher values of Z ( Z = 1.00-1.05 is common).
Using values of stagger angle obtained from K-O Fig. 5, the following figure shows the values of the
Zweifel coefficient for selected combinations of inlet and outlet flow angles. It is evident that the optimum
geometries based on the Ainley & Mathieson correlations lead to higher values of Z than Zweifel originally
recommended. Very high values of Z are obtained for impulse blades (1 = 2). Since the Ainley &
Mathieson loss system was specifically based on loss measurements made for impulse blades, these results
suggest that relatively higher values of Zweifel coefficient can be tolerated in the rotor blades for stages with
low values of degree of reaction, especially if the total flow turning is low.
Z = 1.028
Z = 1.034
Z = 0.911
Z = 1.56
Z = 1.26
Z = 0.990
Z = 0.909
5.3.3
Losses
In both North America and Europe, most loss estimates for axial-flow turbines are based on a loss
system developed by Ainley & Mathieson (AM) in the UK in the early 1950s (ARC R&M 2974, 1957; see
also Saravanamuttoo et al.). The AM system has been updated a couple of times to reflect improvements in
blade design: for the design-point conditions, this was done most recently by Kacker & Okapuu (KO) of Pratt
& Whitney Canada (Kacker, S.C. and Okapuu, U., A Mean Line Prediction Method for Axial Flow Turbine
Efficiency, ASME J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 104, January 1982, pp. 111-119).
The KO system will be summarized here. The figures from the paper have also been fitted to curves
or surfaces and these fits are given in Appendix E.
For turbines, the total-pressure loss coefficient Y is defined as
Y=
P0,loss
P02 P2
(1)
Note that in this case, the loss is non-dimensionalized by the outlet dynamic pressure, whereas the inlet value
is used in the loss coefficients for axial compressors.
As for compressors, losses are again divided into components and these are then added linearly to
obtain the total losses:
(2)
where the subscripts designate the components as follows: P = profile, S = secondary, TET = trailing-edge
thickness, TC = tip clearance. f(Re) represents a correction for the effects of Reynolds number on the profile
losses. The effect of Reynolds number on the other loss components is not well documented but it is believed
to be small.
The following figure shows the blade nomenclature used in the KO system. Note that they do not
follow the sign convention we defined earlier. Using that convention, the inlet and outlet flow and metal
angles will often have opposite signs because of the high turning that is normally present in turbine blade
rows. It becomes a nuisance to keep track of the signs and therefore it is common practice by turbine
designers to take both the inlet and outlet angles as positive, as shown in KO Fig. 3.
Profile Losses:
The profile loss is obtained as the weighted average of the losses for two extreme cases with the same
outlet flow angle: a nozzle blade (maximum blade-passage acceleration) and an impulse blade (zero
acceleration). In the original AM system, the expression took the form:
YP , AM
1
= YP ,nozzle + YP ,impulse YP ,nozzle
2
t
c 2
max
0.2
(3)
where tmax is the maximum thickness of the blade. Note that KO use for "air" angles, for "blade" angles.
The two reference loss coefficients were presented graphically by AM, as shown in Fig. 1 (for nozzles) and
Fig. 2 (for impulse blades). Note also that for a given value of the outlet angle 2 there is a value of solidity
= c/s that minimizes the profile losses. This was the origin of the "optimum " that is plotted on Fig. 7.14 in
Section 5.3.2.2.
Kacker & Okapuu compared the AM predictions of profile losses with those obtained from turbine
airfoils of more recent design. They concluded that the AM loss systems significantly over-estimates the
losses for modern turbine blades. The KO profile loss correlation therefore takes the form
YP , KO =
2
(0.914YP , AM )
3
(4)
where the factor of 0.914 was introduced to correct the AM loss estimate to that for zero trailing-edge
thickness (since KO handle trailing-edge losses separately) and the factor of 2/3 reflects the improvements in
profile design since Ainley & Mathiesons time.
As seen, Eqn. (3) includes a correction for the maximum thickness of the airfoil: the data in Figs. 1
and 2 apply for a maximum thickness of 20% of the chord length. Decisions about the maximum airfoil
thicknesses would not normally be made at the stage of a meanline analysis for the blade row. However, KO
examined the range of maximum thicknesses observed for a number of recent actual designs and provided the
correlation shown in Fig. 4. Knowing the flow turning from the velocity triangles, this figure can then be used
to obtain a reasonable value for the thickness, ahead of the detailed design of the blade.
The estimates obtained from the correlations described above apply for low speed flows. The turbines
in gas turbine engines normally operate under compressible flow conditions. The Mach number levels
encountered depend to some degree on where the turbine is located in the engine:
High Pressure Turbine (HPT). The HPT is located immediately downstream of the combustor and
drive the high pressure compressor. To minimize the number of stages, HPTs are typically designed
to operate at transonic outlet flow conditions.
