Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Large Eddy Simulation and CDNS Investigation of T106C Low-Pressure Turbine

[+] Author and Article Information
Site Hu

College of Engineering,
Peking University,
Beijing 100871, China
e-mail: husite@pku.edu.cn

Chao Zhou

State Key Laboratory for Turbulence and
Complex Systems,
College of Engineering,
Peking University,
Beijing 100871, China;
Collaborative Innovation Center of
Advanced Aero-Engine,
Beijing 100191, China
e-mail: czhou@pku.edu.cn

Zhenhua Xia

School of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou 310058, China
e-mail: xiazh1006@gmail.com

Shiyi Chen

College of Engineering,
Southern University of
Science and Technology,
Shenzhen 518055, China
e-mail: sycpku@163.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received January 19, 2017; final manuscript received May 23, 2017; published online October 4, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Daniel Livescu.

J. Fluids Eng 140(1), 011108 (Oct 04, 2017) (12 pages) Paper No: FE-17-1044; doi: 10.1115/1.4037489 History: Received January 19, 2017; Revised May 23, 2017

This study investigates the aerodynamic performance of a low-pressure turbine, namely the T106C, by large eddy simulation (LES) and coarse grid direct numerical simulation (CDNS) at a Reynolds number of 100,000. Existing experimental data were used to validate the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tool. The effects of subgrid scale (SGS) models, mesh densities, computational domains and boundary conditions on the CFD predictions are studied. On the blade suction surface, a separation zone starts at a location of about 55% along the suction surface. The prediction of flow separation on the turbine blade is always found to be difficult and is one of the focuses of this work. The ability of Smagorinsky and wall-adapting local eddy viscosity (WALE) model in predicting the flow separation is compared. WALE model produces better predictions than the Smagorinsky model. CDNS produces very similar predictions to WALE model. With a finer mesh, the difference due to SGS models becomes smaller. The size of the computational domain is also important. At blade midspan, three-dimensional (3D) features of the separated flow have an effect on the downstream flows, especially for the area near the reattachment. By further considering the effects of endwall secondary flows, a better prediction of the flow separation near the blade midspan can be achieved. The effect of the endwall secondary flow on the blade suction surface separation at the midspan is explained with the analytical method based on the Biot–Savart Law.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Breuer, M. , Jovičić, N. , and Mazaev, K. , 2003, “ Comparison of DES, RANS and LES for the Separated Flow Around a Flat Plate at High Incidence,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 41(4), pp. 357–388. [CrossRef]
Spalart, P. R. , 2009, “ Detached-Eddy Simulation,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 41(1), pp. 181–202. [CrossRef]
Nishino, T. , Roberts, G. T. , and Zhang, X. , 2008, “ Unsteady RANS and Detached-Eddy Simulations of Flow Around a Circular Cylinder in Ground Effect,” J. Fluids Struct., 24(1), pp. 18–33. [CrossRef]
Benyahia, A. , Castillon, L. , and Houdeville, R. , 2011, “ Prediction of Separation-Induced Transition on High Lift Low Pressure Turbine Blade,” ASME Paper No. GT2011-45566.
Pacciani, R. , Marconcini, M. , Arnone, A. , and Bertini, F. , 2010, “ A CFD Study of Low Reynolds Number Flow in High Lift Cascades,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-23300.
Pacciani, R. , Marconcini, M. , Fadai-Ghotbi, A. , Lardeau, S. , and Leschziner, M. A. , 2011, “ Calculation of High-Lift Cascades in Low Pressure Turbine Conditions Using a Three-Equation Model,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133(3), p. 031016. [CrossRef]
Pacciani, R. , Marconcini, M. , Arnone, A. , and Bertini, F. , 2014, “ Predicting High-Lift Low-Pressure Turbine Cascades Flow Using Transition-Sensitive Turbulence Closures,” ASME J. Turbomach., 136(5), p. 051007. [CrossRef]
Babajee, J. , and Arts, T. , 2012, “ Investigation of the Laminar Separation-Induced Transition With the γ-Reθt Transition Model on Low-Pressure Turbine Rotor Blades at Steady Conditions,” ASME Paper No. GT2012-68687.
Zhou, C. , Hodson, H. , and Himmel, C. , 2014, “ The Effects of Trailing Edge Thickness on the Losses of Ultrahigh Lift Low Pressure Turbine Blades,” ASME J. Turbomach., 136(8), p. 081011. [CrossRef]
Tyacke, J. , Tucker, P. , Jefferson-Loveday, R. , Vadlamani, N. R. , Watson, R. , Naqavi, I. , and Yang, X. , 2013, “ LES for Turbines: Methodologies, Cost and Future Outlooks,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94416.
Yangwei, L. , Hao, Y. , Lipeng, L. , and Qiushi, L. , 2017, “ Investigation of Vortical Structures and Turbulence Characteristics in Corner Separation in a Linear Compressor Cascade Using DDES,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 139(2), p. 021107.
Michálek, J. , Monaldi, M. , and Arts, T. , 2012, “ Aerodynamic Performance of a Very High Lift Low Pressure Turbine Airfoil (T106C) at Low Reynolds and High Mach Number With Effect of Free Stream Turbulence Intensity,” ASME J. Turbomach., 134(6), p. 061009. [CrossRef]
Marty, J. , Lantos, N. , Michel, B. , and Bonneau, V. , 2015, “ LES and Hybrid RANS/LES Simulations of Turbomachinery Flows Using High Order Methods,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-42134.
Hillewaert, K. , de Wiart, C. C. , Verheylewegen, G. , and Arts, T. , 2014, “ Assessment of a High-Order Discontinuous Galerkin Method for the Direct Numerical Simulation of Transition at Low-Reynolds Number in the T106C High-Lift Low Pressure Turbine Cascade,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-26739.
Ghidoni, A. , Colombo, A. , Rebay, S. , and Bassi, F. , 2013, “ Simulation of the Transitional Flow in a Low Pressure Gas Turbine Cascade With a High-Order Discontinuous Galerkin Method,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(7), p. 071101. [CrossRef]
Balzer, W. , and Fasel, H. F. , 2013, “ Direct Numerical Simulations of Laminar Separation Bubbles on a Curved Plate—Part 1: Simulation Setup and Uncontrolled Flow,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-95277.
Balzer, W. , and Fasel, H. F. , 2013, “ Direct Numerical Simulations of Laminar Separation Bubbles on a Curved Plate—Part 2: Flow Control Using Pulsed Vortex Generator Jets,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-95278.
