Bai et al 2022a - Revision history

Rimni at 08:06, 15 September 2022

2022-09-15T08:06:40Z

Rimni at 08:03, 15 September 2022

2022-09-15T08:03:03Z

Rimni at 08:02, 15 September 2022

2022-09-15T08:02:15Z

Rimni at 08:00, 15 September 2022

2022-09-15T08:00:46Z

Rimni: /* 2.1 Geometries and models */

2022-09-15T08:00:10Z

‎2.1 Geometries and models

Rimni at 07:35, 15 September 2022

2022-09-15T07:35:29Z

Baitao: References [21] and [22 ]were revised

2022-09-14T14:24:34Z

References [21] and [22 ]were revised

Rimni at 10:55, 14 September 2022

2022-09-14T10:55:17Z

Rimni at 14:39, 13 September 2022

2022-09-13T14:39:59Z

Show changes

Rimni at 13:19, 13 September 2022

2022-09-13T13:19:02Z

@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 ===2.2 Numerical approach and mesh===
-Numerical simulations were performed in ANSYS CFX 2020(R2) software. Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations and shear stress transfer (SST) turbulence model for fully three-dimensional (3D), unsteady flow were solved. The working medium was defined as the mixture of an ideal gas and CO2 tracer gas, and there was no chemical reaction between them. Structured grid generation was undertaken using NUMECA AutoGrid5 and ICEM, as displayed in [[#Ref108524356|Figure 2]]. To minimize the interpolation error, a matching grid interface was defined between the stator and cavity domains. The circumferential grid resolution was set as 0.4 °/cell; A boundary layer grid characterized grids near the wall with the first cell height of approximately y+<1. The total number of nodes was 8.0 million after grid independence verification. Among them, the number of grids in the circumferential, axial, and spanwise directions of the calculation channels of S1, R1, and S2 blade rows were: <math>100\times 109\times 85</math>, <math>100\times 134\times 85</math>, <math>100\times 82\times 85</math>.
+Numerical simulations were performed in ANSYS CFX 2020(R2) software. Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations and shear stress transfer (SST) turbulence model for fully three-dimensional (3D), unsteady flow were solved. The working medium was defined as the mixture of an ideal gas and CO2 tracer gas, and there was no chemical reaction between them. Structured grid generation was undertaken using NUMECA AutoGrid5 and ICEM, as displayed in [[#Ref108524356|Figure 2]]. To minimize the interpolation error, a matching grid interface was defined between the stator and cavity domains. The circumferential grid resolution was set as 0.4°/cell; A boundary layer grid characterized grids near the wall with the first cell height of approximately y+<1. The total number of nodes was 8.0 million after grid independence verification. Among them, the number of grids in the circumferential, axial, and spanwise directions of the calculation channels of S1, R1, and S2 blade rows were: <math>100\times 109\times 85</math>, <math>100\times 134\times 85</math>, <math>100\times 82\times 85</math>.
 <span id='_Ref108524356'></span>

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 ===2.1 Geometries and models===
-The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30° and 45°. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
+The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor-stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial, and chute with the angle of 30° and 45°. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
 <div id="_Ref108523209"></div>

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 ===2.1 Geometries and models===
-The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30<sup>o</sup> and 45<sup>o</sup>. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
+The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30° and 45°. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
 <div id="_Ref108523209"></div>

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 ===2.1 Geometries and models===
-The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30<sup>o</sup>and 45<sup>o</sup>. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
+The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30<sup>o</sup> and 45<sup>o</sup>. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
 <div id="_Ref108523209"></div>