Low Pressure Turbine (LPT). The LPT drives the low pressure compressor, and the fan stage in a
turbofan engine. The fan has a large tip diameter and to keep the tip Mach numbers acceptable, the
fan shaft must rotate at a much lower speed than the high-pressure spool. The tip diameter of the LPT
is much smaller than that of the fan and as a result it runs at a relatively low blade speed. This in turn
results in lower flow velocities generally. It is therefore normal for the flow around LPT airfoils to be
subsonic everywhere.
As a result of these differences, the strongest effects of compressiblity are normally seen in HPTs. The
following Schlieren photos (taken from E. Detemple-Laake, Measurement of the Flow Field in the Blade
Passage and Side Wall Region of a Plane Turbine Cascade, AGARD-CP_469, 1989) show the flow through
an HPT blade passage with exit Mach numbers of 0.9 (left) and 1.25 (right):
The profile losses can be affected by compressibility effects in at least two ways:
(i) Inlet Shock Losses. The high levels of curvature around the leading edges of turbine blades
result in high local velocities in this region. For inlet relative Mach numbers as low as 0.6, patches of
supersonic flow, terminating in a shock, can appear on the suction side of the airfoil.
(ii) Channel Acceleration and Outlet Shocks. A turbine blade passage is normally an accelerating
flow channel. As the outlet Mach number increases, there is a tendency for the blade surface
boundary layers to be thinned and their contribution to the losses actually decreases slightly. As the
outlet Mach number approaches 1.0, patches of supersonic flow, terminating in shocks, may begin to
appear on the aft suction surface. Finally, as the outlet Mach number becomes supersonic, expansion
waves and shocks appear in the trailing edge region. In addition to directly contributing additional
total pressure losses, it is common for one or more of the shocks to impinge on the surface of the
adjacent blade. This can cause boundary layer separation, which would further increase the losses.
This effect can be seen from the following figure, which shows Detemple-Laakes cascade operating
at an outlet Mach number of 1.30.
The following figure shows the relative profile losses as a function of exit Mach number for another
HPT cascade (from Mee et al., An Examination of the Contributions to Loss on a Transonic Turbine Blade in
Cascade, ASME J. Turbomachinery, Vol. 114, January 1992, pp. 155-162).
The complexity of the compressibility effects makes it difficult to predict their influence on the
losses. Kacker & Okapuu provide procedures for estimating the contributions to the profile losses; see
the paper for details.
Finally, KO give the following Reynolds number corrections for profile losses:
Re c
f ( Re) =
2 10 5
0. 4
for
= 10
.
Re c 2 10 5
Re
= 6c
10
0.2
for
Re c > 10 6
where the Reynolds number is based on the chord length and exit velocity.
Secondary Losses:
As in Howells correlations for compressors, the AM/KO loss systems indicate that the secondary
losses in axial turbines are a function of CL2:
2
cos 2 C L cos 2 2
YS = 0.04 f ( AR)
cos 1 s c cos 3 m
(5)
where
CL
= 2( tan 1 + tan 2 ) cos m
sc
1
m = tan 1 ( tan 2 tan 1 )
2
f ( AR) =
1 0.25 2 h c
1
=
hc
hc
for h c 2
(6)
for h c > 2
2.5
2
Ainley & Mathieson
1.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
Kacker & Okapuu also provide a compressibility correction for the secondary losses (see the
paper).
Trailing-Edge Losses:
Due to the finite thickness of the trailing edge, the streamtube experiences a sudden increase in
area as it leaves the blade passage. The resulting sudden-expansion loss is correlated in terms of an
alternative form of loss coefficient, known as an energy loss coefficient, 2, as a function of the ratio of
the trailing-edge thickess to the throat opening. KO correlated the values for nozzle blades and impulse
blades separately, as shown in Fig. 14.
2
TET
2
TET ( 1 = 0 )
2
2
+ 1 TET
( 1 = 2 ) TET ( 1 = 0)
2
(7)
The energy loss coefficient is then converted to the usual total pressure loss coefficient as follows:
YTET =
1 2
1
M2
1
2
2
1 TET
1 2
M2
1 1 +
1
2
TET
Tip-Clearance Loss:
For unshrouded blades, KO express the effects of tip-clearance losses as a correction to the
efficiency:
= 0.93
RTip
k
h cos 2 R Mean
(8)
where 0 is the efficiency for zero tip clearance and k is the tip clearance. Note that Eqn. (8) indicates
that a 1% increase in tip clearance, relative to blade span, will result in a 1% reduction in efficiency. This
is considerably lower sensitivity than the 3% reduction that is predicted by Howells correlation for axial
compressors. As seen, KO also found the loss to be a function of the hub-to-tip ratio of the blade, since
1
R Mean = RTip
1 + HTR 2 , where HTR = RHub/RTip.
2
Low-pressure turbine blades are often shrouded to reduce the tip-leakage flow and losses. KO
recommend the following expression to estimate the tip-leakage losses for a shrouded rotor blade row:
YTC
c k
= 0.37
h c
0.78
C L cos 2 2
s c cos 3 m
(9)
( Number of
seals)
0.42
To illustrate the relative magnitudes of the various components of loss, the predicted loss
components for two different turbine stages, one subsonic and one transonic, will be quoted (taken from
Moustapha et. al., Axial and Radial Turbines, Concepts NREC, 2003, pp. 89-90). The table summarizes
the design parameters for the two stages:
Subsonic Turbine
Transonic Turbine
Pressure Ratio
1.97
3.76
Work Coefficient,
1.31
2.47
Flow Coefficient,
0.47
0.64
Reaction, (%)
50
30
88
83.5
Stators
Rotor
Stators
Rotor
0.67
0.82
1.1
1.14
60
78
76
124
0.71
1.25
0.70
1.44
1.5
Zweifel Coefficient
0.74
1.5
0.88
0.84
0.76
Transonic Turbine
Subsonic Turbine
0.4
0.3
0.4
Stators
0.35
Rotor
Loss Coefficient, Y
Loss Coefficient, Y
0.35
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0.3
Stators
Rotor
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Profile
Trailing
Edge
Secondary
Tip
Clearance
Loss Component
Total
0
Profile
Trailing
Edge
Secondary
Tip
Clearance
Loss Component
Total
PW100 Turboprop
95
1.8
90
1.6
, (Rotor Only)
, Efficiency (%)
85
1.4
Diffuser
Loss
80
75
1.2
1
(Rotor + Diffuser)
70
0.8
65
0.6
60
0.4
55
0.2
50
10
100
0
15
Data for rotor only: Senoo, Y., Hayami, H., Kinoshita, Y. and Yamasaki, H., "Experimental Study on Flow in a Supersonic Centrifugal
Impeller," ASME J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 101, Jan. 1979, pp. 32-41.
Data for rotor with PWC pipe diffuser: Kenny, D.P., "A Comparison of the Predicted and Measured Performance of High Pressure Ratio
Centrifugal Compressor Diffusers," ASME Paper 72-GT-54, 1972.
Influence of diffuser design and diffuser pinch on pressure ratio, surge line and choking mass flow rate: Japikse, D. Decisive Factors in
Advanced Centrifugal Compressor Design and Development, I.MechE, Orlando, FL, November 2000.
6.2
Consider the outlet flow from a centrifugal rotor with backswept vanes. Assume that there is no swirl
in the rotor inlet flow and that the fluid is incompressible. Assume also the Euler Approximation so that the
flow leaves the rotor parallel to the metal angle at the vane trailing edge.
U2
W2
2 (+)
C2
Cr2
'2 (+)
Cw2
and
tan 2 =
Cw2 U 2
Cr 2
or
C w 2 = U 2 + Cr 2 tan 2
Q
= U2 +
tan 2
A2
Then
gH E = U 22 + U 2
Q
tan 2
A2
gH E
Q
= K1 + K 2
2
2
N D
ND 3
2
where
U2
K1 = 2 2 2 = = const .
60
N D
(1)
and
K2 =
U2D
tan 2
NA2
Equation (1) is the equation for the idealized head rise versus flow rate characteristic. Within the Euler
Approximation ($N2 = $2), the slope of the characteristic, K2, is constant and has the same sign as $2, as shown
in the sketch:
Note that whereas the slope of the )H vs Q characteristic for axial machines was always negative
(assuming R < 1.0, which experience has shown is necessary), radial machines can have charateristics with
either positive of negative slopes, depending on the geometry of the vanes at the outlet:
Forward-swept vanes:
dHE/dQ > 0 is destabilizing, but losses can provide some stable operating range (see later
section).
Suitable where want to maximize head rise, efficiency is not a serious concern and surge is
not a problem.
Radial vanes:
Simplest to manufacture.
No bending stresses in vanes due to centrifugal effects (were therefore favoured in early gas
turbine engine applications of centrifugal compressors).
Backward-swept vanes:
6.3
The definition of specific speed used here is based average density (or average volume flow rate):
1
NS =
Q + Q2 2
1
2
3
( gH ) 4
1
2
1
( gH ) 4
&
m
Work Coefficient:
1r22 U 2
P =
h0ref
U 22
where )h0ref is the total enthalpy rise for the reversible process with the same pressure ratio. 0P is the stage
polytropic efficiency. Aungiers correlations are presented in the following two figures:
P =
h0ref
U 22
calculate U2.
(b) Then from the chosen N
&
m
1r22U 2
calculate r2.
