Upload
others
View
28
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
BLADE3DRVersion 3.3
2018
Dr. Justin (Jongsik) Oh
www.TurboAeroDesign.com
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
2
INTRODUCTIONBLADE3DR ver. 3.3
Blade three-dimensional profile design and aero/hydrodynamic analysis in turbomachinery
A single row blade
Design parameters
Hub and shroud contours
Blade camberline metal angle
Blade normal thickness
Aerodynamic analysis options
Blade loading analysis• SCM (Streamline Curvature Method, or Velocity Gradient Method)
• FEM (Finite Element Method)
Blade 3D simplified CFD• Explicit time-marching method using body forces for turbulent viscous terms
• No rotor tip clearance
• Real gas option included
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
3
Development was motivated by personal needs for Better Performance and Reliability at aero design tasks since 2002 while using some commercial software, including
CCAD (by Concepts ETI, but now Concepts NREC)
COMIG (by NREC, but now gone)
BladeGen and BladeGenPlus (by AEA Technology)
AxCENT (by Concepts NREC)
BladeModeller (by Ansys)
Over 12 year-use in personal aero-design tasks at various applications, still evolving.
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
4
Program Strucuture Windows-based ( FORTRAN + Visual Basic ) Aiming for use of PC or laptops Programs are installed in “C:\OJS\TurboSW\Blade3DR\Ver3_3\”. All input/output files are located in “C:\OJS\TurboSW\Blade3DR\Ver3_3\Work\”. All input/output file names are pre-determined and fixed. When tasks are done, all necessary files should be copied to the local folder using the data management menu.
Program Limits A single row of blades Max. two-row tangential splitter blades No fillets Currently limited CAD export options (DXF and STL) *
Program Plus Capabilities Two different methods for blade loading analysis (SCM + FEM) 3D compressible or incompressible turbulent CFD Blade rotation by specified angle (useful for IGV model) Large single screen for better work performance (that I love) Supplementary viewer + Text viewer Total 21 spanwise uniformly-spaced layers (fixed) Two curve options
• Spline **
• Bezier polynomial
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
5
(*) When professional s/w expertise is added,it will be extended to IGES and STEP, etc.However, a solid can be easily created fromSTL with any CAD programs.
(**) In some situation, using Spline providesbetter work performance than Bezier. You willneed both.
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
6
• Large single screen for edit
• Supplementary viewer
• Text viewer
• Easy-access buttons
• File inputs
.rtzt
.ojs
.curve
Meanline output from
all my design programs
The .rtzt file is of a blade meanline format,
shared with all my programs and also with Ansys
BladeModeller (See Appendix).
The .ojs file is of directly-saved data of Blade3D.
The .curve files are Ansys Turbogrid inputs.
Just for illustration (of arbitrary design) to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
Centrifugal compressor impeller using HFC-134a refrigerant
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
7
• 2D DXF
• 3D DXF wireframe
• 3D STL
• Direct inputs for
Ansys Turbogrid (.curve)
Numeca FineTurbo (.geomturbo)
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
8
Dynamic View
Spanwise Distributions
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
9
• Various setting options for
better design performance
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
10
• Various edit options for
better design performance
Spline
Bezier Polynomial
• BETA or THETA edit
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
11
• Various edit options for better design performance
• Edit while looking at hub and shroud curves together
• By default, all tangential splitter-blades follow full-blade
angles. However, they can be changed via Option menu.
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
12
• Edit while looking at hub and shroud curves together
• All tangential splitter-blade thicknesses are independently
changeable.
• Sometimes “spline” curve is better than “Bezier polynomial” at
heavy rate of changes in the distribution. You will need both.
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
13
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
14
• Total 5 Options
Circle
Ellipse
Bezier *
Pseudo *
Cut-off
(*) In case that the ellipse approach fails
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
15
• Unusual case, but available
Through an add-on editor
• Example shows the change of
BETA of 2nd-row splitter.
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
16
• Unusual case, but available
Through an add-on editor
• Example shows the change of
THETA of 1st-row splitter.
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
17
• Blade trim or extension
Impeller outer diameter
o on hub
o on shroud
Impeller exit height
Impeller inlet height
• While reserving baseline shape of
Blade angle
Blade thickness
• Useful option for industry design needs
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
18
• Two Different Analysis Methods
SCM (Streamline Curvature Method)
o Also called Velocity Gradient Method
o Sove the velocity gradient equation (inviscid) along
each quasi-orthogonal to streamlines from inlet to exit
FEM (Finite Element Method)
o Subsonic stream-function Poisson equation (inviscid)
o Adler & Krimerman’s H-S stream surface approach
Ideal gas or incompressible fluid for both methods
Note : Just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
19
Streamlines after
solution converges
Again, just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
20
Streamlines after
solution converges
The FEM program is a part of my
Ph.D. thesis achievements (1992).