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 ===2.1 Geometries and models===
-The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30<sup>。</sup>and 45<sup>。</sup>. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
+The numerically invested sections include a 1.5-stage turbine with a vane-blade-vane configuration. The number of blades in the numerical simulation molded as 2:3:2 since the number of blades in the whole annulus was 36, 54, 36, respectively. Therefore, the 1/18 sector was adopted in the unsteady calculation. For more detailed instructions, see <span id='cite-_Ref99378396'></span>[[#_Ref99378396|[22]]]. This paper took the turbine front cavity as the research object, and the sealing structure located in the stator domain upstream of the rotor- stator interface. The sealing structures studied were axial, radial ,and chute with the angle of 30<sup>o</sup>and 45<sup>o</sup>. The inclination angle is between the seal structure and the axial direction. The turbine devices with four sealing structures were described as Axial, Radial, Chute_45°, Chute_30° in the paper, as illustrated in <span id='cite-_Ref108523209'></span>[[#_Ref108523209|Figure 1]]
 <div id="_Ref108523209"></div>

@@ Line 411: / Line 411: @@
 [20] Yang F., Zhou L.,  Wang Z. Unsteady numerical investigation on viscous shear loss caused by rim seal purge flow. Journal of Power and Energy, 233(3):346–357, 2019.
-[21] Gao J, Cao F K, Chu Z F, et al. Rotationally-induced unstable flow characteristics and structural optimization of rim seals (in Chinese). Sci Sin Tech,2019, 49: 753–766
+[21] Gao J., Cao F.K., Chu Z.F., et al. Rotationally-induced unstable flow characteristics and structural optimization of rim seals (in Chinese). Sci. Sin. Tech., 49:753–766, 2019.
-[22] Behr T. Control of rotor tip leakage and secondary flow by casing air injection in unshrouded axial turbines.Dresden: Dresden University of Technology, 2007
+[22] Behr T. Control of rotor tip leakage and secondary flow by casing air injection in unshrouded axial turbines. Thesis, Dresden: Dresden University of Technology, 2007.
 [23] Zlatinov M.B.,  Tan C.S., Montgomery M., Islam T., Harris M. Turbine hub and shroud healing flow loss mechanisms. Journal of Turbomachinery, 134(6):061027, 2012.
 [24] Sangan C.M., Pountney O.J., Zhou K., Owen J.M., Wilson M., Lock G.D. Experimental measurements of ingestion through turbine rim seal-partI:externally induced ingress. Journal of Turbomachinery, 135(/2):021012, 2013.