With the tip radius and tip blade speed defined, the rotational speed is known. If the rotational speed
is constrained (eg. driving motors are only available for certain speeds) then Fig. 6-1 or Fig. 6-2 can be used to
select a compromise size and rotational speed that minimizes the impact on the stage efficiency.
If there are no IGVs, Cw1 = 0 and the work transfer depends entirely on the rotor tip or outlet conditions. For
good efficiency, the impeller inlet must nevertheless be well designed (eg. the inducer inlet metal angle must
be matched to the inlet relative flow vector) and correctly sized.
Consider three rotors designed for the same m& , U2 and with the same outlet geometry so that all three
give the same h0. The critical region for frictional losses (which vary as V2), cavitation and compressibility
effects is at the vane tip at the inlet, since that is where the relative velocity is the highest and static pressure
the lowest. The drawing shows the resulting inlet tip velocity triangles for three different inlet sizes:
SMALL EYE
LOW U1t
HIGH C1t
LARGE EYE
HIGH U1t
LOW C1t
r2
r1t
r1h
C1t
W1t
C1t
U1t
W1t
C1t
U1t
W1t
U1t
To allow room for a shaft, or for a nut to hold the rotor to the end of the shaft, typically r1h = 0.2r2 to 0.35r2.
For a given r1h, it is evident from the inlet velocity triangles that there is an optimum r1t that minimizes the
inlet relative velocity and Mach number:
W1t
OPTIMUM
M1t
r1t
m& = 2 Cr 2 A2 = 2 Cr 2 (2r2 b2 )
and thus for a fixed m& , the choice of b2 determines the radial component of velocity at the rotor outlet:
Cw 2
U2
C2
W2
Cr 2
SMALL b2
2
LARGE b2
C2
W2
b2
r2
LARGE b2
SMALL b2
C2
Lower
(Good)
Higher
(Bad - Larger diffusion
required downstream)
W2
Lower
Higher
W2/W1
Lower
(Bad - Larger diffusion
required in rotor passage)
Higher
(Good)
Higher
Lower
The value of b2 would thus be chosen to obtain a compromise between high diffusion inside the rotor
passage and high diffusion in the downstream diffuser (which serves the same function as the stators in an
axial compressor stage).
Note that W2/W1 is again the de Haller number. Various papers and textbooks provide guidelines for
choosing the de Haller number for centrifugal fan, compressor, and pump rotor passages:
(1) Aungier (2000)
Recommended:
Never exceed:
Recommended:
Recommended:
Because of slip, the rotor imparts less swirl to the flow than for the ideal case, for which $2 =$2N (that is, the
Euler approximation is taken to hold in the ideal case). Since Cw2 < Cw2N, the )h0 is reduced by this effect. We
then define the slip factor F as
Cw 2
C
w2
where F # 1.0.
A number of correlations have been proposed for F. The one due to Stodola has been widely used:
cos 2
Z
= 1
1 2 tan 2
where N2 = Cr2/U2 and $2N is the backsweep or forwardsweep angle (taken as positive in both cases). Stanitz
suggested a slightly simpler form:
0.63
= 1
1 2 tan 2
Wiesner (F.J. Wiesner, A Review of Slip Factors for Centrifugal Impellers, ASME Trans., J. Eng.
for Power, October 1967, pp. 558-572) reviewed the available slip factor correlations and pointed out that the
Stodola, Stanitz and similar correlations are only valid for impellers with long blades. Wiesner recommended
the Busemann correlation which takes into account the influence of r1/r2 and provided the following curve fit:
Letting , = r1/r2, and identifying a limiting value of , given by
1
lim it =
e
8.16 cos
2
= 1
sin 2
Z 0.7
= 1
cos 2 lim it
1
Z 0.7 1 lim it
Z=
25cos 2
2 W
0.9
W2 + W1
45
40
2 D2 U 2
Z LB
30
b 1 D D1
L B = z I 2 + 2
2 2 cos
Number of Vanes, Z
W =
35
25
20
15
10
10
20
Rodgers, Ns = 0.6
Rodgers, Ns = 0.7
Rodgers, Ns = 0.8
Wilson Zmax
Wilson Zmin
30
40
Backsweep Angle (Deg.)
50
60
70
6.3.6 Losses
The actual stage characteristics are different from ideal due to slip and losses. Slip reduces output but
does not affect efficiency since the required input power is reduced along with the output.
Sources of losses:
(1) Disc friction:
(2) Leakage:
(3) Inlet:
(4) Impeller:
(5) Diffuser/Volute:
The figure shows the approximate trend of the loss components with flow rate:
The next figures show the resulting stage characteristics, taking into account slip and losses, for
backward-swept and forward-swept vanes:
(i)
Backward-swept vanes:
(ii)
Forward-swept vanes:
Note that due to the effects of the losses the machine with forward-swept vanes also has some stable
operating range (dHE/dQ < 0.0), although it tends to be narrower and does not include the design point.