Streamlines after
solution converges
Again, just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
21
• A single blade row
• Compressible fluid
Ideal gas
Real gas
• Incompressible fluid
• Turbulent viscous body forces
• No rotor tip clearance
• Multi-grid convergence
• Structured grids
• Effective tool to check aero designs
Again, just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
22
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
23
Again, just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
24
Again, just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
25
Again, just for illustration to show capabilities of two-row splitters with real gas
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
26
• Example using FreeCAD
Part environment
Open > Blade3D.STL
Part > Creat shape from mesh
Blade3D001 solid
with spanwise extensions
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
27
• Tangential Lean
Edit stacking curve
Mostly axial blades
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
28
• Meridional Sweep
Edit stacking curve
Mostly axial blades
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
29
• Interstage key component
Sample industry design from
a multistage centrifugal chiller
compressor using HFC-134a,
looking a lot problematic in
aerodynamics
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
30
On mid-pitchOn 75% span from hub
Near trailing-edge
Blade loadings on shroud
FEMSCM
FEM
Streamlines
SCM
streamlines
Blade Loading Analysis
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
31
• CFD inputs
• Real gas
• 0 rpm (stationary)
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
32
On mid-pitchOn 75% span from hub
Near trailing-edge
Blade loadings on shroud
Spanwise flow angles
at discharge
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
33
• Conventional water
pump impeller
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
34
Loading
Analysis
FEMSCM
FEM
StreamlinesSCM
streamlines
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
35
• CFD inputs
• Incompressible fluid
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
36
• Time-marching
method using
artificial
compressibility for
incompressible
fluid simulation
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
37
On Shroud
On mid-pitch On mid-span
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
38
• Radial-inflow
turbine rotor with
one-row splitter
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
39
FEM
SCM
FEM
Streamlines
SCM
streamlines
Loading Analysis
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
40
On lower mid-pitch
On 75% span from hub
Secondary flows
near trailing-edge
On shroud
• CFD
• Transonic rotor
Convergence
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
41
• NASA CR 72562
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
42
• CFD results
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
43
APPENDIX
BLADE3DR ver.3.3
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
44
• One of Blade3DR default input formats
Blade meanline geometry
Originally the format was from BladeGen (AEA Technology). (now Ansys BladeModeller)
However, for tangential splitter blades, Blade3DR uses a different definition of pitchwise locations.
Full-blade count Number of tangential splitter blades
Full-blade pitch position Number of spans N (Normal thickness) M
T (Tangential thickness)
Normalized span from hub Total number of data
R (Radius) Theta (rad) Z (Axial) T (Thickness)
along camberline
from bladeless-upstream, blade and bladeless-downstream
Normalized span from hub Total number of data
R (Radius) Theta (rad) Z (Axial) T (Thickness)
along camberline
from bladeless-upstream, blade and bladeless-downstream
>
>
>
○○ Repeated to Shroud
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
45
End of bladeless-downstream at shroud of full blade
1st-row splitter pitch position(*) Number of spans N (Normal thickness) M
T (Tangential thickness)
Normalized span from hub Total number of data
R (Radius) Theta (rad) Z (Axial) T (Thickness)
along camberline
from bladeless-upstream, blade and bladeless-downstream
Normalized span from hub Total number of data
R (Radius) Theta (rad) Z (Axial) T (Thickness)
along camberline
from bladeless-upstream, blade and bladeless-downstream
>
>
○○ Repeated to Shroud
>
(*) Relative pitch between two adjacent full blades
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
46
End of bladeless-downstream at shroud of 1st-row splitter blade
2nd-row splitter pitch position(**) Number of spans N (Normal thickness) M
T (Tangential thickness)
Normalized span from hub Total number of data
R (Radius) Theta (rad) Z (Axial) T (Thickness)
along camberline
from bladeless-upstream, blade and bladeless-downstream
Normalized span from hub Total number of data
R (Radius) Theta (rad) Z (Axial) T (Thickness)
along camberline
from bladeless-upstream, blade and bladeless-downstream
>
>
○○ Repeated to Shroud
>
(**) Relative pitch between full blade and 1st-row splitter blade
2018www.TurboAeroDesign.com
47
THANKS FOR YOUR INTEREST