1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Numerical Computations of Film Cooling In Gas Turbine
Blades
Ahmed S Al-Adawy1, Samy M Morcos
2 and Essam E Khalil
2
1Teaching assistant
2Professor of Mechanical Engineering
Cairo University, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo, Egypt
Film cooling is vital to gas turbine blades to protect them from high temperatures and hence high
thermal stresses. Improvements have been made to the shaping of the cooling hole to provide higher
heat transfer effectiveness. Forward-diffused (laidback) holes and laterally-diffused (fan-shaped) holes
proved to give better effectiveness than cylindrical round ones. However, combining both effects
achieves better lateral distribution and less penetration into the mainstream. As a preliminary study of
the effect of varying lateral diffusion angle (γ) and forward diffusion angle (δ) on effectiveness
distribution on an adiabatic flat plate, a numerical model is built with GAMBIT commercial
preprocessor and flow field is solved with spatially-averaged film cooling effectiveness values in the
streamwise direction using FLUENT commercial solver. Numerical results are verified and compared
to corresponding experimental measurements.
I. Introduction
To increase the gas turbine power and efficiency, it was necessary that the inlet pressure and temperature be
increased to meet the high continuous demand over about the last two decades. However, maintaining such high
temperatures has been difficult due to material limits as creep and thermal stresses. That made the development of
gas turbine cooling technology an inevitable task to prevent failure of the turbine components. Many cooling
techniques were developed as (1) internal convective cooling, (2) impingement cooling and (3) external film
cooling. Film cooling has met a series of improvements to the shape of cooling hole to optimize the film cooling
effectiveness distribution. Effects such as orientation angles, length-to diameter ratio, hole spacing-to-diameter ratio,
blowing ratio, density ratio and temperature ratio have been studied, influencing local and spatially-averaged heat
transfer coefficients and film cooling effectiveness.
This literature studies the effect of lateral and forward diffusion angles on local and spatially-averaged cooling
effectiveness at the same blowing ratio. The blowing ratio (M) is defined by the equation
1 … (1)
Three sets of results are analyzed at three blowing ratios 0.5, 1 and 2. For the sake of improving film-cooling
effectiveness, holes are oriented to inject cooling fluid at a specified angle with streamwise direction (α); here taken
to be 35°. These holes are either simple- or compound-angle holes. For simple-angle holes, as shown in Figure 1, the
injection angle with span wise direction (β) is maintained at 90°. For compound-angle holes, as shown in Figure 2,
this angle is varied to give some lateral penetration in the span wise direction. In the presented literature, only
simple-angle holes are studied1-3
.
46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit25 - 28 July 2010, Nashville, TN
AIAA 2010-7088
Copyright © 2010 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Figure 1: Simple-Angle (SA) Holes Figure 2: Compound-Angle (CA) Holes
Simple-angle holes are cylindrical round simple-angle (CYSA), laterally-diffused simple angle (LDSA), forward-
diffused simple-angle (FDSA) or laterally- and forward diffused simple angle (LFDSA). CYSA holes are simple
cylindrical holes with no lateral or forward diffusion. This type is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Cylindrical Round Simple-Angle Holes
LDSA and FDSA holes are both simple cylindrical holes for some metering length L1 and diffused for a length L2.
In LDSA holes, the diffusion is span wise with a lateral diffusion angle (γ). This type is also known as fan-shaped
holes. They provide better lateral distribution and hence improve the effectiveness through the pitch between holes
and away from centerlines of cooling holes. This type is illustrated in Figure 4. On the other hand, in FDSA, the
diffusion is streamwise with a forward diffusion angle (δ). This type is also known as laidback holes. They provide
less penetration to the mainstream at the hole exit area in FDSA than in CYSA and hence they provide less cooling
velocities and less viscous losses. This type is illustrated in Figure 5. However, both diffusion techniques can be
combined to produce laterally and forward diffusion FLDSA holes that are also known as laidback fan-shaped holes.