Lee, C. B. , and Wu, J. Z. , 2008, “ Transition in Wall-Bounded Flows,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 61(3), p. 030802. [CrossRef]
Zhang, X. F. , 2006, “ Separation and Transition Control on Ultra-High-Lift Low Pressure Turbine Blades in Unsteady Flow,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Cui, J. , Rao, V. N. , and Tucker, P. , 2016, “ Numerical Investigation of Contrasting Flow Physics in Different Zones of a High-Lift Low-Pressure Turbine Blade,” ASME J. Turbomach., 138(1), p. 011003. [CrossRef]
Wu, X. , and Durbin, P. A. , 2001, “ Evidence of Longitudinal Vortices Evolved From Distorted Wakes in a Turbine Passage,” J. Fluid Mech., 446, pp. 199–228. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/evidence-of-longitudinal-vortices-evolved-from-distorted-wakes-in-a-turbine-passage/FE484A0D212982AB5947D60DA428B3C4
Michelassi, V. , Wissink, J. , and Rodi, W. , 2002, “ Analysis of DNS and LES of Flow in a Low Pressure Turbine Cascade With Incoming Wakes and Comparison With Experiments,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 69(3–4), pp. 295–329. [CrossRef]
Hodson, H. P. , and Howell, R. J. , 2005, “ Bladerow Interactions, Transition, and High-Lift Aerofoils in Low-Pressure Turbines,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 37(1), pp. 71–98. [CrossRef]
Meneveau, C. , and Katz, J. , 2000, “ Scale-Invariance and Turbulence Models for Large-Eddy Simulation,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 32(1), pp. 1–32. [CrossRef]
Liu, Y. , Yu, X. , and Liu, B. , 2008, “ Turbulence Models Assessment for Large-Scale Tip Vortices in an Axial Compressor Rotor,” J. Propul. Power, 24(1), pp. 15–25. [CrossRef]
Sohankar, A. , Davidson, L. , and Norberg, C. , 2000, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Flow Past a Square Cylinder: Comparison of Different Subgrid Scale Models,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 122(1), pp. 39–47. [CrossRef]
Klostermeier, C. , 2008, “ Investigation Into the Capability of Large Eddy Simulation for Turbomachinery Design,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/252106
Meyers, J. , and Sagaut, P. , 2007, “ Is Plane-Channel Flow a Friendly Case for the Testing of Large-Eddy Simulation Subgrid-Scale Models?,” Phys. Fluids, 19(4), p. 048105. [CrossRef]
Kravchenko, A. G. , and Moin, P. , 2000, “ Numerical Studies of Flow Over a Circular Cylinder at ReD = 3900,” Phys. Fluids, 12(2), pp. 403–417. [CrossRef]
Chen, S. , Chen, Y. , Xia, Z. , Qu, K. , Shi, Y. , Xiao, Z. , and Cai, J. , 2013, “ Constrained Large-Eddy Simulation and Detached Eddy Simulation of Flow Past a Commercial Aircraft at 14 Degrees Angle of Attack,” Sci. China Phys., Mech. Astron., 56(2), pp. 270–276. [CrossRef]
Cai, J. , and Chng, T. L. , 2009, “ On Vortex Shedding From Bluff Bodies With Base Cavities,” Phys. Fluids, 21(3), p. 034109. [CrossRef]
Zha, G. C. , and Bilgen, E. , 1993, “ Numerical Solutions of Euler Equations by Using a New Flux Vector Splitting Scheme,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 17(2), pp. 115–144. [CrossRef]
Raverdy, B. , Mary, I. , Sagaut, P. , and Liamis, N. , 2003, “ High-Resolution Large-Eddy Simulation of Flow Around Low-Pressure Turbine Blade,” AIAA J., 41(3), pp. 390–397. [CrossRef]
Tyacke, J. , and Tucker, P. G. , 2015, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Turbine Internal Cooling Ducts,” Comput. Fluids, 114, pp. 130–140. [CrossRef]
Cui, J. , and Tucker, P. G. , 2017, “ Numerical Study of Purge and Secondary Flows in a Low Pressure Turbine,” ASME J. Turbomach., 139(2), p. 021007. [CrossRef]
Xu, C. Y. , Chen, L. W. , and Lu, X. Y. , 2010, “ Large-Eddy Simulation of the Compressible Flow Past a Wavy Cylinder,” J. Fluid Mech., 665, pp. 238–273. [CrossRef]
Yoon, S. , and Jameson, A. , 1988, “ Lower-Upper Symmetric-Gauss-Seidel Method for the Euler and Navier–Stokes Equations,” AIAA J., 26(9), pp. 1025–1026. [CrossRef]
Smagorinsky, J. , 1963, “ General Circulation Experiments With the Primitive Equations—I: The Basic Experiment,” Monthly Weather Rev., 91(3), pp. 99–164. [CrossRef]
Lilly, D. K. , 1967, “ The Representation of Small Scale Turbulence in Numerical Simulation Experiments,” IBM Scientific Computational Symposium on Environmental Science, Yorktown Heights, NY, pp. 195–210.
Rogallo, R. S. , and Moin, P. , 1984, “ Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Flows,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 16(1), pp. 99–137. [CrossRef]
Nicoud, F. , and Ducros, F. , 1999, “ Subgrid-Scale Stress Modelling Based on the Square of the Velocity Gradient Tensor,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 62(3), pp. 183–200. [CrossRef]
Shah, K. B. , and Ferziger, J. H. , 1995, “ A New Non-Eddy Viscosity Subgrid-Scale Model and Its Application to Channel Flow,” Center for Turbulence Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, Report No. NASA-CR-200667. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960022300.pdf
Akselvoll, K. , and Moin, P. , 2014, “ Large Eddy Simulation of a Backward Facing Step Flow,” Eng. Turbul. Modell. Exp., 2, pp. 303–313. http://folk.ntnu.no/ivarse/art/MEKIT09_Panjwani_etal_final.pdf
Georgiadis, N. J. , Rizzetta, D. P. , and Fureby, C. , 2010, “ Large-Eddy Simulation: Current Capabilities, Recommended Practices, and Future Research,” AIAA J., 48(8), pp. 1772–1784. [CrossRef]
Hunt, J. C. R. , Wray, A. , and Moin, P. , 1988, “ Eddies, Streams, and Convergence Zones in Turbulent Flows,” Center for Turbulence Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, Report No. CTR-S88. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890015184.pdf
Tucker, P. , Eastwood, S. , Klostermeier, C. , Jefferson-Loveday, R. , Tyacke, J. , and Liu, Y. , 2010, “ Hybrid LES Approach for Practical Turbomachinery Flows: Part 1—Hierarchy and Example Simulations,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-23431.
Wu, J. Z. , Ma, H. Y. , and Zhou, M. D. , 2007, Vorticity and Vortex Dynamics, Springer, Berlin.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Global view of computational domain and the boundary conditions (one out of four points in both streamwise and pitchwise directions)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Grid spacing distribution along suction surface: (a) Δy+ distribution around blade suction surface and (b) Δx+ distribution around blade suction surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Mais distribution along suction surface for different meshes and SGS models: (a) CM, (b) QM, and (c) FM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Contour of pressure coefficient and streamlines, CM: (a) SMAG and (b) WALE