Taking into account the losses, the required shaft power is
W& = gQH E ( th ) + gQl H E ( th ) + Disc & Bearing Friction Power
where
)HE(th) =
Ql
=
where
)HL
overall =
gQH
W& shaft
CHAPTER 7
Static and Dynamic Stability of Compression Systems
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Point C is different. If m
& is disturbed to a larger value,
the machine delivers more )P0 than the load requires at the
& . The flow in the load will therefore increase even
new m
further and the operating point moves further from the
equilibrium point. Thus C is a statically unstable operating
point.
The flow through the components is treated as onedimensional. Thus, the flow at any point is characterized by
& etc. (if necessary, these would
a single value of P, T, C, m
be interpreted as the local average values). The analysis will
consider perturbations about an equilibrium operating point
and the perturbations will be assumed to be small.
The instantaneous value of any flow quantity is
represented by the sum of the mean value plus the
instantaneous (small) perturbation:
m2 = m2 + m2
d ( P2 P01 )
dm1
dC
=c
dm1
P3 = P3 + P3 etc.
=
=c
dm1 dm1 dm1
(3)
P2
m1
dP = cdm
2
P2
m1
P2 P2 = c m1 m1
(1) Compressor
The pressure rise across the across the compressor,
represented by P2 - P01, is a function of the inlet mass flow:
P2 P01 = C(m1 )
(2)
P2 = cm1
(1)
(4)
P2 = cm2
(5)
(2) Duct
We assume that the losses in the system occur primarily
in the throttle so that we can neglect the frictional losses in
the duct. We also neglect the volume of the duct relative to
the volume of the plenum. Therefore, the duct introduces
only inertia: a pressure difference is present between stations
2 and 3 only when the fluid in the duct is being accelerated or
decelerated.
The equation governing the behaviour of the duct can be
obtained either by performing a force balance on the free
body consisting of the cylinder of fluid in the duct or by
P2 P3 =
L dm2
A dt
(7)
d
(mu)
dt
d
P2 A P3 A = ( A Lu)
dt
d
= L ( Au)
dt
Fx
m2 m3 = V
L dm2
A dt
(8)
P2 P3 =
d3
dt
(6)
If the compression or expansion process is isentropic,
then
Fx =
u dV + (mu)
d
dt
out
(mu)in
Fx =
d
dt
u Adx =
d
m2
dt
d3
dP3
= 3
dt
P3 dt
1 dP3
=
RT3 dt
dm
dx = L 2
dt
0
= const.
1 dP3
a32 dt
m2 m3 =
We then substitute into (6) in terms of the perturbations
) (
P2 + P2 P3 + P3 =
L d m2 + m2
A
dt
V dP3
a32 dt
m2 m3 =
and since there are no losses in the duct, the mean inlet and
outlet pressures must be the same. Thus, the perturbation
equation for the duct becomes
V dP3
a32 dt
(9)
(4) Throttle
The throttle is handled in exactly the same way as the
compressor: the load line is linearized at the equilibrium
operating point. If the valve is choked, the mass flow rate
P3 = f m3
dP3 dP2 L d 2 m2
=
dt
dt
A dt 2
(10)
where f is the local slope of the load line (note that f will
always be positive).
dm
dP2
=c 2
dt
dt
Thus
P2 = cm2
dP3
dm L d 2 m2
=c 2
dt
dt
A dt 2
(11)
L dm2
P2 P3 =
A dt
V dP3
m2 m3 = 2
a3 dt
or
(12)
f V dP3 c f V dm2
f V d 2 m2
=
a32 dt
a32 dt
a32 dt 2
(13)
P3 = f m3
(14)
These are four equations in the four unknowns m2N, m3N, P2N
and P3N. Solving for any one of the unknowns from (11) (14) leads to a second-order ordinary differential equation for
the variation in time for that unknown.
f V L d 2 m2 L c f V dm2
+ ( f c) m2 = 0 (19)
+ 2
a32 A dt 2
a3 dt
A
cm2 f m3 =
L dm2
A dt
(15)
f m2 f m3 = f
V dP3
a32 dt
(16)
V dP L dm2
f m2 cm2 = f 2 3
A dt
a3 dt
(18)
d2x
dt
(17)
+s
dx
+ kx = 0
dt
(20)
sc = 2 k m
x = Ae
s
sc
k
t
m
2
s
sin 1
sc
k
t +
m
References
Cumpsty, N.A., 1989, Compressor Aerodynamics, Longman,
Harlow.
Greitzer, E.M., 1980, Review - Axial Compressor Stall
Phenomena, ASME J. Fluids Engineering, Vol. 102, June
1980, pp. 134-151.
