The aerodynamic interaction of upstream and downstream blade rows can have a significant impact on the forced response of the compressor. Previously, the authors carried out the forced response analysis of a three-row stator-rotor-stator (S1-R2-S2) configuration from a 3.5-stage compressor. However, since the stator vane counts in both the stators (S1 and S2) were the same, it was not possible to separate the excitations from both the rows as they excited the rotor at the same frequency. Hence, a new configuration was developed and tested in which the stator 1 blade count was changed to 38 and stator 2 blade count was maintained at 44 in order to study the individual influences of the stator on the embedded rotor. By using this method, the excitations from both rows can be determined, and the excitations can be quantified to determine the row having the maximum influence on the overall forcing. To achieve this, two sets of simulations were carried out. The three-row stator-rotor (S1-R2-S2) simulation was carried out at both the 38EO (engine order) and 44EO crossings at the peak efficiency (PE) operating condition. The two-row stator-rotor analysis (S1-R2) was carried out at the 38EO crossing, and the other two-Row (R2-S2) analyses were carried out at the 44EO crossing. The steady aerodynamics was preserved in both the cases. A study was done to determine the contribution of wave reflections from the stator inlet and exit planes to the forcing function. Two conclusions drawn from this study are as follows: (1) the modal force value decreased after the upstream stator was removed, which proved that wave reflections from this stator were significant and (2) the increase in modal force was in-line with experimental observations.

References

References
1.
Srinivasan
,
A. V.
,
1997
, “
Flutter and Resonant Vibration Characteristics of Engine Blades
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power-Trans.
,
119
(
4
), pp.
742
775
.
2.
Hall
,
K. C.
,
Thomas
,
J. P.
, and
Clark
,
W. S.
,
2002
, “
Computation of Unsteady Nonlinear Flows in Cascades Using a Harmonic Balance Technique
,”
AIAA J.
,
40
(
5
), pp.
879
886
.
3.
Ekici
,
K.
, and
Hall
,
K. C.
,
2008
, “
Nonlinear Frequency-Domain Analysis of Unsteady Flows in Turbomachinery With Multiple Excitation Frequencies
,”
AIAA J.
,
46
(
8
), pp.
1912
1920
.
4.
Besem
,
F. M.
,
Kielb
,
R. E.
,
Galpin
,
P.
,
Zori
,
L.
, and
Key
,
N. L.
,
2016
, “
Mistuned Forced Response Predictions of an Embedded Rotor in a Multistage Compressor
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
138
(
6
), pp.
106
115
.
5.
Besem
,
F. M.
,
Kielb
,
R. E.
, and
Key
,
N. L.
,
2015
, “
Forced Response Sensitivity of a Mistuned Rotor From an Embedded Compressor Stage
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
138
(
3
), pp.
103
113
.
6.
Li
,
J.
, and
Kielb
,
R.
,
2017
, “
Forcing Superposition and Decomposition of an Embedded Compressor Rotor
,”
ASME Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, Volume 7B: Structures and Dynamics
,
Charlotte
, NC,
June 26–30, 2017
.
7.
Giles
,
M.
,
1988
, “
Calculation of Unsteady Wake/Rotor Interaction
,”
J. Propul. Power
,
4
(
4
), pp.
356
362
.
8.
ansys
,
2018
, CFX R18.0 Help manual, ANSYS Inc.
9.
Connell
,
S.
,
Braaten
,
M.
,
Zori
,
L.
,
Steed
,
R.
,
Hutchinson
,
B.
, and
Cox
,
G.
,
2011
, “
A Comparison of Advanced Numerical Techniques to Model Transient Flow in Turbomachinery Blade Rows
,”
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo
,
Vancouver, Canada
, Paper No. GT2011-45820.
10.
Connell
,
S.
,
Hutchinson
,
B.
,
Galpin
,
P.
,
Campregher
,
R.
, and
Godin
,
P.
,
2012
, “
The Efficient Computation of Transient Flow in Turbine Blade Rows Using Transformation Methods
,”
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo
,
Copenhagen, Denmark
,
June 11–15
.
11.
Qizar
,
M.
,
Mansour
,
M.
, and
Goswami
,
S.
,
2013
, “
Study of Steady State and Transient Blade Row CFD Methods in a Moderately Loaded NASA Transonic High-Speed Axial Compressor Stage
,”
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo
,
San Antonio, TX
,
June 3–7
.
12.
Zori
,
L.
,
Galpin
,
P.
,
Campregher
,
R.
, and
Morales
,
J. C.
,
2017
, “
Time-Transformation Simulation of a 1.5 Stage Transonic Compressor
,”
ASME J. Turbomach
,
139
(
7
), pp.
1139
1152
.
13.
Zhao
,
B.
,
Yang
,
C.
,
Hu
,
L.
,
Zhou
,
M.
, and
Li
,
D.
,
2012
, “
Investigation of Separating and Utilizing the Influences of Up- and Downstream Blade Rows
,”
ASME Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, Volume 8: Turbomachinery, Parts A, B, and C
,
Copenhagen, Denmark
,
June 2012
.
14.
Mao
,
Z.
,
Hegde
,
S.
,
Pan
,
T.
,
Kielb
,
R.
,
Zori
,
L.
, and
Campregher
,
R.
,
2018
, “
Influence of Rotor-Stator Interaction and Reflecting Boundary Conditions on Compressor Forced Response
,”
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo
,
Oslo Norway
,
June 11–15
.
15.
Mao
,
Z.
,
Hegde
,
S.
,
Pan
,
T.
,
Kielb
,
R.
,
Zori
,
L.
, and
Campregher
,
R.
,
2018
, “
Investigation of the Effect of Wave Reflection in the Forced Response Study of a Compressor
,”
Proceedings of Global Power and Propulsion Conference (GPPS)
,
Montreal
,
May 7–9
.
16.
Li
,
J.
,
2016
,
Multi-Row Interactions and Mistuned Forced Response of an Embedded Compressor Rotor
,
Duke University
,
Dec.
2016
.
You do not currently have access to this content.