Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2010 GT2010 June 14-18, 2010, in Glasgow, Scotland

DRAFT

GT2010-23525

NUMERICAL COMPUTATION OF FORCES ACTING ON BLADES AS A FUNCTION OF AXIAL CLEARANCE AND MINIMUM THROAT AREA
J. C. Garca CIATEQ Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx. F. Aboites CIATEQ Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx

F. Sierra UAEM Cuernavaca, Morelos,Mx

H. Morales CIATEQ Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx

M. Gonzalez CIATEQ Quertaro, Quertaro, Mx

ABSTRACT Its well known that in any stage of steam turbine the working fluid comes trough the nozzles, which direct the flow towards the blades causing loads on the blade surfaces to move the rotor and produce useful work. These loads are oscillating in time in a harmonic pattern and could be computed by knowing the pressure around the blades in every moment. The variation in the loads are due because the interaction between the nozzle wakes with the rotating blades. In this paper, a 2D numerical computation of forces acting on blades as a function of the axial clearance and minimum throat area is presented. The pressure field in a Curtis stage of a 300 MW steam turbine was numerically computed. The Navier Stokes equations were resolved in 2D using a commercial program based on the finite volume method. The sliding mesh technique was used to take into account the interaction between the nozzle wakes and the blade motion. The forces acting on the blades were computed for several axial clearances and throat area variations. It is showed how these forces are affected by the variability of these distances. Dependence of the forces from the pressure field variation in time in the axial clearance is investigated. These forces, which cause forced vibrations on blades, are expressed as Fourier series in order to investigate the changes in these forces.

unsteadiness downstream which may induce vibrations on blades, affecting the operation and performance of turbines. A lot of blade vibrations are caused by pressure variations in the axial clearance. One of the most important sources of pressure variations for a blade row is the upstream nozzle wake [1, 2]. The nozzle wake could be affected by the length of the axial clearance and by the nozzle throat area. If the blade vibrations have large amplitude could cause high alternating stresses on blades, leading to failures by fatigue. In this paper, a 2D Curtis time dependant numerical simulation was used to compute the forces acting on blades and caused by the passing nozzle wake. The total force on blades as a function of axial clearance and nozzle throat area are showed. The total force computed for different cases of axial clearance and nozzle throat area was expressed as Fourier series. NOMENCLATURE density angular velocity viscosity relative velocity ur u absolute velocity r vector of position x spatial coordinate t time g gravity F force frequency Hz fi constants in a Fourier series Ai

INTRODUCTION During the operation of a steam turbine, there are dynamic interactions between the fluid work and the internal parts like nozzles and blades. Some of those interactions cause

Copyright 20xx by ASME

phase angle

GOVERNING EQUATIONS AND MATHEMATICAL MODEL The numerical computations of the pressure field in the first Curtis stage of a 300 MW steam turbine was performed applying Fluent CFD code, using the RNG-- turbulence model. To predict non-stationary phenomena, in the bladenozzle flow interaction, the sliding mesh technique was used [3,4,5]. A relative reference frame was used to evaluate easily the force acting on the blades. The flow field was numerically resolved under steady-state and time-dependent simulations using 2-D geometric models. The force acting on blades was calculated using a user defined function, which integrates the static pressure around the blade walls at every time step. These force time-dependent data were analyzed using a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). The computation domain is defined by: a) the stator zone and b) the blade zone. The Navier-Stokes equations in rotating domains, as the turbine stage, include an additional term to take into account the fluid acceleration inside the moving zones [6]. The absolute and relative velocities in the rotating domain are related by: (1) u r = u ( r ) The continuity equation may be used either with the absolute or the relative velocity:

Figure 1 Geometrical aspects of the 2-D turbine Curtis stage. The boundary conditions at the stage were inlet pressure 15.7 MPa and outlet pressure was 11.1 MPa. The inlet and outlet temperature of the steam were 805.55 K and 760.49 K, respectively.

