Numerical and experimental study of the flow structure in a reverse-flow combustor of a gas turbine engine


Аuthors

Veselov K. E., Evdokimov O. A.*

Rybinsk State Aviation Technical University named after P.A. Soloviev, RSATU, 53, Pushkin St., Rybinsk, Yaroslavl region, 152934, Russia

*e-mail: yevdokimov_oleg@mail.ru

Abstract

The combustion chamber is one of the most complex elements of a gas turbine engine, where various physical processes take place, including turbulent unsteady flows, chemical reactions, complex and radiative heat transfer with phase transitions. It is also important to minimize hydraulic losses and maximize combustion efficiency as well as to reduce pollutants emissions in combustion products. Most numerical results published in various papers are based on different computational models desc-ribing turbulent flows, which are not always interchangeable or generalizable. Therefore, it is essential to have original experimental data on physical processes in gas turbine combustion chambers to validate different computational fluid dynamics (CFD) approaches. One suitable way lies in applying planar optical diagnostics to the flow. This paper presents new results from optical measurements of flow dynamics in a sector of a reverse-flow annular gas turbine combustion chamber. It also demonstrates the potential of using particle image velocimetry (PIV) to obtain detailed velocity distributions in comp-lex turbulent flows in the combustor. Among the advantages of the experimental approach, the main disadvantage is related to the flow observation in near-wall regions, where measurements are limited due to the specific features of the laser beam's expansion, especially in the presence of wall curvature. Despite this fact, the obtained results can be used as a reliable basis for validation of numerical studies in the main flow field. A comparison of experimental data with results from numerical simulations based on RANS, URANS, and hybrid eddy resolving approaches is presented. Steady models do not provide accurate predictions of velocity profiles, while hybrid eddy resolving models, such as SBES and DES, provide high levels of calculation accuracy with deviations of no more than 9–16 % relative to experiment. For the simulation of reverse-flow combustion chambers, it is recommended to use the SBES turbulence model. It provides high-quality solutions to engineering problems thanks to the lower level of requirements placed on the computational grid, while maintaining a high level of accuracy in calculations. The results obtained can serve as a reliable basis for numerical simulations of flow structures in gas turbine combustors, as well as for configuring turbulence models.

Keywords:

reverse-flow combustion chamber, scale-resolving turbulence models, numerical simulation, PIV, optical measurements

References

  1. Lefebvre AH, Ballal DR. Gas Turbine Combustion: Alternative Fuels and Emissions. (3rd ed.). CRC Press. 2010. 537 p.
  2. Khosravy M. Review of the New Combustion Technologies in Modern Gas Turbines. Progress in Gas Turbine Performance. InTech. 2013. DOI: 10.5772/54403
  3. Liu W. Experimental Study on Instability Characteristics of Low-Swirl Flames in a Multinozzle Combustor With Different Swirling Arrays. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power. 2017;139(6). DOI: 10.1115/ 1.4035660
  4. Okada M., Pinho J., Cernat B. et al. A fluorescent PIV technique for turbomachinery flows. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2023;2511(1). DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/2511/1/012021
  5. Veretennikov SV, Evdokimov OA. Visualization and PIV-study of the formation of a cooling film when flowing around the leading edge of the gas turbine nozzle blade. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2019;1421(1). DOI: 10.1088/ 1742-6596/1421/1/012043
  6. Sung Y, Choi G. Non-intrusive optical diagnostics of co- and counter-swirling flames in a dual swirl pulverized coal combustion burner. Fuel. 2016;174:76–88. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2016.01.011
  7. Grohmann J, O’Loughlin W, Meier W et al. Comparison of the Combustion Characteristics of Liquid Single-Component Fuels in a Gas Turbine Model Combustor». Volume 4A: Combustion, Fuels and Emissions. Seoul, South Korea: American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 2016. DOI: 10.1115/GT2016-56177
  8. Inozemtsev AA et al. Development and application of non-contact technology for studying combustion processes in a gas turbine engine combustor. Thermophysics and Aeromechanics. 2015;22(3):373–383. (In Russ.).
  9. Gubaidullin IT, Andreeva TP, Gumerov A et al. Optical-electronic spectrometric system for monitoring combustion processes in the combustion chamber of gas turbine engine. PNRPU Aerospace Engineering Bulletin. 2015; 41:59–71. DOI: 10.15593/2224-9982/20 15.41.03
  10. Feng Y et al. Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the Non-Reacting Flow in a High-Fidelity Heavy-Duty Gas Turbine DLN Combustor. Energies. 2022; 15(24). DOI: 10.3390/en15249551
  11. Yao Q et al. Effects of Primary Jets on the Flow Field and Outlet Temperature Distribution in a Reverse-Flow Combustor. Aerospace. 2025;12(3):182. DOI: 10.3390/ aerospace12030182
  12. Gavrilov AA, Dekterev AA. Application of the PANS Turbulence Model to Calculate the Flow in the Francis‑99 Model Radial-­Axial Hydroturbine. J. Sib. Fed. Univ. Eng. & Technol. 2022;15(6):726–738. DOI: 10.1751 6/1999-494X-0430 (In Russ.).
  13. Menter FR, Lechner R, Matyushenko A. Best Practice: RANS Turbulence Modeling in Ansys CFD. Version 1.0. Ansys Germany GmbH. 2021.
  14. Amaya J. Unsteady coupled convection, conduction and radiation simulations on parallel architectures for combustion applications. Fluid Dynamics. INPT. 2010.
  15. Bulat G, Jones WP, Marquis AJ. Large Eddy Simulation of an industrial gas-turbine combustion chamber using the sub-grid PDF method. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute. 2013;34(2):3155–3164. DOI: 10.1016/j. proci.2012.07.031
  16. Kong F, Li T, Cheng C et al. Modeling of spray flame in gas turbine combustors with LES and FGM. Fuel. 2022;325. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124756
  17. Zubrilin IA, Gurakov NI, Matveev SG. Lean Blowout Limit Prediction in a Combustor with the Pilot Flame. Energy Procedia. 2017;141:273–281. DOI: 10.1016/j. egypro.2017.11.105
  18. ActualFlow. Version 1.17.3. User Manual. Novosibirsk. 2012. 175 p. (In Russ.).
  19. Thermocouples. Nominal static transformation characteristics.  State Standard R 8.585-2001. (In Russ.).
  20. Speziale CG, Sarkar S, Gatski TB. Modelling the pressure–strain correlation of turbulence: an invariant dynamical systems approach. J. Fluid Mech. 1991;227: 245–272.
  21. Menter F., Kuntz M., Bender R. A Scale-Adaptive Simulation Model for Turbulent Flow Predictions. 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Reno. Nevada: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. 2003.
  22. Menter F., Egorov Y. A Scale Adaptive Simulation Model using Two-Equation Models. 43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. 2005.
  23. Gritskevich MS, Garbaruk AV, Schütze J et al. Deve-lopment of DDES and IDDES Formulations for the k-ω Shear Stress Transport Model. Flow Turbulence Combust. 2012;88(3):431–449. DOI: 10.1007/s10494-011-9378-4

mai.ru — informational site of MAI

Copyright © 2009-2026 by MAI