Christian Morsbach, Michael Bergmann, Adem Tosun, Bjoern F. Klose, Edmund Kügeler, Matthias Franke
{"title":"Large Eddy Simulation of a Low-Pressure Turbine Cascade with Turbulent End Wall Boundary Layers","authors":"Christian Morsbach, Michael Bergmann, Adem Tosun, Bjoern F. Klose, Edmund Kügeler, Matthias Franke","doi":"10.1007/s10494-023-00502-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We present results of implicit large eddy simulation (LES) and different Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) models of the MTU 161 low pressure turbine at an exit Reynolds number of <span>\\(90\\,000\\)</span> and exit Mach number of 0.6. The LES results are based on a high-order discontinuous Galerkin method and the RANS is computed using a classical finite-volume approach. The paper discusses the steps taken to create realistic inflow boundary conditions in terms of end wall boundary layer thickness and freestream turbulence intensity. This is achieved by tailoring the input distribution of total pressure and temperature, Reynolds stresses and turbulence length scale to a Fourier series based synthetic turbulence generator. With this procedure, excellent agreement with the experiment can be achieved in terms of blade loading at midspan and wake total pressure losses at midspan and over the channel height. Based on the validated setup, we focus on the discussion of secondary flow structures emerging due to the interaction of the incoming boundary layer and the turbine blade and compare the LES to two commonly used RANS models. Since we are able to create consistent setups for both LES and RANS, all discrepancies can be directly attributed to physical modelling problems. We show that both a linear eddy viscosity model and a differential Reynolds stress model coupled with a state-of-the-art correlation-based transition model fail, in this case, to predict the separation induced transition process around midspan. Moreover, their prediction of secondary flow losses leaves room for improvement as shown by a detailed discussion of turbulence kinetic energy and anisotropy fields.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":559,"journal":{"name":"Flow, Turbulence and Combustion","volume":"112 1","pages":"165 - 190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10494-023-00502-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Flow, Turbulence and Combustion","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10494-023-00502-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MECHANICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We present results of implicit large eddy simulation (LES) and different Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) models of the MTU 161 low pressure turbine at an exit Reynolds number of \(90\,000\) and exit Mach number of 0.6. The LES results are based on a high-order discontinuous Galerkin method and the RANS is computed using a classical finite-volume approach. The paper discusses the steps taken to create realistic inflow boundary conditions in terms of end wall boundary layer thickness and freestream turbulence intensity. This is achieved by tailoring the input distribution of total pressure and temperature, Reynolds stresses and turbulence length scale to a Fourier series based synthetic turbulence generator. With this procedure, excellent agreement with the experiment can be achieved in terms of blade loading at midspan and wake total pressure losses at midspan and over the channel height. Based on the validated setup, we focus on the discussion of secondary flow structures emerging due to the interaction of the incoming boundary layer and the turbine blade and compare the LES to two commonly used RANS models. Since we are able to create consistent setups for both LES and RANS, all discrepancies can be directly attributed to physical modelling problems. We show that both a linear eddy viscosity model and a differential Reynolds stress model coupled with a state-of-the-art correlation-based transition model fail, in this case, to predict the separation induced transition process around midspan. Moreover, their prediction of secondary flow losses leaves room for improvement as shown by a detailed discussion of turbulence kinetic energy and anisotropy fields.
期刊介绍:
Flow, Turbulence and Combustion provides a global forum for the publication of original and innovative research results that contribute to the solution of fundamental and applied problems encountered in single-phase, multi-phase and reacting flows, in both idealized and real systems. The scope of coverage encompasses topics in fluid dynamics, scalar transport, multi-physics interactions and flow control. From time to time the journal publishes Special or Theme Issues featuring invited articles.
Contributions may report research that falls within the broad spectrum of analytical, computational and experimental methods. This includes research conducted in academia, industry and a variety of environmental and geophysical sectors. Turbulence, transition and associated phenomena are expected to play a significant role in the majority of studies reported, although non-turbulent flows, typical of those in micro-devices, would be regarded as falling within the scope covered. The emphasis is on originality, timeliness, quality and thematic fit, as exemplified by the title of the journal and the qualifications described above. Relevance to real-world problems and industrial applications are regarded as strengths.