Numerical investigation of particle deposition in film-cooled blade leading edge

Figures & data

Figure 1. Geometry model and computational domain. (a) AGTB-B1 blade [28] in a cascade [29]. (b) Computational domain with boundary condition.

Table 1. Cascade geometry and parameters.

Geometry
Chord length (Lch)	250 mm
Vane height (H)	300 mm
Blade pitch (t′)	178.5 mm
Staggering angle (βs)	73°
Aerodynamics
Inlet Mach number (Ma1)	0.37
Inlet Re number (Re1)	371,000
Inlet flow angle (β1)	133°
Turbulence intensity (Tu1)	5%
Isentropic exit Ma number (Ma2is)	0.95
Isentropic exit Re number (Re2is)	695,000
Exit flow angle (β2)	28.3°
Cooling configuration
Hole position at SS (s/Lch)SS	0.02
Hole position at PS (s/Lch)PS	−0.03
Hole diameter (D)	3 mm
Hole length (L)	12.5 mm
Hole distance (P)	15 mm
Number of holes at each row	20

Table 2. Boundary conditions and particle properties.

Flow property
Blowing ratio (M)	0.53	0.93	1.31	1.63
Total pressure (Pt,1)	19,650 Pa	19,650 Pa	19,650 Pa	19,650 Pa
Total temperature (Tt,1)	1,453 K	1,453 K	1,453 K	1,453 K
Mainstream inlet angle (β1 =133°)	−10°, 0°, +10°
Static pressure (P2)	14,640 Pa	14,640 Pa	14,640 Pa	14,640 Pa
Coolant inlet angle (Pt,c)	19,710 Pa	20,710 Pa	21,710 Pa	22,710 Pa
Temperature ratio (Tt,c/Tt,1)	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5
Particle property
Particle diameter (dp)	1 µm, 5 µm, 10 µm, 20 µm, 50 µm
Mass flow rate	5.71 × 10^−6 kg/s
Density	990 kg/m ^3
Specific heat	984 J/(kg·K)

Figure 2. Flowchart of the deposition computation.

Figure 3. Grid independence study. (a) Mesh view, (b) Film-cooling effectiveness near the blade-leading edge.

Figure 4. Model validation of the turbulence model using AGTB blade geometry.

Figure 5. Model validation of deposition model.

Figure 6. Comparison of film-cooling effectiveness distributions for the cases with various inlet flow angles at four blowing ratios.

Figure 7. Streamlines and temperature contours near the leading edge for the cases with various inlet flow angles at four blowing ratios.

Figure 8. Particle trajectories for various particle diameters M= 0.93 and β₁=133˚.

Figure 9. Comparisons of particle trajectories and temperature variations for various particle diameters M= 0.93 and β₁=133˚.

Figure 10. Comparisons of particle trajectories and temperature variations for various inlet flow angles at M=0.53 and 1.63, dp=0.93.

Figure 11. Comparisons of impact and capture efficiencies in different zones based on various particle sizes.

Figure 12. Comparisons of impact and capture efficiencies at different blowing ratios based on various inlet flow angles.

Figure 13. Comparisons of invasion efficiencies under various particle sizes, inlet flow angles, and blowing ratios. (a) M=0.93. (b) d_p=20 μm.