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Mass-averaged viscous ratio in boundary layer, CM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Instantaneous vortex structure based on Q criterion colored by spanwise vorticity, CM: (a) SMAG and (b) WALE

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Instantaneous vortex structure based on Q criterion colored by spanwise vorticity: (a) QM-WALE and (b) FM-WALE

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Contour of pressure coefficient and streamlines, CM, Smagorinsky: (a) Cs = 0.5 and (b) Cs = 0.05

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Mais distribution along suction surface for different Cs, CM, Smagorinsky

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Difference in exit flow angles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Difference in mass-weighted kinetic energy losses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Instantaneous vortex structure based on Q criterion colored by spanwise vorticity, FM, WALE: (a) EW and (b) SYM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Isentropic Mach number distribution on the midspan, FM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Contour of pressure coefficient and streamlines, FM, WALE: (a) EW and (b) SYM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Effects of endwall flows on exit flow angle and kinetic loss coefficient: (a) mean flow angles and (b) mass-weighted kinetic energy loss coefficients

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

The velocity and pressure distribution along the centerline of the passage, midspan, m/s and pascal

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Spanwise vorticity distribution at the midspan, FM, WALE, EW

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Streamwise vorticity distribution, FM, WALE, EW: (a) plane 1 and (b) plane 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Wall normal velocity at the midspan, FM, WALE: (a) CFD results and (b) the difference of Vn between EW and SYM cases compared to the induced velocity computed by Eq. (9)




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In