L cfV
2 >0
A
a3
or
c>
La32
AV f
APPENDIX A:
Curve and Surface Fits for Howells Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades
(a) Design-Point flow Deflection, ,* (C,R & S, Fig. 5.14)
B = -0.530812
E = -0.677212
C = -15.2599
F = 0.187148
(b) Reynolds Number Correction for Design-Point Deflection (Horlock Fig. 3.3)
With
A = 0.664154 B = 22.1578
C = 1.03819
D = 4.71864
where Re is the Reynolds number based on inlet velocity and blade chord divided by 105.
where
The curve fit is applicable for -0.8 < irel < 0.8.
APPENDIX B:
C4 Compressor Blade Profiles
Like NACA 4-digit airfoils, the C-series compressor blades are defined by a symmetrical
thickness distribution which is superimposed on a specified mean, or camber, line. As indicated in the
Howell correlations, both circular arc and parabolic arc camber lines have been used with C-series
blades.
For the blade with a parabolic arc camber line, the point of maximum camber lies at other than
mid-chord. Typically, the point of maximum camber lies towards to leading edge; that is, a/c < 0.5.
The relationship between the camber angle 2 (= 21 + 22), a/c and b/c is:
(1)
and
The term parabolic arc camber line is somewhat misleading. The mean line is not defined by a
single parabola, or even by two joined parabolas. For example, to define a polynomial which passes
1
through (0,0) with slope tan21 and through (a,b) with zero slope requires at least a cubic. The following
discussion will consider mainly the circular arc camber line.
Setting a/c = 0.5 in Eqn (1),
(2)
The equations of the camber line and its inclination, Nc, are then
(3)
and
(4)
The co-ordinates of the upper and lower sides of the blade are then
(5)
where yt is the local thickness of the blade. For the C4 profile, the blade thickness distribution is given by
where t is the maximum thickness of the blade as a fraction of the chord length.
The geometry of C-series blade is designated using a shorthand notation. For example, a blade
designated 10C4/30C50 refers to a blade with a C4 profile and: 10% maximum thickness, circular arc
camber, camber angle 30o and maximum camber at 50% chord (the last piece of information is redundant
2
since circular arc camber has already been specified). The resultant geometry is shown:
APPENDIX C:
Curve and Surface Fits for NASA Correlations for Axial Compressor Blades
The surface fit gives the minimum loss incidence for a blade of zero camber and 10% thickness as
a function of inlet flow angle, $1, and solidity, F:
With:
A00 = -0.13571
A10 = 0.015986
A01 = 0.075795
A11 = 0.074959
A02 = 9.1315x10-4
A20 = -2.4954x10-4
With:
A00 = -0.066879
A03 = 0.033568
A11 = 7.402x10-3
A20 = -3.3001x10-5
A30 = 8.0286x10-7
A01 = 0.05897
A04 = -7.1706x10-3
A12 = -2.5749x10-3
A21 = -3.084x10-5
A31 = -1.2016x10-7
A02 = -0.054019
A10 = -6.0476x10-3
A13 = 2.6067x10-4
A22 = 1.3955x10-5
A40 = -9.1961x10-9
n1($1,F) = A00 + A01F + A02F2 + A03F3 + A04F4 + A10$1 + A11$1F + A12$1F2 + A13$1F3
n2($1,F) = A20$12 + A21$12F + A22$12F2 + A30$13 + A31$13F + A40$14
n($1,F) = n1($1,F) + n2($1,F)
Valid for: 0.4 < F < 2.0, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.
(c) Thickness Correction, (Ki)t, for Minimum-Loss Incidence (SP-36 Fig. 142)
Valid for: 0.0 < t/c < 0.12, probably usable up to t/c = 0.15.
A00 = 0.053535
A03 = -0.75902
A10 = -3.838x10-3
A13 = 3.4149x10-3
A21 = 2.0917x10-4
A30 = -1.3124x10-5
A40 = 2.3356x10-7
A01 = -0.29275
A04 = 0.3706
A11 = 0.02838
A14 = 5.8448x10-4
A22 = 3.0519x10-4
A31 = -1.0755x10-5
A41 = 1.1718x10-7
A02 = 0.71879
A05 = -0.067233
A12 = -0.02068
A20 = 3.5333x10-4
A23 = -1.2273x10-4
A32 = 1.7229x10-6
A50 = -1.4651x10-9
*o1($1,F) = A00 + A01F + A02F2 + A03F3 + A04F4 +A05F5 + A10$1 + A11$1F + A12$1F2 + A13$1F3 + A14$1F4
*o2($1,F) = A20$12 + A21$12F + A22$12F2 + A23$12F3 + A30$13 + A31$13F + A32$13F2
+ A40$14 + A41$14F + A50$15
*o($1,F) = *o1($1,F) + *o2($1,F)
Valid for: 0.4 < F < 2.0, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.