This type can be taken as the generalized form of the previously-mentioned types and is illustrated in Figure 6.
Figure 4: Laterally-Diffused Simple-Angle Holes Figure 5: Forward-Diffusion Simple-Angle Holes
3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Figure 6: Laterally- and Forward-Diffusion Simple-Angle Holes
The selected numerical model for the present work is illustrated here in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Numerical Model
A simple control volume is extracted out of this numerical model. The diameter of the cooling hole is D, its length is
L and the pitch between holes is P. The control volume has a height of 10D and a thickness of P/2, and is extended
upstream to 10D and downstream to 25D. Symmetry boundary conditions are maintained at the vertical mid-pitch
and hole center planes. This control volume is illustrated in Figure 8.
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Figure 8: Control Volume Studied
The diameter of cooling holes is taken to 5 mm and length of cooling holes for CYSA is taken to be 3D,
corresponding to 15 mm. For LDSA, FDSA and LFDSA holes, both the metering length and diffusion lengths are
taken as 1.5D, corresponding to 7.5 mm. The streamwise injection angle is maintained at 35° and compound angle is
kept at 90°. Pitch between holes is chosen as 3D, corresponding to 15 mm.
II. Mathematical Modelling and Assumptions
The present numerical investigation was based on solving the governing equations that described airflow inside the
selected control volume by a CFD program FLUENT 6.34-5
(commercially available CFD program). This numerical
approach solves the partial differential equations governing the transport of mass, three momentum, energy and
species in a fully turbulent three dimensional domain under steady state conditions in addition to standard k – ε
model equations for turbulence closure6-7
.
Computational Fluid Dynamics Models
The different governing partial differential equations are typically expressed in a general form as:
ΦΦΦΦ +
∂
Φ∂Γ
∂
∂+
∂
Φ∂Γ
∂
∂+
∂
Φ∂Γ
∂
∂=Φ
∂
∂+Φ
∂
∂+Φ
∂
∂S
zzyyxxW
zV
yU
xeffeffeff ,,,ρρρ
… (2)
Where ρ is the air density and Φ is the dependent variable, SΦ = Source term of Φ, and U, V, W are the velocity
vectors, and ΓΦ,eff is the effective diffusion coefficient. The effective diffusion coefficients and source terms for the
various differential equations8 are listed in the table 1.
Table 1. Terms of Partial Differential Equations (PDE) in Equation 1.
Φ ΓΦ,eff SΦ
Continuity 1 0 0
X-momentum U µeff -∂P/∂x +ρg+ SU
Y-momentum V µeff -∂P/∂y+ρg (1+β∆t) + SV
Z-momentum W µeff -∂P/∂z+ρg+ SW
H-equation H µeff/σH SH
k-equation k µeff/σk G - ρ ε ε-equation ε µeff/σε C1 ε G/k – C2 ρ ε2
/k
µeff = µlam + µ t µ t = ρ Cµ k2 / ε
5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
G = µt [2{(∂U/∂x)2 +(∂V/∂y)
2 +(∂W/∂z)
2}+(∂U/∂y + ∂V/∂x)
2 +(∂V/∂z + ∂W/∂y)
2 +(∂U/∂z + ∂W/∂x)
2]
SU = ∂/∂x(µeff ∂Φ/∂x)+∂/∂y(µeff ∂Φ/∂x)+∂/∂z(µeff ∂Φ/∂x)
SV = ∂/∂x(µeff ∂Φ/∂y)+∂/∂y(µeff ∂Φ/∂y)+∂/∂z(µeff ∂Φ/∂y)
SW = ∂/∂x(µeff ∂Φ/∂z)+∂/∂y(µeff ∂Φ/∂z)+∂/∂z(µeff ∂Φ/∂z)
SH is the source of Energy at nodal points
Turbulence model constants C1 = 1.44, C2 = 1.92, Cµ = 0.09
σH = 0.9, σRH = 0.9, στ = 0.9, σk = 0.9, σε = 1.225
Boundary Conditions
The solution of the governing equations can be realized through the specifications of appropriate boundary
conditions. The values of velocity, temperature, kinetic energy, and its dissipation rate are specified at all
boundaries. The mainstream gases are approximated as air, with a temperature of 333 K. The inlet mainstream flow
is considered to have a uniform velocity of 10 m/s as measured by Nassir et al1, the turbulence level is 11% and
