Experiments in Fluids

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 73–88 | Cite as

An experimental investigation of a low-pressure turbine blade suction surface using a shear and stress sensitive film

  • Mark McQuilling
  • Mitch Wolff
  • Sergey Fonov
  • Jim Crafton
  • Rolf Sondergaard
Research Article

Abstract

A shear and stress sensitive film (S3F) is employed on the suction surface of an industry standard low-pressure turbine blade. These tests address the optimization of S3F for low-speed air investigations on a curved surface, and are the first measurements of its kind. S3F provides all three stress components on a surface in a single measurement, and is based on 3D elastic deformations of a polymeric film. A detailed description of the S3F technique is presented along with proof of concept experiments, followed by the turbine results which illustrate the need for separate films tailored for the local stress levels in each area. Oil–film verification of stresses is also included.

List of symbols

c

chord length

Cf

skin friction coefficient

dCp

change in pressure coefficient, \({\rm d}C_{\rm p}=\frac{{\rm d}P}{0.5\,mU^2}\)

G

Green’s functions of influence

h

film thickness

m

density of air

Re

Reynold's number, \(Re=\frac{Uc}{\nu}\)

S

contact surface

u

displacement fields

U

characteristic velocity

Greek

η

dynamic viscosity of oil

ε

deformation tensor

λ

Lame constant, \(\lambda=\frac{2\mu \nu}{1-2\nu}\)

μ

shear modulus of elasticity

ν

Poisson ratio

ρ

S3F density

τ

shear stress

θ

volume deformation

Subscript

x

streamwise direction

y

surface-normal direction

z

cross-stream direction

Notes

Acknowledgments

The first author wishes to thank the Dayton Area Graduate Studies Institute for financial support. All authors would like to thank Andrew Lethander and Chris Murphy of AFRL for their assistance with the rapid prototyping of the LPT blade, and Grant Jones of ISSI for assistance with the S3F formulation.

References

  1. Bell H, Schairer E, Hand L, Mehta R (2001) Surface pressure measurements using luminescent coating. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 33:155–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Black M, Anadan P (1993) Framework for robust estimation of optical flow. In: Presented at 4th international conference on computer vision (ICCV93)Google Scholar
  3. Bons J, Hansen L, Clark J, Koch P, Sondergaard R (2005) Designing low-pressure turbine blades with integrated flow control. ASME Paper No. GT2005-68962Google Scholar
  4. Braess D (2002) Finite elements, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Crafton J, Fonov S, Jones G, Fonov V (2005) Optical measurements of pressure and shear in a plasma. In: AIAA paper no. AIAA-2005-5006Google Scholar
  6. Curtis E, Hodson H, Banieghbal M, Denton J, Howell R, Harvey N (1997) Development of blade profiles for low-pressure turbine applications. J Turbo 119:531–538Google Scholar
  7. Danaila I, Hecht F, Pironneau O (2003) Simulation numerique en C++. Dunod, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  8. Denton J (1993) Loss mechanisms in turbomachines. J Turbo 115(4):621–656Google Scholar
  9. Fonov V (2002) Development and analysis of data processing methods applied to luminescent coating system in aerodynamics. PhD thesis, Herriot–Watt University, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  10. Fonov S, Goss L, Jones G, Crafton J, Fonov V, Ol M (2005) New method for surface pressure measurements. AIAA paper no. AIAA-2005-1029Google Scholar
  11. Hakkinen R (2004) Reflections on fifty years of skin friction measurement. AIAA paper no. AIAA-2004-2111Google Scholar
  12. Howell R, Ramesh O, Hodson H, Harvey N, Schulte V (2001) High lift and aft-loaded profiles for low-pressure turbines. J Turbo 123:181–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kobayashi T (2002) Handbook of particle image velocimetry. Morikita ChuppanGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu T, Sullivan J (1998) Luminescent oil–film skin-friction meter. AIAA J 36(8)Google Scholar
  15. Liu T, Sullivan J (2005) Pressure and temperature sensitive paints. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayle R (1991) The role of laminar-turbulent transition in gas turbine engines. J Turbo 113:509–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Plesniak M, Peterson S (2004) Wall shear stress measurements for conventional applications and biomedical flows (invited). (AIAA paper no. AIAA-2004-2301)Google Scholar
  18. Praisner T, Clark J (2004) Predicting Transition in Turbomachinery. Part I: A review and new model development. ASME paper no. IGTI-2004-54108Google Scholar
  19. Sharma O, Pickett G, Ni R (1990) Assessment of unsteady flows in turbines. ASME paper no. 90-GT-150Google Scholar
  20. Soemarwoto B, Boelens O (2003) Simulation of vortical flow over a slender delta wing experiencing vortex breakdown. NLR-TP-2003-396:27Google Scholar
  21. Tarasov V, Orlov A (1990) Method for determining shear stress on aerodynamic model surface. Patent of Russia, 4841553/23/1990Google Scholar
  22. Tobak M, Peake D (1982) Topology of three-dimensional separated flows. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 14:61–85CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Tyler C, Fonov S, Goss L, Crafton J, Jones E, Sarka B (2004) Comparison of computationally predicted and experimentally measured skin friction. AIAA paper no. AIAA-2004-2304Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark McQuilling
    • 1
  • Mitch Wolff
    • 1
  • Sergey Fonov
    • 2
  • Jim Crafton
    • 2
  • Rolf Sondergaard
    • 3
  1. 1.Mechanical and Materials EngineeringWright State UniversityDaytonUSA
  2. 2.Innovative Scientific Solutions, Inc.DaytonUSA
  3. 3.Turbines Branch, Propulsion Directorate, Air Force Research LaboratoryDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations