Influence of Flow Coefficient,

Stagger Angle, and Tip

Yong Sang Yoon
e-mail: perfect1@snu.ac.kr
Seung Jin Song
School of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering,
Seoul National University,
San 56-1,
Shillim dong, Kwanak gu,
Seoul, 151-744, Korea
Hyoun-Woo Shin
GE Transportation,
Aircraft Engines,
1 Neumann Way,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45215
Clearance on Tip Vortex
in Axial Compressors
Experiments have been performed on the low speed research compressor (LSRC) at
General Electric Aircraft Engines to investigate the effects of flow coefficient, stagger
angle, and tip clearance on tip vortex. Time resolved casing pressure distributions over
the third stage rotor have been acquired with high-frequency-response pressure transduc-
ers. Also, tip vortex strength and trajectory have been estimated from the casing pressure
fluctuations which have been obtained simultaneously from various axial locations. As
flow coefficient decreases, tip vortex gets strengthened and migrates upstream. The stag-
ger angle increase weakens the tip vortex and moves it downstream slightly because the
blade loading is decreased. However, tip leakage vortex is influenced mainly by tip
clearance, and there exists a critical tip clearance which determines the type of tip
vortex trajectory (straight or kinked). As predicted by others, tip vortex gets
strengthened with increasing tip clearance. However, unlike the predictions, the tip vortex
trajectory moves upstream with increasing tip clearance. Furthermore, with tip clearance
above a critical value, the tip vortex trajectory is no longer straight but shows a kink
in the passage. DOI: 10.1115/1.2354522

Keywords: axial compressor, tip clearance, stagger angle, flow coefficient, tip leakage
flow, tip vortex trajectory, vortex strength

Introduction
In turbomachines, the gap between the casing and rotor blade
tip results in leakage flows as shown in Fig. 1. This unsteady,
three-dimensional leakage flow rolls up into a tip vortex that in-
creases the endwall blockage; decreases compressor performance;
and deteriorates stability. Therefore, the tip leakage flow has long
been an important research topic for turbomachinery designers.
Since the pioneering study of Rains 1, many studies have been
conducted. Khalid et al. 2 have presented a methodology for
quantifying compressor endwall blockage due to tip leakage flow.
Storer 3 predicts that the principal mechanism of loss entropy
creation due to tip leakage flow is the mixing of passage and
leakage flows. Focusing on the structure of tip vortex itself, Lak-
shminarayana 4 suggests a retained lift approach to analyze
the vorticity shed at blade tips, and Martinez-Sanchez 5 has
developed an analytical model which predicts the tip vortex tra-
jectory as a function of blade loading. Chen et al. 6 have devel-
oped a similarity analysis to examine tip vortex kinematics, and
predict a kink in the vortex trajectory at the blade trailing edge.
From their numerical analysis, Hoying et al. 7 predict that tip
vortex moves upstream with decreasing flow coefficient and pops
out upstream of rotor blade leading edge at the stall point. Fur-
thermore, Furukawa et al. 8 predict tip vortex breakdown at flow
rates less than that corresponding to the peak of the compressor
characteristic.
Many experimental studies have been conducted as well. The
roll-up of tip leakage flows into vortices has been measured by
various investigators e.g., Hunter and Cumpsty 9, Inoue and
Kuroumaru 10, Wagner et al. 11, and Inoue et al. 12. Inoue
et al. 13,14 and Marz et al. 15 have measured unsteady casing
Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received April 27, 2005; final manu-
script received March 27, 2006. Assoc. Editor: Phillip M. Ligrani.
static pressure and its deviation to detect tip vortex, and Mailach
16 has located tip vortex by measuring the axial velocity and
relative flow angle within the rotor blade passage near the tip
region. Goto 17 has experimentally verified that, as the rotor tip
clearance increases, the viscous region near the casing thickens
due to the diffusion of the tip vortex. Storer and Cumpsty 18
predict that tip vortex begins at the minimum static pressure loca-
tion on the blade and validate their prediction in a linear cascade
test. According to Inoue et al. 13, the axial compressor rotor tip
vortex gets strengthened with increasing tip clearance up to 4.2%
of blade chord length and moves upstream as the flow coefficient
decreases. In an axial flow fan, Jang et al. 19 also find that the
vertical center of the leakage vortex is located radially over 94%
of span; and that the tip leakage vortex migrates upstream when
the flow coefficient degreases. Liu et al. 20 experimentally show
that the tip vortex is stable at the design condition before break-
down occurs in the core of the tip leakage vortex at near stall
condition. Despite such efforts, however, experimental data show-
ing parametric variation of tip vortex are scarce. For example, to
the authors knowledge, the effects of stagger angle variation or
very large tip clearances larger than 5% of the chord have not
yet been reported in the literature. Therefore, the objective of this
research is to help understand the tip vortex kinematics by mea-
suring the influence of flow coefficient, stagger angle, and very
large tip clearance. The vortex trajectory was estimated from time
versus space T-S diagrams of unsteady static pressure obtained
simultaneously at various axial locations on the casing
Experimental Facility
This research has been conducted on the low speed research
compressor LSRC at GEAE, a low speed, four-stage, axial com-
pressor shown in Fig. 2. The LSRC is a four-stage machine de-
signed to represent the essential features of modern high-speed
core compressors. The successful transfer of design philosophies
verified in the LSRC to high-speed machines has been well estab-

1274 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006 Copyright 2006 by ASME Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 1 Tip leakage vortex
lished. The facility has a constant casing diameter of 1.524 m, and
the flow enters from the top through a bellmouth/inlet system,
which filters the flow. After passing through the test section, the
flow exits through a large, circular throttle plate that can be moved
to change the compressor back pressure or flow rate by varying
the exit area. The compressor is driven by a motor connected to a
gear-box and has a design rotational speed of 900 RPM. More
details about the facility can be found in Wisler 21.
Instrumentation
Compressor operating conditions e.g., efficiency, pressure ra-
tio, mass flow rate, etc. are determined from the following steady
state measurements. Inlet flow temperature has been measured by
RTD sensors. The flow rate is determined at the compressor inlet
Fig. 2 Low speed research compressor LSRC at GE aircraft
engines GEAE
Journal of Fluids Engineering
Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Fig. 3 Pressure transducer locations on the casing wall of
Stage 3 rotor
from the pressure difference between upstream and downstream
of the bullet nose ogive using pressure transducers with an ac-
curacy of 0.01% of the full scale values. Power input into the
compressor is measured with a strain gauge-type torque meter in
the drive shaft with an accuracy of 0.07% of the measured
torque. At each stage, eight circumferentially distributed static
pressure taps are used to obtain casing pressure data, by using
6800 Pa 1 psi and 13,600 Pa 2 psi pressure transducers with
an accuracy of 0.01% of the full-scale values.
Inoue et al. 12 have found that the secondary flow due to tip
vortex remains radially near the casing at about 95% of span as it
goes downstream. Jang et al. 19 also reconfirmed the radial lo-
cation of the core at 94% of span. Furthermore, tip vortex induces
random pressure unsteadiness and, therefore, pressure fluctuations
at the casing can be used to detect tip vortices. The time-resolved
casing pressure has been measured by utilizing fifteen high fre-
quency response pressure transducers with an accuracy of 1.0%
and a frequency response of 70 kHz. They are mounted on the
casing of the third stage rotor Fig. 3. These pressure transducers
are installed in two rows 2.54 in apart to obtain a better resolution
in the axial direction. The instantaneous analogue signals from the
pressure transducers are digitized by an A/D converter with six-
teen channels and a maximum sampling rate of 10 MS/ s. For this
study, fifteen channels have been used with a 100 kHz sampling
rate blade passing frequency is 810 Hz for each channel. The
data acquisition system is shown schematically in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4 Data acquisition system
NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 1275
 Table 1 Test configurations