(e) Parameters for Deviation Rule (SP-36 Figs. 163,164)
The slope factor for the deviation rule is given by
where
Valid for: 0.0 < t/c < 0.12, probably usable up to t/c = 0.15.
(g) Gradient of Deviation Angle with Incidence, d*o/di (SP-36 Fig. 177)
2
Valid for: 0.4 < F < 1.8, 0.0 < $1 < 70.0.
APPENDIX D:
NACA 65-Series Compressor Blade Profiles
The 65-series blade geometry is not represented by closed-form analytical expressions. Instead, it
is necessary to work with tabulated values:
x/c
Thickness
(for t = 0.10c)
yt/c
dyc/dx
0.0
0.0
0.0
---
0.005
0.00752
0.00250
0.42120
0.0075
0.00890
0.00350
0.38875
0.0125
0.01124
0.00535
0.34770
0.025
0.01571
0.00930
0.29155
0.050
0.02222
0.01580
0.23430
0.075
0.02709
0.02120
0.19995
0.10
0.03111
0.02585
0.17485
0.15
0.03746
0.03365
0.13805
0.20
0.04218
0.03980
0.11030
0.25
0.04570
0.04475
0.08745
0.30
0.04824
0.04860
0.06745
0.35
0.04982
0.05150
0.04925
0.40
0.05057
0.05355
0.03225
0.45
0.05029
0.05475
0.01595
0.50
0.04870
0.05515
0.0
0.55
0.04570
0.05475
-0.01595
0.60
0.04151
0.05355
-0.03225
0.65
0.03627
0.05150
-0.04925
0.70
0.03038
0.04860
-0.06745
0.75
0.02451
0.04475
-0.08745
0.80
0.01847
0.03980
-0.11030
0.85
0.01251
0.03365
-0.13805
0.90
0.00749
0.02585
-0.17485
0.95
0.00354
0.01580
-0.23430
1.00
0.00150
0.0
(-0.23430)
The thickness distribution is given for a NACA 65-010 blade which has been modified to give a
finite trailing-edge thickness of 0.3% of the chord length. The baseline thickness distribution has zero
thickness at the trailing edge and therefore cannot be manufactured. The nominal maximum thickness is
10% of chord. For blades with other values of maximum thickness, the tabulated distribution is simply
scaled accordingly.
The table indicates that maximum camber is at 50% of chord. However, the camber line is not a
simple circular arc. In fact, the slope of the camber line tends to infinity at the leading and trailing edges.
At the leading edge, this gives a "droop" to the nose of the blade which is believed to reduce its sensitivity
to incidence.
Because of the camber line shape, there is no simple relationship between the camber angle, as
defined earlier, and the magnitude of the maximum camber. Instead, the camber line shape is related to
the nominal maximum lift coefficient which the blade shape would achieve as an isolated airfoil. The
camber line shape quoted applies for a nominal lift coefficient CL = 1.0. To generate compressor blades
with a desired camber angle, the following can be used to relate an equivalent circular arc camber angle to
the nominal CL:
(1)
for 2 in degrees.
To generate the geometry for a 65-series compressor blade with a particular camber angle, 2:
(i) From (1), determine the nominal CL.
(ii) Scale the camber line co-ordinates and slope values by (CL/1.0).
(iii) Calculate the blade-surface co-ordinates by superimposing the tabulated thickness
distribution (scaled as necessary if the maximum thickness is to be different from 10% of chord)
on the camber line using Eqns. (5) from Appendix B.
The drawing compares the 10C4/30C50 blade with the 65-series which has the same maximum thickness
and the equivalent camber:
APPENDIX E:
Curve and Surface Fits for Kacker & Okapuu Loss System
for Axial Turbines
Kacker & Okapuu ("A Mean Line Prediction Method for Axial Flow Turbine Efficiency," ASME
Trans., J. Eng. for Power, Vol. 104, January 1982, pp. 111-119) presented an updated version of the
Ainley & Mathieson loss system for axial turbines. The Kacker & Okapuu (KO) system presents a basis
for estimating the complete losses, and thus the efficiency, of an axial turbine at its design point. For a
complete outline of the loss system see the paper.
Some aspects of the loss system are presented only in graphical form in the paper. Therefore a
number of figures have been digitized and curves or surfaces fitted to the data. This appendix documents
the curve fits and, in some cases, demonstrates the quality of the fits graphically. The figure numbers
refer to the figures in the Kacker & Okapuu paper.
