Understanding the interaction between the combustor and turbine subsystems of a gas turbine engine is believed to be key in developing focused strategies for improving turbine performance. Past studies have approached the problem starting with an existing turbine rig with inlet conditions provided by “representative” hardware which attempts to mimic some key flow features exiting the combustor. In this paper, experiments are performed which center around complete engine hardware of the combustor, including engine geometry turbine nozzle guide vanes (NGVs) to solely represent the upstream impact of the complete turbine. This domain ensures that the traditional interface between combustor and turbine is sufficiently encompassed and not compromised by obfuscating or limiting effects due to approximating combustor hardware. The full-annular experimental measurements include all components of the velocity and pressure fields at various planar sections perpendicular to the primary flow direction. These include detailed, two-dimensional measurements both upstream and downstream of the NGVs. The combustor is a classic rich-burn design. Passive scalar (CO2) tracing measurements are performed to gain insight into the flow responsible for the temperature fields in the coupled system, including the impact of the NGVs on the upstream flow at the conventional combustor-turbine interface. CFD simulations are used to develop a complete picture of the combustor-turbine interface and the coupling between the two subsystems. The complementary experimental and simulation datasets are together intended to provide a benchmark for future, more traditional turbine rig tests and turbine CFD simulations where inlet conditions are at the exit plane of the combustor.

References

References
1.
Lefebvre
,
A. H.
, 1983,
Gas Turbine Combustion
,
Taylor
,
London
.
2.
Cumpsty
,
N.
, 2008,
Jet Propulsion
,
Cambridge University Press
,
London
.
3.
Colban
,
W. F.
,
Thole
,
K. A.
, and
Zess
,
G.
, 2003, “
Combustor Turbine Interface Studies-Part 1: Endwall Effectiveness Measurements
,”
J. Turbomach.
,
125
, p.
193
.
4.
Colban
,
W. F.
,
Thole
,
K. A.
, and
Zess
,
G.
, 2003, “
Combustor Turbine Interface Studies-Part 2: Flow and Thermal Field Measurements
,”
J. Turbomach.
,
125
, p.
203
.
5.
Barringer
,
M. D.
,
Thole
,
K. A.
, and
Polanka
,
M. D.
, 2009, “
An Experimental Study of Combustor Exit Profile Shapes on Endwall Heat Transfer in High Pressure Turbine Vanes
,”
J. Turbomach.
,
131
, p.
021009
.
6.
Barringer
,
M. D.
,
Thole
,
K. A.
,.
Polanka
,
M. D.
,
Clark
,
J. P.
, and
Koch
,
P. J.
, 2009, “
Migration of Combustor Exit Profiles Through High Pressure Turbine Vanes
,”
J. Turbomach.
,
131
, p.
021010
.
7.
Povey
,
T.
, and
Qureshi
,
I.
, 2009, “
Developments in Hot-Streak Simulators for Turbine Testing
,”
J. Turbomach.
,
131
, p.
031009
.
8.
Povey
,
T.
, and
Qureshi
,
I.
, 2008, “
A Hot-Streak (Combustor) Simulator Suited to Aerodynamic Performance Measurements
,”
Proc. IMechE Part G: J. Aerosp. Eng.
,
222
(
6
), pp.
705
720
.
9.
Simone
,
S.
,
Montomoli
,
F.
,
Martelli
,
F. G.
,
Chana
,
K. S.
,
Qureshi
,
I.
, and
Povey
,
T.
, 2010, “
Analysis on the Effect of a Non-Uniform Inlet Profile on Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow in Turbine Stages
,”
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo
, Glasgow, UK, Paper No. GT2010-23526.
10.
Denman
,
P. A.
, and
Ireland
,
P. T.
, “
SAMULET Task 1.3.3: Interdependency of the Combustor-Turbine Interface
,” Interim Report D1.3.3.3, Loughborough University Report TT10R016, September 2010.
11.
Mahesh
,
K.
,
Constantinescu
,
G.
,
Apte
,
S.
,
Iaccarino
,
G.
,
Ham
,
F.
, and
Moin
,
P.
, 2006, “
Large-Eddy Simulation of Reacting Turbulent Flows in Complex Geometries
,”
ASME J. Appl. Mech.
,
73
, pp.
374
381
.
12.
Denman
,
P. A.
, 2002, “
Aerodynamic Evaluation of Double Annular Combustion Systems
,”
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo
, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Paper No. GT2002-30465.
13.
Wray
,
A. P.
, and
Carrotte
,
J. F.
, 1993, “
The Development of a Large Annular Facility for Testing Gas Turbine Combustor Diffuser Systems
,”
Proceedings of the AIAA Joint Prop. Conf
, Monterey, USA, Paper No. AIAA 93-2546.
14.
Ansys, 2012, “
ICEM CFD Software
,” http://www.ansys.com/products/icemcfd.asp.
15.
Boudier
,
G.
,
Gicquel
,
L. Y. M.
, and
Poinsot
,
T.
, 2007, “
Comparison of LES, RANS and Experiments in an Aeronautical Gas Turbine Combustion Chamber
,”
Proc. Combust Inst.
,
31
(
2
), pp.
3075
3082
.
16.
Ansys, 2012, “
Fluent Software
,” http://www.fluent.com/software/flowizard/support/login/doc/html/usersguide.
17.
Cha
,
C. M.
,
Zhu
,
J.
,
Rizk
,
N. K.
, and
Anand
,
M. S.
, 2005, “
A Comprehensive Liquid Fuel Injection Model for CFD Simulations of Gas Turbine Combustors
,”
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit
, Reno NV, USA, AIAA Paper No. 05-0349.
18.
Spalart
,
P. R.
, and
Allmaras
,
S. R.
, 1992, “
A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows
,”
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit
, Reno NV, USA, AIAA Paper No. 92-0439.
You do not currently have access to this content.