+ ( ui ) = 0 t xi

(2)

In the stationary domain the momentum equation is written as:

u (ui ) + (ui u j ) = g i p + ui + 1 j t x j xi x j x j 3 xi x j

(3)

Instead in the rotating domain the momentum equation must include the relative velocity ur and the angular velocity as follows:
(u i ) + (u ri u j ) + ( u i ) = p + t x j xi x j u i x j 1 + 3 x i u j x j

(4) GEOMETRY AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS The Curtis stage of a 300 MW steam turbine under study has a mean radius of 0.94 m. The stator has 56 nozzles and a mean height of 0.0228 m. The rotor has 84 blades and a mean height of 0.027 m. Only a segment of the last stage was simulated and periodic boundary conditions were applied at every side of the stage segment. The stage segment was defined by 2 nozzle and 3 blades (as shown in Fig. 1).

Figure 2 A 2D mesh of the Curtis Stage The geometrical model was meshed with quadrilateral cells, using a structured mesh. For meshing walls vicinity a boundary layer was used. A zoom of the 2D mesh are shown in Fig. 2. Meshes of different sizes were used to assure mesh independence. A profile of static pressure, located at the clearance nozzle-rotor, was used as a convergence criterion. A mesh with 138 558 cells was selected after a convergence test where another mesh of more than 750 thousands cells converged to the same result. A time step size of 1x10-5s was used during time-dependent simulation, whereas that the rotor speed was 173.03 m/s.

Copyright 20xx by ASME

RESULTS The Figure 1 also shows as lines a through f, the spatial location where the static pressure profiles were taken at the axial nozzle-rotor clearance. These profiles were used to show a 3D view of the pressure field in the axial clearance at given instant. In order to show the pressure field as a time function, monitors a-f were used. These profiles and monitors were located in the axial clearance as show in Table 1. For a giver profile or monitor the dimensionless distance was calculated using the total axial clearance and the distance between that profile or monitor and the nozzle trailing edge. Table 1 Dimensionless distance to locate the profiles and monitors Profiles or Dimensionless distance in the axial clearance monitors a 0.009 b 0.17 c 0.35 d 0.5 e 0.7 f 0.9 In order to compute the total force on blades as function of axial clearance, six different meshes were used. In each mesh a different axial clearance was utilized as shown in Table 2. The design axial clearance corresponds to the mesh labeled as AIII D: 0.0163 m. Table 2 Axial clearances used during the computations Case Axial clearance [m] AI 0.0113 AII 0.0123 AIII D 0.0163 AIV 0.0213 AV 0.0263 AVI 0.0313 In the case of the computations of blade forces as a function of the nozzle minimum throat area, three different meshes were used, as shown in Table 3. The design nozzle minimum throat area corresponds to the mesh TH D: 0.000353 m2/nozzle. The minimum throat area was calculated using the minimum length T shown in Figure 1 and the nozzle height. The THI mesh correspond to a increased throat area, caused by an hypothetical nozzle wear, while the THII mesh correspond to a reduced throat area, caused by an hypothetical deposit. Table 3 Minimum nozzle throat area Case nozzle minimum throat area [m2] TH D 0.000353 TH I 0.000418 TH II 0.000257

The static pressure profiles at a given time and for the design axial clearance (AIII D) of the Curtis stage is shown in Fig 3. The spatial position of the profiles inside the axial clearance was shown in Fig. 1. The profiles show alternating zones of low and high static pressure in the axial clearance (nozzle to blade). The profiles of static pressure near (Fig. 3) the nozzle trailing edge have two peaks which fall in the same position of the nozzle. While the profiles near the blade leading edge have three peaks which are coincident with the blade leading edge position (Fig. 3). The profiles located at the middle of the axial clearance (c or d) shows a transition in the number of peaks. It is clear that the static pressure field in the axial clearance is described by series of harmonic profiles that change their peaks number.
Blade leading edge

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4

Nozzle trailing edge

c b a

6 5 2 1 0 6 4 3 9 8 5 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

length into the simulation group [m]