Stagger Tip clearance

Configuration angle t/C %

Baseline Nominal Nominal 1.73

Stagger 5 deg Nominal 1.73
bigger
Tip Nominal Huge 5.48

Test Configurations
Three configurations have been tested Table 11 a nominal
tip clearance and a nominal stagger angle baseline; 2 a nominal
tip clearance and the stagger angle 5 deg bigger than nominal one
stagger; and 3 a huge tip clearance and a nominal stagger angle
tip. The stagger angle is the angle between the axial line and the
line connecting the leading and trailing edges of the blade Fig. 5.
In Fig. 5, the blade with the solid line has the nominal stagger
angle and the blade with the dotted line has the increased stagger
angle. The nominal tip clearance is 1.73% of the blade chord Fig. 6 Compressor characteristic curves
length and the huge clearance is 5.48%. This value is signifi-
cantly larger than the maximum tip clearances ranging from 4% to
4.3% previously investigated by Inoue et al. 13, Storer et al. Static Pressure Distribution. For all test cases, phase-locked
18, and Chen 6. For each configuration, three different flow t, distributions
ensemble-averaged static pressure coefficient, C
coefficients have been testeda high flow coefficient low load- p
ing, the design flow coefficient, and a low flow coefficient stall have been obtained as follows. Since the pressure transducers are
point. located in two axial rows Rows A and B in Fig. 3, the data from
Row B are shifted by the time it takes for a rotor blade to move
from Row A to Row B. Then, the shifted data from Row B are
Results and Discussion merged with the data from Row A. To get rid of the unsteady
Compressor characteristics, or graphs of the compressor pres- off-set, the averaged pressure values have been replaced with
sure coefficient plotted versus the flow coefficient , have been static pressure readings from static holes at the same axial loca-
obtained for all configurations in Fig. 6. The two coefficients are tion. Each pressure data set, pit, contains 10,000 data points, or
defined as about 1.47 rotor revolutions worth of data, and 256 such data sets

1/
have been acquired for each test condition. To remove the inlet
c pT 1 p condition effect of the third stage rotor, the phase-locked
= +1 1 1
1 2 p1 ensemble-averaged static pressure, pt, is obtained from Eq. 1,
U where pit is the pressure difference between pit and the av-
2 t
eraged unsteady static pressure at Location 1 in Fig. 3.
m 256
= 2

1
AUt pt = pit 3
256 i=1
where p is the difference between the compressor outlet static
1
pressure and inlet total pressure. The compressor operation range Subsequently, pt values are normalized by 2 1U2t , where 1 is
narrows i.e., stall onset at a higher flow coefficient and the pres- the compressor inlet density and Ut is the rotor tip velocity, to
sure coefficient drops as tip clearance is increased from baseline obtain the phase-locked ensemble-averaged pressure coefficient
to tip configuration because the increased tip clearance increases t.
C p
tip leakage flow which increases blockage and instability. The
t = pt
stagger configuration stalls at a lower flow coefficient, and its
pressure coefficient also drops. Also, the operation range and the C P 4
1
pressure coefficient are more sensitive to the change in the stagger 1Ut2
angle than that in tip clearance. 2
Figures 79 show contour plots of C t at three different flow
p
coefficients for the baseline, stagger, and tip configurations, re-
spectively. The minimum pressure near the suction side of each
blade is indicated by the white region. The flow coefficient does
not influence the minimum static pressure locations. Despite the
decreasing flow coefficient, the minimum static pressure location
still remains at the same spot. However, when the stagger angle is
increased from Figs. 7 and 8, the minimum static pressure loca-
tions near the suction surface shift downstream from the leading
edge. In addition, the low pressure region covers a greater portion
of the suction side chord. The increase in the stagger angle also
lowers the pressure rise across the rotor. With increasing tip clear-
ance from Figs. 79, the static pressure rise across the rotor
decreases as tip losses increase. Also, the minimum pressure lo-
cations near the suction surface shift downstream from the blade
Fig. 5 Stagger angle setting leading edge baseline to approximately 30% chord location tip.

1276 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 Fig. 7 t distributions for the baseline configuration
C Fig. 8 t distributions for the stagger configuration
C
p p

Such trends have been analytically predicted by Chen 6 and configuration Fig. 10 but still show qualitatively similar depen-
Storer 18 and experimentally observed in compressor cascades dence on flow coefficient. The strengthening and upstream migra-
and rotating compressor rigs by Storer 18 and Inoue et al. 13, tion of tip vortex with decreasing flow coefficient become clearer
respectively. Thus, the trends of the new data Figs. 79 agree in the tip configuration Fig. 12. Such trends are qualitatively
with previous findings and enhance confidence in the new data. consistent with Chen 6 and Hoying 7 predictions and the Inoue
14 experimental results. According to Chen 6, the tip vortex
Random Pressure Unsteadiness. To detect the tip vortex, ran-
moves farther away from the suction surface as flow coefficient
dom pressure unsteadiness at each time is determined as
decreases because the convection time and the shed vortex sheet
pit = pit pt 5 strength both increase. Hoying 7 also predicts that the tip vortex
trajectory migrates upstream with decreasing flow coefficient due
Then, the absolute value of these deviations are obtained,
to the image vortex of the tip vortex in the casing. As flow coef-
ensemble-averaged, and nondimensionalized by the inlet dynamic
1 ficient decreases, the blade loading increases and consequently the
pressure, 2 1U2t tip leakage mass fraction increases. Thus, the tip vortex is
256 strengthened and the induced-velocity also increases. Conse-
1
pt2 quently, a new equilibrium point between the main flow velocity
256 i=1 i and the induced velocity is reached closer to the leading edge.
t = 6
C pdev
1 Hoying 7 goes further and predicts that the tip vortex pops out
1Ut2 upstream of the blade leading edge at stall inception. However, the
2 experimental data shown in the Figs. 10c and 11c indicate that
t, tip vortices remain downstream of the leading edge, even at stall,
Thus, the nondimensional mean in pressure deviation, C pdev and, thus, disprove the last prediction. The experimental results by
indicates random pressure unsteadiness, or fluctuations due to tip Jang et al. 19 also show the migration of tip vortex by decreas-
vortices. ing flow coefficient but still in the passage.
Figures 1012 show axial C t distributions plotted versus In a linear cascade, Storer 18 has shown that the minimum
pdev
time for the baseline, stagger, and tip configurations, respectively. pressure exists on the suction side where the compressor tip vor-
The discrete random pressure unsteadiness regions over the blade tex begins due to the increased velocity. In the current investiga-
tip i.e., circles are due to the discretely located pressure sensors. tion, with increasing tip clearance, the position of the minimum
From Figs. 1012 the influence of flow coefficient on tip vortex static pressure on the blade suction surface moves downstream.
can be examined for all configurations. In the baseline configura- Thus, it can be inferred that the leakage jet flow forms farther
tion Fig. 10, as flow coefficient decreases, the tip vortex is downstream, and, similar trends have been observed by Inoue
strengthened i.e., bigger pressure fluctuations and the vortex 13. With nominal tip clearance Fig. 10, the tip vortex begins at
moves upstream slightly. The tip vortices for the stagger configu- the leading edge where the minimum static pressure white re-
ration Fig. 11 are weaker than their counterparts in the baseline gion, is located on the suction side of the blade Fig. 7. When

Journal of Fluids Engineering NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 1277

Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 t distributions for the tip configuration
Fig. 9 C p
the tip gap is enlarged Fig. 12, the starting location of the tip
vortex moves downstream from the rotor leading edge, as does the
minimum static pressure location Fig. 9.
In the stagger configuration, the origins of the tip vortices still
coincide with the loci of the minimum static pressure Figs. 8 and
11. However, as the stagger angle is increased from Figs. 10 and
11, the magnitudes of pressure random unsteadiness decrease vis-
ibly, signifying a reduction in tip vortex strength. The reduced
blade loading due to the increased stagger angle likely decreases
the tip leakage mass fraction, weakening the tip vortex. Also, the
fraction of passage area affected by pressure fluctuations has been
significantly reduced in Fig. 11 relative to Figs. 10 and 12.
Therefore, the blockage due to tip vortex can be assumed to have
been reduced as well. Based on their numerical analysis, Khalid et
al. 2 predict reductions in tip leakage mass flux, tip leakage flow
angle relative to the blade, and blockage with increasing stagger
angle. To the authors best knowledge, the new experimental re-
sults in Fig. 12 qualitatively validate their predictions for the first
time. Furthermore, the vortex trajectory remains linear but the
angle between the vortex trajectory line and the blade chordline is
smaller in Fig. 11 than in Fig. 10. Thus, the tangential extent of
the area affected by tip vortex has also been reduced.
At all flow coefficients, as tip gap is increased, the magnitudes
of pdevt increase, indicating strengthened tip vortices from Figs.
10 and 12. These results agree with Chen 6 and Storer 18
predictions and Inoue 13 measurement. Furthermore, as tip
clearance increases, vortex trajectory moves upstream. For ex-
ample, in Fig. 11b, the tip vortex hits the adjacent blade near its
trailing edge. In Fig. 13b, the tip vortex moves upstream and hits
the adjacent blade at near midchord location. These results are
consistent with the experimental findings of Inoue 13 but incon-
sistent with the predictions of Martinez-Sanchez 5 and Chen 6.
Therefore, further modeling is needed in this regard.
1278 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006
Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Fig. 10
C
pdev distributions for the baseline configuration
The tip vortex trajectory is linear in the baseline Fig. 10, but
nonlinear i.e., has a kink in the tip configuration Fig. 12. This
finding is also new. Inoue 13 and Storer 18 do not find kinks in
their in-passage vortex trajectory, probably because their clear-
ances are below the critical value. Chen 6 predicts a kink in
vortex trajectory, but at the blade trailing edge. However, in this
study, the kink appears inside the passage and, therefore, is fun-
damentally different from that predicted by Chen 6. Furukawa et
al. 8 predict and Liu et al. 20 visualize tip vortex breakdown
and kinked trajectory in axial compressors. However, they find
vortex breakdown only on the positively sloped parts of the com-
pressor characteristic, not on the negatively sloped part examined
in this study. Therefore, a more likely explanation is the increased
tip leakage flow rate. Unlike the baseline and stagger configura-
tions Figs. 10 and 11, the blade tip region pressure for the tip
configuration Fig. 12 shows high random unsteadiness little
black circle shape only near the leading edge. For the baseline
and stagger configurations, the tip leakage flow seems to pass
through the tip clearance evenly between the leading and trailing
edges. However, the tip leakage flow for the tip configuration in
