This is the second part of a two-part paper. First, the design-optimization system based on the adjoint gradient solution approach as described in Part I is introduced. Several test cases are studied for further validation and demonstration of the methodology and implementation. The base-line adjoint method as applied to realistic 3D configurations is demonstrated in the redesign of the NASA rotor 67 at a near-choke condition, leading to a 1.77% efficiency gain. The proposed adjoint mixing plane is applied to the redesign of a transonic compressor stage (DLR compressor stage) and an IGV-rotor-stator configuration of a Siemens industrial compressor at a single-operating point, both producing measurably positive efficiency gains. An examination on the choice of the operating mass flow condition as the basis for the performance optimization, however, highlights the limitation of the single-point approach for practical applications. For the three-row compressor configuration, a near peak-efficiency point based redesign leads to a measurable reduction in the choke mass flow, while a near-choke point based redesign leads to a significant performance drop in other flow conditions. Subsequently, a parallel multipoint approach is implemented. The results show that a two-point design optimization can produce a consistently better performance over a whole range of mass flow conditions compared with the original design. In the final case, the effectiveness of the present method and system is demonstrated by a redesign applied to a seven-row industrial compressor at the design point, leading to a remarkable 2.4% efficiency gain.

1.
Denton
,
J. D.
, 1992, “
The Calculation of Three-Dimensional Viscous Flow Through Multistage Turbinemachines
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
0889-504X,
114
, pp.
18
26
.
2.
Giles
,
M. B.
, and
Pierce
,
N. A.
, 2000, “
An Introduction to the Adjoint Approach to Design
,”
Flow, Turbul. Combust.
1386-6184,
65
(
3/4
), pp.
393
415
.
3.
Wang
,
D. X.
, and
He
,
L.
, 2010, “
Adjoint Aerodynamic Design Optimization for Blades in Multistage Turbomachines—Part I: Methodology and Verification
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
0889-504X,
132
(
2
), p.
021011
.
4.
Oyama
,
A.
, and
Liou
,
M. S.
, 2004, “
Transonic Axial-Flow Blade Optimization: Evolutionary Algorithms/Three-Dimensional Navier–Stokes Solver
,”
J. Propul. Power
0748-4658,
20
(
4
), pp.
612
619
.
5.
Wu
,
H.
,
Liu
,
F.
, and
Tsai
,
H.
, 2005, “
Aerodynamic Design of Turbine Blades Using an Adjoint Equation Method
,” AIAA Paper No. 05-1006.
6.
Wu
,
H.
,
Yang
,
S.
, and
Liu
,
F.
, 2003, “
Comparison of Three Geometric Representation of Airfoils for Aerodynamic Optimization
,” AIAA Paper No. 2003-4095.
7.
Miller
,
P. L.
, IV
,
Oliver
,
J. H.
,
Miller
,
D. P.
, and
Tweedt
,
D. L.
, 1996, “
Blade CAD: An Interactive Geometric Design Tool for Turbomachinery Blades
,”
NASA
Technical Report No. 107262.
8.
Samareh
,
J. A.
, 1999, “A Novel Shape Parameterization Approach,”
NASA
Technical Report No. TM-1999-209116.
9.
Arens
,
K.
,
Rentrop
,
P.
,
Stoll
,
S. O.
, and
Wever
,
U.
, 2005, “
An Adjoint Approach to Optimal Design of Turbine Blades
,”
Appl. Numer. Math.
,
53
, pp.
93
105
. 0168-9274
10.
Büche
,
D.
,
Guidati
,
G.
, and
Stoll
,
P.
, 2003, “
Automated Design Optimization of Compressor Blades for Stationary, Large Scale Turbomachinery
,” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38421.
11.
Benini
,
E.
, 2004, “
Three-Dimensional Multi-Objective Design Optimization of a Transonic Compressor Rotor
,”
J. Propul. Power
0748-4658,
20
, pp.
559
565
.
12.
Sieverding
,
F.
,
Ribi
,
B.
,
Casey
,
M.
, and
Meyer
,
M.
, 2004, “
Design of Industrial Axial Compressor Blade Sections for Optimal Range and Performance
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
0889-504X,
126
, pp.
323
331
.
13.
Lotfi
,
O.
,
Teixeira
,
J. A.
,
Ivey
,
P. C.
,
Kinghorn
,
I. R.
, and
Sheard
,
A. G.
, 2006, “
Shape Optimization of Axial Fan Turbines Using Genetic Algorithm and a 3D Navier–Stokes Solver
,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90659.
14.
Anderson
,
W. K.
, and
Venkatakrishnan
,
V.
, 1997, “
Aerodynamic Design Optimization On Unstructured Grids With a Continuous Adjoint Formulation
,” AIAA Paper No. 97-0643.
15.
Jang
,
C. M.
,
Samad
,
A.
, and
Kim
,
K. Y.
, 2006, “
Optimal Design of Swept, Leaned and Skewed Blades in a Transonic Axial Compressor
,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90384.
16.
Li
,
H. D.
,
He
,
L.
,
Li
,
Y. S.
, and
Wells
,
R. G.
, 2006, “
Blading Aerodynamics Design Optimization With Mechanical and Aeromechanical Constraints
,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90503.
17.
Yi
,
W.
,
Huang
,
H.
, and
Han
,
W.
, 2006, “
Design Optimization of Transonic Compressor Rotor Using CFD and Genetic Algorithm
,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90155.
18.
Yang
,
S.
,
Wu
,
H.
,
Liu
,
F.
, and
Tsai
,
H.
, 2003, “
Aerodynamic Design of Cascades by Using an Adjoint Equation Method
,” AIAA Paper No. 03-1068.
19.
Strazisar
,
A. J.
,
Wood
,
J. R.
,
Hathaway
,
M. D.
, and
Suder
,
K. L.
, 1989, “
Laser Anemometer Measurements in a Transonic Axial-Flow Fan Rotor
,”
NASA
Technical Report No. 2879.
20.
Dunker
,
R.
,
Rechter
,
H.
,
Starken
,
H.
, and
Weyer
,
H.
, 1984, “
Redesign and Performance Analysis of a Transonic Axial Compressor Stator and Equivalent Plane Cascades With Subsonic Controlled Diffusion Blades
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
,
106
, pp.
279
287
. 0742-4795
21.
Li
,
Y. S.
, and
Wells
,
R. G.
, 1999, “
The Three Dimensional Aerodynamic Design and Test of a Three-Stage Transonic Compressor
,” ASME Paper No. GT-99-68.
22.
Lian
,
Y.
, and
Liou
,
M. S.
, 2005, “
Multi-Objective Optimization of Transonic Compressor Blade Using Evolutionary Algorithm
,”
J. Propul. Power
0748-4658,
21
(
6
), pp.
979
987
.
23.
Pierret
,
S.
, 2005, “
Multi-Objective and Multi-Disciplinary Optimization of Three Dimensional Turbomachinery Blades
,”
Sixth World Congress of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization
, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, May 30–Jun. 3.
24.
Arnone
,
A.
, 1993, “
Viscous Analysis of Three-Dimensional Rotor Flow Using a Multigrid Method
,”
NASA
Technical Report No. TM106266.
You do not currently have access to this content.