Figure 3 Static pressure profiles in the axial clearance design (Case AIII D) Static pressure time variations across the axial clearance monitored in fixed points, a-f, are shown in the Fig. 4. The spatial location of fixed monitors was shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 4 shows how the static pressure field in front of blade is changing as a function of time and since a relative reference point of view. Figure 4 also shows that the peak magnitudes of the static pressure are higher near the nozzle trailing edge than near the blade leading edge.
1.00 0.96

time variation of static pressure across the axial clearance

static pressure [dimensionless]

0.93 0.89 0.85 0.81 0.78 0.74 0.4570 0.4575 0.4580 0.4585 0.4590 0.4595 0.4600

simulation time [s]

Figure 4 Static pressure profiles in the axial clearance design as time function (Case AIII D)

Copyright 20xx by ASME

pr es su re

a c e f

sta tic pr of ile s

e d

0.2 f

static pressure [dimensionless]

As expected, the static pressure field in the axial clearance was affected by the variation of the length of axial clearance and by the variation of the nozzle throat area. The Figs. 5 and 6, shows the cases with major variation in the pressure field. Fig. 5 corresponds to the case AI which has the smallest axial clearance used during the simulations. Fig. 6 corresponds to the case THII which has the smallest nozzle throat area used during the simulations. The maximum amplitude variations for the static pressure profiles were found in these two cases: AI and THII. These results also can be observed in Fig. 7, which is a comparison of the f static pressure profiles. Fig. 7 shows that the f profile has the maximum amplitude for the cases AI and THII. At this point one can infer that these two cases could cause vibrations with major amplitude than the other cases.

1.00 0.95 0.90

static pressure [dimensionless]

0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16

AIII D (Desing clearance) AI (Reduced clearance) AIV (Increased clearance) THI (Increased throat area) THII (Reduced throat area) length into the simulation group (m)

Nozzle trailing edge Blade leading edge

Blade leading edge

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4

Nozzle trailing edge

Figure 7 Comparison of the f static pressure profiles in the axial clearance.

static pressure [dimensionless]

The forces acting on the blades were calculated by integration of the static pressure on the blade walls using a defined user function. The calculated forces for case A III D -design caseare shown in the Fig. 8. The curves have a harmonic pattern and can be expressed as a Fourier series.
total force on blades in curtis stage as a time function

c b a

sta tic pr of ile s

e d

0.2 f

1.00 0.96

6 5 2 1 0 6 4 3 9 8 5 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

force [dimensionless]

length into the simulation group [m]

pr es su re

Figure 5 Static pressure profiles in a reduced axial clearance (Case AI)

0.91 0.87 0.82 0.77

Blade leading edge

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4

Nozzle trailing edge

static pressure [dimensionless]

0.73

total force

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 5 5 5 010 012 015 017 020 022 025 027 030 032 035 037 040 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

simulation time [s]

c b a

pr es su re

sta tic pr of ile s

0.2 f e

Figure 8 Total force on blades in a Curtis stage as a time function (Case A III D design case-) Fig. 9 shows the total force as function of axial clearance. The maximum total force was reached for the case AI, however this case has the larger pressure amplitude across the axial clearance (Fig 7). In contrast Fig. 10 shows the tangential force as function of axial clearance. The tangential force shows a minimum for the case AI, and reaches a maximum for the case AVI (this has the maximum axial clearance)

6 5 2 1 0 6 4 3 9 8 5 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

length into the simulation group [m]

Figure 6 Static pressure profiles in the a reduced throat area (Case THII)

Copyright 20xx by ASME

1.000

1.05

total force on blades in a Curtis stage as functon of axial clearance

1.00 0.95

0.995

total force [dimensionless]

force [dimensionless]

0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65

0.990

0.985

total force

total force tangential force

0.980

0.975
100 .0125 .0150 .0175 .0200 .0225 .0250 .0275 .0300 .0325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

0.60 0.00024 0.00027 0.00030 0.00033 0.00036 0.00039

axial clearance [m]

minimum throat area

Figure 9 Total force on blades in a Curtis stage as a function of axial clearance