Fig. 13 appears to pass through mainly near the trailing edge. The
increased tip leakage flow at chordwise locations toward the trail-
ing edge could strengthen and deflect the tip vortex toward the
adjacent blade, resulting in a kink Fig. 13.
The tip vortex trajectory angle is plotted versus flow coefficient
for all three configurations in Fig. 14. The tip vortex trajectory
angle is calculated by the least-square fitting of a line through the
loci of the maximum pressure random unsteadiness, C t, at
pdev
each chordwise location in the control volume shown in Figs.
3a3d. Axially, the data from pressure transducers from Posi-
tions 3 to 12 in Fig. 3 are considered. Tangentially, the data be-
tween the time lines Figs. 3a and 3b 0.12 blade passing
period after the suction surface and Figs. 3c and 3d 0.12
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 11
C
pdev distributions for the stagger configuration
blade passing period before the pressure surface are considered.
The angle is defined to be positive clockwise from the axial di-
rection pointing downstream; thus, a larger angle means that the
tip vortex trajectory moves upstream. In all configurations, the
vortex does migrate upstream as the flow coefficient decreases,
but this sensitivity is more pronounced in the tip configuration. As
stagger angle is increased, the vortex trajectory angle decreases
but still exhibits a similar dependence on the flow coefficient.
Figure 15 shows the random pressure unsteadiness magnitude
plotted versus flow coefficient for all configurations. The magni-
tude of the random pressure unsteadiness is defined as
12 m
1 1
= C p ti 7 are as follows:
10 j=3 m i=1 dev j
where pdev jt j is the random pressure unsteadiness Eq. 4 from
pressure transducers at locations 312 Fig. 3. First, the pressure
t, values are time-averaged for the
random unsteadiness, C pdev
control volume at each position, and, these time-averaged values
are averaged in the axial direction through 10 pressure transduc-
ers. The random pressure unsteadiness magnitude increases as tip
clearance increases and decreases as stagger angle increases. In all
configurations, the random pressure unsteadiness magnitude in-
creases as flow coefficient decreases. Increased random pressure
unsteadiness can indicate tip vortex strength increase.
Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn from this experimental
study.
First, the study has reconfirmed the following:
1 As predicted by Chen 6 and Hoying 7 and experi-
Journal of Fluids Engineering
Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Fig. 12 C pdev distributions for the tip configuration
mentally verified by Inoue et al. 13 and Jang et al.
19, the tip vortex is strengthened and moves upstream
as flow coefficient decreases.
2 Contrary to Hoyings 7 prediction, the tip vortex does
not move upstream of the leading edge even at stall.
3 Unlike the predictions of Martinez-Sanchez 5 and
Chen 6, tip vortex trajectory moves upstream with in-
creased tip clearance, confirming the experimental find-
ings of Inoue et al. 13.
4 As found by Storer 18 and Inoue 13, the tip vortex
begins at the minimum static pressure site on the suction
side near the tip region.
Second, the new findings of this experimental study
5 The flow coefficient does not influence the minimum
static pressure locations on the blade.
6 With increased stagger angle, the tip vortex is weakened
and moves downstream, as predicted by Khalid et al.
2.
7 The effects of very large tip clearance on tip vortex
have been experimentally investigated, and there exists
Fig. 13 Tip vortex trajectory kink
NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 1279