@@ Line 396: / Line 396: @@
 [13] Rabs M., Benra F., Dohmen, H.J., Schneider O. Investigation of flow instabilities near the rim cavity of a 1.5 stage gas turbine. Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2009: Power for Land, Sea, and Air. Volume 3: Heat Transfer, Parts A and B, ASME Paper No.GT2009-59965, pp. 1263-1272, Orlando, Florida, USA, June 8–12, 2009.
 [14] Horwood J.T., Hualca F.P., Scobie J.A., Wilson M., Sangan C.M., Lock G.D. Experimental and computational investigation of flow instabilities in turbine rim seals. ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 141(1):011028, 2019.
-[15] Chew J.W., Gao F., Palermo D.M., et al. Flow mechanisms in axial turbine rim sealing. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 2018.
+[15] Chew J.W., Gao F., Palermo D.M. Flow mechanisms in axial turbine rim sealing. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 233(23-24):7637–7657, 2018.
-−
-[16] Gao F, Chew J. W, Beard P. F, et al. Large-eddy simulation of unsteady turbine rim sealing flows. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2018,70:160–170..
-[17] Ziqing Zhang,Yingjie Zhang,Xu Dong et al. Flow mechanism between purge flow and mainstream in different turbine rim seal configurations. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2020,33(8):2162-2175
+[16] Gao F., Chew J.W., Beard P.F., Amirante D., Hills N.J. Large-eddy simulation of unsteady turbine rim sealing flows. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 70:160–170, 2018.
-[18] Regina.K, Kalfas A L and Abhari R S. Experiment investigation of purge flow effects on a high pressure turbine stage. Journal of Turbomachinery,2015,Vol.137:041006:1-7
+[17] Zhang Z., Zhang Y., Dong X., Qu X., Lu X., Zhang Y. Flow mechanism between purge flow and mainstream in different turbine rim seal configurations. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 33(8):2162-2175, 2020.
-[19] Jenny P, Abhari R S and Rose M G. Unsteady rotor hub passage vortex behavior in the presence of purge flow in an axial low pressure turbine. Journal of turbomachinery,2013,135(05): 051022-1:9
+[18] Regina K, Kalfas A.L.,  Abhari R.S. Experimental investigation of purge flow effects on a high pressure turbine stage. Journal of Turbomachinery, 137(4):041006 (8 pages), 2015.
-[20] Fan Yang , Li Zhou and Zhanxue Wang. Unsteady numerical investigation on viscous shear loss caused by rim seal purge flow. Journal of Power and Energy,2019,0(0)1-12
+[19] Jenny P., Abhari R.S.,  Rose M.G. Unsteady rotor hub passage vortex behavior in the presence of purge flow in an axial low pressure turbine. Journal of Turbomachinery, 135(5):051022 (9 pages), 2013.
-[21] Gao Jie,Cao FuKun,Chu ZhaoFeng,et al. Unsteady flow characteristics and structural optimization of rotary induced rim seal .Science China Press:Scientia, 2019,49(07):753-766
+[20] Yang F., Zhou L.,  Wang Z. Unsteady numerical investigation on viscous shear loss caused by rim seal purge flow. Journal of Power and Energy, 233(3):346–357, 2019.
-[22] Behr T. Control of rotor tip leakage and secondary flow by casing air injection in unshrouded axial turbines.
+[21] Jie G., FuKun C., ZhaoFeng C., et al. Unsteady flow characteristics and structural optimization of rotary induced rim seal. Science China Press: Scientia, 49(7):753-766, 2019.
-[23] Zlatinov M B,Tan V S,Montgomery M,et al. Turbine hub and shroud healing flow loss mechanisms. Journal of Turbomachinery,2012,134(11):1-12.
+[22] Behr T. Control of rotor tip leakage and secondary flow by casing air injection in unshrouded axial turbines.
-[24] Carl M,Sangan, Oliver J.Pountney,Kunyuan Zhou,et al. Experimental measurements of ingestion through turbine rim seal-partI:externally induced ingress. Journal of Turbomachinery,2013, 135:021012-1-10.
+[23] Zlatinov M.B.,  Tan C.S., Montgomery M., Islam T., Harris M. Turbine hub and shroud healing flow loss mechanisms. Journal of Turbomachinery, 134(6):061027, 2012.
-<span id="_Ref108448368"></span><span id="_Ref108448378"></span><span id="_Ref94801250"></span><span id="_Ref108449045"></span><span id="_Ref93127295"></span><span id="_Ref94879538"></span><span id="_Ref94879552"></span><span id="_Ref99373266"></span><span id="_Ref99373036"></span><span id="_Ref108451670"></span><span id="_Ref99376116"></span><span id="_Ref92472768"></span><span id="_Ref92472765"></span><span id="_Ref92472772"></span><span id="_Ref92472774"></span><span id="_Ref99374982"></span><span id="_Ref92217894"></span><span id="_Ref108457537"></span><span id="_Ref92388885"></span><span id="_Ref92388863"></span><span id="_Ref99375991"></span><span id="_Ref93214531"></span><span id="_Ref93221023"></span><span id="_Ref92650304"></span><span id="_Ref108713664"></span><span id="_Ref99378396"></span><span id="_Ref92731051"></span>
+[24] Sangan C.M., Pountney O.J., Zhou K., Owen J.M., Wilson M., Lock G.D. Experimental measurements of ingestion through turbine rim seal-partI:externally induced ingress. Journal of Turbomachinery, 135(/2):021012, 2013.

@@ Line 289: / Line 289: @@
 <div id="_Ref108703353"></div>
-{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
+{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: 40%;"
 |-
 |style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Bai_534964392-image35.png|294px]]