1.000 0.995

Figure 11 Total and tangential forces on blades in a Curtis stage as a function of minimum throat area The term Ai in the Table 4 states the force amplitude around the term A0. Table 4 shows that the term Ai with more amplitude variation corresponds to the case AVI (reduced axial clearance) and to the case THII (reduced nozzle throat area). Table 4 Terms of the Fourier series calculated trough FFT of the forces calculated using a 2D numerical simulation A0 Ai Case fi [Hz] [dimensi [dimensi onless] onless] A III D 1.000 0.119 3357.860 156.524 A VI AI Th I Th II 1.004 1.019 1.072 0.904 0.025 0.254 0.130 0.273 3365.301 3357.864 3365.301 3365.301 -146.185 -118.353 104.443 33.231

tangential force [dimensionless]

0.990 0.985 0.980 0.975 0.970 0.965 0.960 0.955 0.950

100 .0125 .0150 .0175 .0200 .0225 .0250 .0275 .0300 .0325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

tangential force

tangential force on blades in a Curtis stage as functon of axial clearance

axial clearance [m]

Figure 10 Tangential force on blades in a Curtis stage as a function of axial clearance Fig. 11 shows the total and tangential forces on blades as function of the nozzle throat area. The total force reach a maximum for the increased nozzle throat area, however the maximum tangential force is reached at the design condition. The forces data for the case AI, AIIID, AVI, THI and THII were analyzed using Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) and the results are showed in the Table 4, where the results of frequency, phase angle and amplitude are tabulated. The frequency calculated with FFT shows good agreement with the nozzle passing frequency (56 nozzles X 60 Hz=3360 Hz). The frequency and constants given in the table are the first terms of the Fourier series as indicated by the next equation:

Using the results tabulated in the Table 4 with equation (5), one may reproduce the forces calculated using fluid dynamics simulation in additional studies, like fatigue life estimation.

F = A0 + [AiCos (2f it )]
i =1

(5)

CONCLUSIONS The two dimensional unsteady flow across the axial clearance in a Curtis stage of 300 MW steam turbine was numerically investigated. The computations show that the pressure profiles in the axial clearance have an oscillatory pattern. For a given instant, a picture of pressure field shows static pressure profiles with different number of peaks or valleys across the clearance. Near the nozzle trailing edge the profiles have a number of peaks equal to the nozzles and at the vicinity of the blade leading edge, the profiles pressure have a number of peaks equal to the number of blades at that segment.

Copyright 20xx by ASME

The pressure profiles as time function in the axial clearance show that pressure fields in front of the blades have harmonic variations with a frequency equal to the nozzle passing frequency. In the case of the axial clearance variations, the maximum total force was reached for the minimum axial clearance, however this case has the minimum tangential force and shows large pressure variations across the axial clearance, which could cause forces acting on blades with large amplitude. Talking about of the nozzle throat variation, the maximum total force was reached for the case with increased throat area (THI), while the maximum pressure variations across the axial clearance were find for the case with reduced throat area. However this two cases show a tangential force lesser than the case with the design nozzle throat area.

REFERENCES [1] Rangwalla, A.A. and Rai, M.M., A numerical analysis of tonal acoustics in rotor stator interactions, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 1993. [2] Chaluvadi, V.S.P., Kalfas, A.I. and Hodson H.P., Vortex transport and blade interactions in high pressure turbines, ASME, Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol 126, 2004. [3] Kosowski, K. and Stepien, R., Theoretical investigations into flows in rotor blade shroud clearance, Transactions of The Institute of Fluid-Flow Machinery, No. 113, Gdansk, Poland, 2003. [4] Lampart, P.et al., Unsteady forces acting on rotor blades of a large power steam turbine control stage at different levels of partial admission, Transactions of The Institute of Fluid-Flow Machinery, No. 114, Gdansk, Poland , 2003. [5] Fluent users guide, version, 6.1, 2003 [6] Pantakar, S.V., Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow, McGrawHill, NY, 1980.

Copyright 20xx by ASME