turbulent length scale is 5 mm. The coolant inlet is taken to be air, with a temperature of 293 K. The inlet coolant
flow is considered to have a uniform velocity. Due to the temperature ratio of 333/293, density ratio is maintained at
1.14. All computations in the present paper, which is a preliminary study to the effect of diffusion angles and
blowing ratios, are performed at a blowing ratio of 0.5 and hence cooling velocity inlet of 4.39 m/s. As measured by
Nassir et al1, the turbulence level is 1% and turbulent length scale is 5 mm. Symmetry boundary condition is applied
to hole-centre and mid-pitch planes. The flat plate surfaces upstream and downstream of the hole injection and the
internal walls of the coolant pipe are considered adiabatic (zero heat flux). Symmetry boundary condition is applied
to the upper boundary of the control volume, as the gradients of flow field properties are assumed to disappear at
ten-times the hole metering section diameter. A non-slip condition at all solid wall is applied to the velocities. The
logarithmic law of the wall (wall function) of Launder and Spalding6 was used here, for the near wall boundary
layer. At inlets, the air velocity was assumed to have a uniform distribution; inlet values of the temperature were
assumed to be of a constant value and uniform distribution. All velocity components were set as zeros initially, and
temperatures were assumed to be initially equal to the average of cooling and mainstream temperatures.
Numerical Procedure
The Computer Program, FLUENT5 was used to solve the time-independent (steady state) conservation
equations together with the standard k-ε model as Launder and Spalding6
and the corresponding boundary
conditions. The numerical solution grid divided the space of the control volume into discretized computational cells
of the order of 1,000,000 tetrahedral cells. The discrete finite difference equations were solved with the SIMPLE
algorithm, Khalil9. Solution convergence criteria, was applied at each iteration and ensured the summations of
normalized residuals were less than 0.001 for flow, 0.001 for k andε, and 10-6
for energy. The predictions of flow
and turbulence characteristics are in general qualitative agreement with the corresponding experiments and
numerical simulations published by others, Neilsen4. Nevertheless discrepancies exist and particularly in the vicinity
of recirculation zone boundaries. More discrepancies were also observed in situation with heating flows than those
of cooling.
Convergence and Stability
The simultaneous and non-linear characteristics of the finite difference equations necessitate that special measures
are employed to procure numerical stability (convergence); these include under relaxation of the solution of the
momentum and turbulence equations by under relaxation factors which relate the old and the new values of Φ as
follows,
( ) oldnew 1 Φγ−+Φγ=Φ}… (3)
Where γ is the under-relaxation factor. It was varied between 0.2 and 0.3 for the three velocity components as the
number of iteration increases. For the turbulence quantities, γ was taken between 0.2 and 0.4 and for other variables
between 0.2 and 0.6. The required iterations for convergence are based on the nature of the problem and the
6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
numerical conditions (grid nodes, under-relaxation factor, initial guess, etc.). So the time (on the computer
processor) required to obtain the results is based on many factors. The computational number of iterative steps is
selected according space cell (spatial difference) to yield converged solutions9. The validity of the present
computational technique was assessed previously in the open literature, for example Khalil 4, 7 where reference
should be made for more detailed readings.