(a) Ainley & Mathieson (AMDC) Profile-Loss Coefficients (Figs. 1, 2)
KO use the AMDC correlation for profile loss coefficient, with corrections for Reynolds number,
exit Mach number, channel acceleration, and improvements in design. The AMDC loss coefficient is
obtained as a weighted average of the values for a nozzle blade ($1 = 0) and an impulse blade. These
values are obtained from the plots shown in Figures 1 and 2. The data in these figures have been fitted to
polynomial surfaces of the form:
Nozzle Blade,
(Fig. 1)
a0,0 = 0.358716
a0,1 = -1.43508
a0,2 = 1.57161
a0,3 = -0.496917
a1,0 = -0.0112815
a1,1 = 0.0548594
a1,2 = -0.0555387
a1,3 = 0.014165
a2,0 = 0.000175083
a2,1 = -0.000824937
a2,2 = 0.000652287
a2,3 = -7.30141E-05
a3,0 = -8.61323E-07
a3,1 = 3.95998E-06
a3,2 = -1.89698E-06
a3,3 = -4.9954E-07
(ii)
Impulse Blade,
(Fig. 2)
a0,0 = 0.0995503
a0,1 = 0.182837
a0,2 = 0.01603
a1,0 = 0.00621508
a1,1 = -0.0283658
a1,2 = 0.011249
a2,0 = -7.10628E-05
a2,1 = 0.000327648
a2,2 = -0.000122645
with coefficients,
a0,0 = -2.90463
a1,0 = 0.412797
a2,0 = 0.593956E-02
a0,1 = 0.307036
a1,1 = -0.355369E-01
a2,1 = 0.389157E-03
The surface fit and the digitized values are compared over.
a0,2 = 0.370176E-02
a1,2 = -0.194938E-03
a2,2 = 1.74147E-06
Rotors
(ii)
Nozzles
(ii)
Nozzle
APPENDIX F:
Centrifugal Stresses in Axial Turbomachinery Blades
1.0
Introduction
As briefly mentioned in lectures, the design of a turbomachine involves a trade-off between often
conflicting considerations: aerodynamics, heat transfer, materials, stresses, and vibrations (not to mention
cost). While our focus is on the aerodynamics, it is obviously wasteful to develop even a preliminary
aerodynamic design for a turbomachine which cannot be built for stress reasons.
Turbomachinery blades experience significant unsteady forces which lead to vibratory stresses,
and both low cycle and high cycle fatigue are important considerations. However, the level of the steady
stress determines the margin which is available for these unsteady stresses. In turbines, creep distortion is
an important consideration and the steady centrifugal stress is also the starting point for a creep analysis.
Thus, if the steady centrifugal stresses are kept within established limits, the design is likely to be
mechanically feasible. Fortunately, the steady centrifugal stresses in the rotor blades can be estimated
fairly easily in the early stages of the aerodynamic design.
A later section gives some criteria for judging whether the centrifugal stresses are acceptable.
These criteria apply primarily to the high-performance machines used in gas turbine engines. The stresses
are particularly high in low hub-to-tip ratio fan blades and in turbine blades; they are much lower in
normal compressor blades. A survey of typical, industrial axial-flow fans from several manufacturers
shows that peak tip speeds are consistently below 120 m/s. It is believed that this limit is related to the
stresses which can be sustained by the rather simple blade attachments, rather than stresses in the actual
blades. Higher tips speeds can be used but these require a switch to a considerably more expensive
method of attachment.
2.0
Then
(1)
and this can then be integrated from radius R to the tip, RT, (with a specified blade area variation) to
obtain the centrifugal stress at R.
Constant Section Blade:
With dA = 0, integrating (1):
Tapered Blades:
The cross-sectional area of turbomachinery blades often varies from hub to tip. If the area
decreases, the root stress will be reduced from the value given by (2). Taking into account the taper, the
hub stress can be written
(3)
(b)
where
The cross-sectional area of the blade is roughly proportional to the product of the chord length (c) and the
maximum thickness (tmax). Thus, the area ratio can be approximated by
If both the chord length and the maximum thickness are tapered linearly from the hub to the tip, to
maintain constant maximum thickness-to-chord ratio, the cross-sectional area will in fact vary
parabolically. It can be shown that the resultant centrifugal stresses will be lower than for linear taper.
However, for HTR > 0.5 the stresses are very similar and the assumption of linear taper gives a good,
slightly conservative, estimate of the hub stress.
3.0
From the density and stress limits for currently available blade materials, values of the right-hand side of
(4) can defined by the structural engineer. The aerodynamicist can then use these to verify that the
proposed design is feasible mechanically. The following table gives values of KAN2 which are
3
KAN2
KAN2
(A in inches2,
N in RPM)
(A in m2,
N in RPM)
Compressor
8-10 x 1010
5.2-6.5 x 107
4-5 x 1010
2.5-3.2 x 107
6-8 x 1010
3.8-5.2 x 107
Unshrouded LPT
8-10 x 1010
5.2-6.5 x 107
MACHINE TYPE