Fig. 14 Vortex trajectory angle versus flow coefficient for all
configurations
a critical tip clearance which determines the type lin-
ear versus nonlinear and sensitivity to flow coefficient
of the vortex trajectory.
8 The tip vortex trajectory for the huge tip clearance con-
figuration has a kink because of increased tip leakage
mass flow rate between the mid chord and trailing edge
of the blade. This increased tip leakage flow pushes the
tip vortex toward the adjacent blade.
Acknowledgment
This research has been supported by the Micro Thermal Sys-
tems Center of KOSEF and by GE Transportation, Aircraft En-
gines. Special thanks are given to the technical staff at Aero Tech-
nology Laboratory ATL in GE for helping with the experiment.
Nomenclature
A compressor annulus area
cP specific heat
Cp pressure coefficient
m flow rate
N number of data sets or traces
Fig. 15 Pressure random unsteadiness versus flow coefficient
for all configurations
1280 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006
Downloaded 15 Feb 2011 to 147.46.117.245. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
P pressure
P pressure difference
t time
T1 compressor inlet temperature
U rotor blade speed
Ut rotor tip velocity
flow coefficient
average density
tip vortex strength
compressor pressure coefficient
Superscripts
- ensemble average
perturbation component
Subscripts
dev absolute deviation average
t rotor tip
1 compressor inlet
References
1 Rains, D. A., 1954, Tip Clearance Flow in Axial Flow Compressors and
Pumps, Hydrodynamics and Mechanical Engineering Laboratories Report,
No. 5.
2 Khalid, S. A., Khalsa, A. S., Waitz, I. A., Tan, C. S., Greitzer, E. M., Cumpsty,
N. A., Adamczyk, J. J., and Marble, F. E., 1999, Endwall Blockage in Axial
Compressors, ASME J. Turbomach., 1213, pp. 499509.
3 Storer, J. A., and Cumpsty, N. A., 1994, An Approximate Analysis and Pre-
diction Method for Tip Clearance Loss in Axial Compressors, ASME J. Tur-
bomach., 1164, pp. 648656.
4 Lakshminarayana, B., and Pandya, A., 1984, Tip Clearance Flow in a Com-
pressor Rotor Passage at Design and Off-Design Conditions, ASME J. Eng.
Gas Turbines Power, 1063, pp. 570577.
5 Martinez-Sanchez, M., and Gauthier, R. P., 1990, Blade Scale Effects of Tip
Leakage, Gas Turbine Laboratory Report #202, M.I.T.
6 Chen, G. T., Greitzer, E. M., Tan, C. S., and Marble, F. E., 1991, Similarity
Analysis of Compressor Tip Clearance Flow Structure, ASME J. Turbomach.,
1132, pp. 260269.
7 Hoying, D. A., Tan, C. S., Vo, Huu D., and Greitzer, E. M., 1999, Role of
Blade Passage Flow Structures in Axial Compressor Rotating Stall Inception,
ASME J. Turbomach., 1214, pp. 735742.
8 Furukawa, M., Inoue, M., Saiki, K., and Yamada, K., 1999, The Role of Tip
Leakage Vortex Breakdown in Compressor Rotor Aerodynamics, ASME J.
Turbomach., 1213, pp. 469480.
9 Hunter, I. H., and Cumpsty, N. A., 1982, Casing Wall Boundary Layer De-
velopment Through an Isolated Compressor Rotor, ASME J. Eng. Power,
1044, pp. 805818.
10 Inoue, M., and Kuroumaru, M., 1984, Three-Dimensional Structure and De-
cay of Vortices Behind an Axial Flow Compressor Rotor, ASME J. Eng. Gas
Turbines Power, 1063, pp. 561569.
11 Wagner, J. H., Dring, R. P., and Joslyn, H. D., 1985, Inlet Boundary Layer
Effects in an Axial Compressor Rotor: Part 1-Blade to Blade Effects, ASME
J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 1072, pp. 374386.
12 Inoue, M., Kuroumaru, M., and Fukuhara, M., 1986, Behavior of Tip Leakage
Flow Behind an Axial Compressor Rotor, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines
Power, 1081, pp. 714.
13 Inoue, M., and Kuroumaru, M., 1989, Structure of Tip Clearance Flow in an
Isolated Axial Compressor Rotor, ASME J. Turbomach., 1113, pp. 250
256.
14 Inoue, M., Kuroumaru, M., Iwamoto, T., and Ando, Y., 1991, Detection of a
Rotating Stall Precursor in Isolated Axial Flow Compressor Rotors, ASME J.
Turbomach., 1132, pp. 281289.
15 Marz, J., Gui, X., and Neise, W., 1999, On the structure of Rotating Insta-
bilities in Axial Flow Machines, Paper AIAA 99-IS-282 presented at the 14th
ISABE, Florence, Italy.
16 Mailach, R., Lehmann, I., and Vogeler, K., 2000, Rotating Instabilities in an
Axial Compressor Originating From the Fluctuating Blade Tip Vortex, 2000-
GT-506.
17 Goto, A., 1992, Three-Dimensional Flow and Mixing in an Axial Flow Com-
pressor With Different Rotor Tip Clearances, ASME J. Turbomach., 1143,
pp. 675685.
18 Storer, J. A., and Cumpsty, N. A., 1991, Tip Leakage Flow in Axial Com-
pressors, ASME J. Turbomach., 1132, pp. 252259.
19 Jang, C.-M., Sato, D., and Fukano, T., 2005, Experimental Analysis on Tip
Leakage and Wake Flow in an Axial Flow Fan According to Flow Rates,
ASME J. Fluids Eng., 1272, pp. 322329.
20 Liu, B., Yu, X., Wang, H., Liu, H., Jiang, H., and Chen, M., 2004, Evolution
of the Tip Leakage Vortex in an Axial Compressor Rotor, 2004-GT-53703.
21 Wisler, D. C., 1985, Loss Reduction in Axial-Flow Compressors Through
Low-Speed Model Testing, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 1072, pp.
354363.
Transactions of the ASME