III. Results and Discussions
The control volume is meshed for a 0.5 mm spacing of tetrahedral-hybrid grid on the tested flat plate and the cooling
hole. A size function is generated with a growth rate of 1.02 and maximum size of 2 mm. The number of cells is in
the order of a million cells. A snapshot of the meshed control volume is shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9: Snapshot of the Meshed Control Volume
A common definition for the local adiabatic film effectiveness on the surface is
… (4)
The mainstream (hot) gas recovery temperature is a local value, but is in some cases taken to be a constant, or
assumed equal to the gas total temperature. The coolant temperature is typically taken to be equal to the coolant exit
bulk temperature at the injection point into the mainstream, though in compressible flows it may be more
appropriate to use the coolant recovery or total temperature.
The adiabatic wall temperature is the local mixed fluid temperature that drives heat transfer to or from the wall. It is
this adiabatic wall temperature that is primarily dependent on many parameters of the fluid streams, both local and
developing, as well as the surfaces and geometry.
This tetrahedral-hybrid mesh has proven to be effective when compared to corresponding experimental results.
When applying the same boundary conditions of the study of each of Nassir et al1, Ai et al
2 and Jung and Lee
3, the
laterally- (spatially-) averaged cooling effectiveness distribution meets the experimental results presented in each of
those studies as presented in Figure 10, corresponding only to the case of cylindrically-round simple-angle holes.
The predicted spatially averaged film cooling effectiveness is in reasonable agreement with the previous
measurements of Nassir et al1, Ai et al
2 and Jung and Lee
3. The present predictions are well within the various
experimental values that are relatively scattered. However the comparisons indicated good trend wise agreement. It
is to be noted that z/D represent the streamwise distance-to-metering diameter ratio and hence a dimensionless form
of the distance in the streamwise direction.
7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Figure 10: Numerical results in comparison to corresponding experimental results
Contours of temperature distribution on the tested plate and on the hole-center planes are shown in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Temperature Contours on tested plate and hole-center plane (°C) for CYSA holes (M = 0.5)
IV. Concluding Remarks
8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
This paper analyzes verified numerical results of adiabatic wall film cooling effectiveness on a flat plate solved
using FLUENT commercial solver and modeled by GAMBIT preprocessor, as a preliminary step of studying the
effect of varying lateral diffusion angle (γ) and forward diffusion angle (δ) on effectiveness distribution on an
adiabatic flat plate. Numerical computations can well represent the measured data as highlighted in the case shown
in the paper. Further investigations are to follow to clearly identify the parameters affecting film cooling
effectiveness.
References
1 Nassir, H., Ekkad, S.V., Acharya, S., 2000, Effect of compound angle injection on flat surface film cooling with
large streamwise injection angle, Proceeding of the 8th
International Symposium on Transport Phenomena and
Dynamics of Rotating Machinery 2, 763- 768. 2 Ai D., Ding, P.P., Chen, P.H., 2001, The selection criterion of injection temperature pair for transient liquid crystal,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 44, 1389- 1399. 3 Jung, I.S., Lee, J.S., 2000, Effects of Orientation Angles on Film Cooling over a Flat Plate: Boundary Layer
Temperature Distributions and Adiabatic Film Cooling Effectiveness, ASME J. Turbomach., 122, 153- 160. 4
Khalil, E.E., 2010, Modelling Of Flow Regimes and Thermal Patterns Interactions in Complex Applications,
AIAA-2010-1554, Orlando, January 2010. 5 FLUENT 6.3 Documentation, © Fluent Inc. 2005.
6 Launder, B. E., and Spalding D. B., 1974, The Numerical Computation of Turbulent Flows, Computer Methods
App. Mech., pp. 269-275. 7
Khalil, E.E. 2009, Computational Analyses and Design of Industrial Furnaces and Combustion Chambers,
Proceedings of ICGSI, MC04, Thailand, December 2009. 8
Spalding, D. B., and Patankar, S. V., 1974, A Calculation Procedure for Heat, Mass and Momentum Transfer in
Three Dimensional Parabolic Flows, Int. J. Heat & Mass Transfer, 15, pp. 1787. 9 Khalil, E.E., 1983, Modelling of Furnaces and Combustors, Abacus Press, UK.